Reproducibility and validity of A-mode ultrasound for body composition measurement and classification in overweight and obese men and women

Abbie E Smith-Ryan, Sarah N Fultz, Malia N Melvin, Hailee L Wingfield, Mary N Woessner, Abbie E Smith-Ryan, Sarah N Fultz, Malia N Melvin, Hailee L Wingfield, Mary N Woessner

Abstract

Identifying portable methods to measure body composition may be more advantageous than using body mass index (BMI) to categorize associated health consequences.

Purpose: To compare the validity and reliability of a portable A-mode ultrasound (US) to a criterion three compartment model (3C) for the measurement of body composition.

Methods: Forty-seven overweight and obese subjects participated in this study. Body composition was measured once via air displacement plethysmography for body density (Bd) and bioelectrical impedance spectroscopy for total body water (TBW) for the 3C calculations. Ultrasound measurements (BodyMetrix, Intelametrix) were made using an A mode, 2.5- MHz transmitter. All measurements were made on the right side of the body at 7 skinfold sites. The US software calculated percent body fat (%BF), fat mass (FM) and fat free mass (FFM) from the 7-site Jackson and Pollock equation.

Results: %BF and FM, respectively, measured by the US (29.1 ± 6.5%; 27.4 ± 8.1 kg) was significantly lower compared to the 3C model (33.7 ± 7.6%; 31.8 ± 9.8 kg; p<0.0005). Fat free mass was significantly higher for the US (66.7 ± 13.0 kg) compared to the 3C model (62.3 ± 12.6; p = 0.001). The US demonstrated respectable reliability for %BF, FM, and FFM with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) ranging from 0.84-0.98 and standard error of the measurement (SEM) values and 2.2%BF, 1.9 kg, 1.9 kg, respectively.

Discussion: The US was found to under predict %BF and FM with large deviations from the criterion (n = 10 >4%BF error). While the US was not valid in this population, it was reliable producing results with minimal error, suggesting this technique may be effective for tracking changes in a weight loss or clinical setting.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1. Image of the tissue boundaries…
Figure 1. Image of the tissue boundaries and corresponding amplitudes produced from the proprietary software.
Amplitudes appear within measurement data section (A). With a minimum of two measurements averaged. The fat-muscle boundary is illustrated at the first peak (B). Artifact within the muscle is demonstrated by other peaks (C).
Figure 2. Image of the ultrasound transducer…
Figure 2. Image of the ultrasound transducer and corresponding software used for evaluation.
Figure 3. Bland and Altman plots comparing…
Figure 3. Bland and Altman plots comparing individual differences in %BF (A), FM (B), and FFM (C) measured from the ultrasound (US) - 3compartment model (3C) methods compared with the mean values for both methods.

References

    1. Flegal KM, Carroll MD, Ogden CL, Curtin LR (2010) Prevalence and trends in obesity among US adults, 1999–2008. JAMA 303: 235–241.
    1. Flegal KM, Carroll MD, Kit BK, Ogden CL (2012) Prevalence of obesity and trends in the distribution of body mass index among US adults, 1999–2010. JAMA 307: 491–497.
    1. Wang YC, McPherson K, Marsh T, Gortmaker SL, Brown M (2011) Health and economic burden of the projected obesity trends in the USA and the UK. Lancet 378: 815–825.
    1. De Lucia Rolfe E, Sleigh A, Finucane FM, Brage S, Stolk RP, et al. (2010) Ultrasound measurements of visceral and subcutaneous abdominal thickness to predict abdominal adiposity among older men and women. Obesity (Silver Spring) 18: 625–631.
    1. Stolk RP, Meijer R, Mali WP, Grobbee DE, van der Graaf Y (2003) Ultrasound measurements of intraabdominal fat estimate the metabolic syndrome better than do measurements of waist circumference. Am J Clin Nutr 77: 857–860.
    1. Van Der Ploeg GE, Withers RT, Laforgia J (2003) Percent body fat via DEXA: comparison with a four-compartment model. J Appl Physiol (1985) 94: 499–506.
    1. Siri WE (1993) Body composition from fluid spaces and density: analysis of methods. 1961. Nutrition 9: 480–491; discussion 480, 492.
    1. Das SK, Roberts SB, Kehayias JJ, Wang J, Hsu LK, et al. (2003) Body composition assessment in extreme obesity and after massive weight loss induced by gastric bypass surgery. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 284: E1080–1088.
    1. Wang ZM, Deurenberg P, Guo SS, Pietrobelli A, Wang J, et al. (1998) Six-compartment body composition model: inter-method comparisons of total body fat measurement. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 22: 329–337.
    1. Moon JR, Smith AE, Tobkin SE, Lockwood CM, Kendall KL, et al. (2009) Total body water changes after an exercise intervention tracked using bioimpedance spectroscopy: a deuterium oxide comparison. Clin Nutr 28: 516–525.
    1. Johnson KE, Naccarato IA, Corder MA, Repvich W (2012) Validation of three body composition techniques with a comparison of ultrasound abdominal fat depths against an octopolar bioelectrical impedance device. International Journal of Exercise Science 5: 205–2013.
    1. Pineau JC, Guihard-Costa AM, Bocquet M (2007) Validation of ultrasound techniques applied to body fat measurement. A comparison between ultrasound techniques, air displacement plethysmography and bioelectrical impedance vs. dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Ann Nutr Metab 51: 421–427.
    1. Pineau JC, Filliard JR, Bocquet M (2009) Ultrasound techniques applied to body fat measurement in male and female athletes. J Athl Train 44: 142–147.
    1. Wagner DR (2013) Ultrasound as a tool to assess body fat. J Obes 2013: 280713.
    1. Bullen BA, Quaade F, Olessen E, Lund SA (1965) Ultrasonic reflections used for measuring subcutaneous fat in humans. Hum Biol 37: 375–384.
    1. Fanelli MT, Kuczmarski RJ (1984) Ultrasound as an approach to assessing body composition. Am J Clin Nutr 39: 703–709.
    1. Kuczmarski RJ, Fanelli MT, Koch GG (1987) Ultrasonic assessment of body composition in obese adults: overcoming the limitations of the skinfold caliper. Am J Clin Nutr 45: 717–724.
    1. Utter AC, Hager ME (2008) Evaluation of ultrasound in assessing body composition of high school wrestlers. Med Sci Sports Exerc 40: 943–949.
    1. Da Silva L (2010) An introduction to ultrasound and the bodymetrix system. In: IntelaMetrix, editor. Livermore, California.
    1. Muller W, Horn M, Furhapter-Rieger A, Kainz P, Kropfl JM, et al. (2013) Body composition in sport: a comparison of a novel ultrasound imaging technique to measure subcutaneous fat tissue compared with skinfold measurement. Br J Sports Med 47: 1028–1035.
    1. Jackson AS, Pollock ML, Gettman LR (1978) Intertester reliability of selected skinfold and circumference measurements and percent fat estimates. Res Q 49: 546–551.
    1. Ackland TR, Lohman TG, Sundgot-Borgen J, Maughan RJ, Meyer NL, et al. (2012) Current status of body composition assessment in sport: review and position statement on behalf of the ad hoc research working group on body composition health and performance, under the auspices of the I.O.C. Medical Commission. Sports Med 42: 227–249.
    1. Dempster P, Aitkens S (1995) A new air displacement method for the determination of human body composition. Med Sci Sports Exerc 27: 1692–1697.
    1. Demerath EW, Guo SS, Chumlea WC, Towne B, Roche AF, et al. (2002) Comparison of percent body fat estimates using air displacement plethysmography and hydrodensitometry in adults and children. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 26: 389–397.
    1. McCrory MA, Mole PA, Gomez TD, Dewey KG, Bernauer EM (1998) Body composition by air-displacement plethysmography by using predicted and measured thoracic gas volumes. J Appl Physiol (1985) 84: 1475–1479.
    1. Lukaski HC, Johnson PE, Bolonchuk WW, Lykken GI (1985) Assessment of fat-free mass using bioelectrical impedance measurements of the human body. Am J Clin Nutr 41: 810–817.
    1. Matthie J, Zarowitz B, De Lorenzo A, Andreoli A, Katzarski K, et al. (1998) Analytic assessment of the various bioimpedance methods used to estimate body water. J Appl Physiol 84: 1801–1816.
    1. Moon JR, Hull HR, Tobkin SE, Teramoto M, Karabulut M, et al. (2007) Percent body fat estimations in college women using field and laboratory methods: a three-compartment model approach. J Int Soc Sports Nutr 4: 16.
    1. Pateyjohns IR, Brinkworth GD, Buckley JD, Noakes M, Clifton PM (2006) Comparison of three bioelectrical impedance methods with DXA in overweight and obese men. Obesity (Silver Spring) 14: 2064–2070.
    1. Gallagher D, Heymsfield SB, Heo M, Jebb SA, Murgatroyd PR, et al. (2000) Healthy percentage body fat ranges: an approach for developing guidelines based on body mass index. Am J Clin Nutr 72: 694–701.
    1. Borrud LG, Flegal KM, Looker AC, Everhart JE, Harris TB, et al. (2010) Body composition data for individuals 8 years of age and older: U.S. population, 1999–2004. Vital Health Stat 11: 1–87.
    1. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL (1979) Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 86: 420–428.
    1. Weir JP (2005) Quantifying test-retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient and the SEM. J Strength Cond Res 19: 231–240.
    1. Hopkins WG (2000) Measures of reliability in sports medicine and science. Sports Med 30: 1–15.
    1. Ulbricht L, Neves EB, Ripka WL, Romaneli EF (2012) Comparison between body fat measurements obtained by portable ultrasound and caliper in young adults. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2012: 1952–1955.
    1. Ginde SR, Geliebter A, Rubiano F, Silva AM, Wang J, et al. (2005) Air displacement plethysmography: validation in overweight and obese subjects. Obes Res 13: 1232–1237.
    1. Bosy-Westphal A, Later W, Hitze B, Sato T, Kossel E, et al. (2008) Accuracy of bioelectrical impedance consumer devices for measurement of body composition in comparison to whole body magnetic resonance imaging and dual X-ray absorptiometry. Obes Facts 1: 319–324.
    1. Moon JR, Eckerson JM, Tobkin SE, Smith AE, Lockwood CM, et al. (2009) Estimating body fat in NCAA Division I female athletes: a five-compartment model validation of laboratory methods. Eur J Appl Physiol 105: 119–130.
    1. Ramsey R, Isenring E, Daniels L (2012) Comparing measures of fat-free mass in overweight older adults using three different bioelectrical impedance devices and three prediction equations. J Nutr Health Aging 16: 26–30.
    1. Verdich C, Barbe P, Petersen M, Grau K, Ward L, et al. (2011) Changes in body composition during weight loss in obese subjects in the NUGENOB study: comparison of bioelectrical impedance vs. dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Diabetes Metab 37: 222–229.
    1. Minderico CS, Silva AM, Keller K, Branco TL, Martins SS, et al. (2008) Usefulness of different techniques for measuring body composition changes during weight loss in overweight and obese women. Br J Nutr 99: 432–441.
    1. Ritz P, Salle A, Audran M, Rohmer V (2007) Comparison of different methods to assess body composition of weight loss in obese and diabetic patients. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 77: 405–411.
    1. Leahy S, Toomey C, McCreesh K, O’Neill C, Jakeman P (2012) Ultrasound measurement of subcutaneous adipose tissue thickness accurately predicts total and segmental body fat of young adults. Ultrasound Med Biol 38: 28–34.
    1. Bellisari A, Roche AF, Siervogel RM (1993) Reliability of B-mode ultrasonic measurements of subcutaneous adipose tissue and intra-abdominal depth: comparisons with skinfold thicknesses. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 17: 475–480.
    1. Stolk RP, Wink O, Zelissen PM, Meijer R, van Gils AP, et al. (2001) Validity and reproducibility of ultrasonography for the measurement of intra-abdominal adipose tissue. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 25: 1346–1351.

Source: PubMed

스폰서 및 공동 작업자

건강 상태

약물 개입

3
구독하다