Dataset Information

Body adiposity measured by bioelectrical impedance is an alternative to dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry in black Africans: The Africans in America Study.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

The prevalence of cardiometabolic disease has risen in Africa and parallels the obesity epidemic. To assess cardiometabolic risk, body composition measurements by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) are ideal. In communities with limited resources, alternative measures may be useful but have not been compared extensively in black Africans. Therefore, the aim of this study was to identify alternative methods of body composition assessment, such as body adiposity index (BAI) and bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), for use in African-born blacks.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional study with African-born blacks. BAI and five BIA predictive equations (using variations of height, weight, age, sex, and impedance) were compared with DXA to estimate percent fat. Participants were 266 African-born blacks (39 ± 10 y, body mass index 28 ± 4 kg/m², and 68% men) living in metropolitan Washington DC. Equivalence (90% confidence interval, -3 to 3), concordance, and Bland-Altman analyses (bias <2%, R² closest to zero) compared BAI or BIA predictive equations to DXA as the criterion method.

Results

DXA percent fat was 27.2% ± 5.5% and 40.3% ± 6.9% in men and women, respectively. BAI underestimated percent fat in men (bias: 1.88 ± 4.71, R² = 0.25, P < 0.001) and women (bias: 6.47 ± 4.94, R² = 0.08, P = 0.01). Of the five BIA predictive equations, the equation reported by Sun et al. had the best agreement with DXA percent fat for men (bias: -0.91 ± 3.67, R² = 0.02, P = 0.05) and women (bias: -0.92 ± 4.02, R² = 0.003, P = 0.58). Percent fat from the Sun et al. equation best agreed with DXA percent fat.

Conclusion

BIA with the Sun et al. predictive equation was the best alternative to DXA for body fat assessment in African-born blacks.

SUBMITTER: Courville AB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7230013 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background/objectivesQuantile-dependent expressivity occurs when a gene's phenotypic expression depends upon whether the trait (e.g., BMI) is high or low relative to its distribution. We have previously shown that the obesity effects of a genetic risk score (GRSBMI) increased significantly with increasing quantiles of BMI. However, BMI is an inexact adiposity measure and GRSBMI explains <3% of the BMI variance. The purpose of this paper is to test BMI for quantile-dependent expressivity using a more inclusive genetic measure (h2, heritability in the narrow sense), extend the result to other adiposity measures, and demonstrate its consistency with purported gene-environment interactions.Subjects/methodsQuantile-specific offspring-parent regression slopes (βOP) were obtained from quantile regression for height (ht) and computed tomography (CT), dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), anthropometric, and bioelectrical impedance (BIA) adiposity measures. Heritability was estimated by 2βOP/(1 + rspouse) in 6227 offspring-parent pairs from the Framingham Heart Study, where rspouse is the spouse correlation.ResultsCompared to h2 at the 10th percentile, genetic heritability was significantly greater at the 90th population percentile for BMI (3.14-fold greater, P < 10-15), waist girth/ht (3.27-fold, P < 10-15), hip girth/ht (3.12-fold, P = 6.3 × 10-14), waist-to-hip ratio (1.75-fold, P = 0.01), sagittal diameter/ht (3.89-fold, P = 3.7 × 10-7), DXA total fat/ht2 (3.62-fold, P = 0.0002), DXA leg fat/ht2 (3.29-fold, P = 2.0 × 10-11), DXA arm fat/ht2 (4.02-fold, P = 0.001), CT-visceral fat/ht2 (3.03-fold, P = 0.002), and CT-subcutaneous fat/ht2 (3.54-fold, P = 0.0004). External validity was suggested by the phenomenon's consistency with numerous published reports. Quantile-dependent expressivity potentially explains precision medicine markers for weight gain from overfeeding or antipsychotic medications, and the modifying effects of physical activity, sleep, diet, polycystic ovary syndrome, socioeconomic status, and depression on gene-BMI relationships.ConclusionsGenetic heritabilities of anthropometric, CT, and DXA adiposity measures increase with increasing adiposity. Some gene-environment interactions may arise from analyzing subjects by characteristics that distinguish high vs. low adiposity rather than the effects of environmental stimuli on transcriptional and epigenetic processes.

Project description:Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) has been considered a reference method for measuring body fat percentage (BF%) in children and adolescents with an excess of adiposity. However, given that the DXA technique is impractical for routine field use, there is a need to investigate other methods that can accurately determine BF%. We studied the accuracy of bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) technology, including foot-to-foot and hand-to-foot impedance, and Slaughter skinfold-thickness equations in the measurement of BF%, compared with DXA, in a population of Latin American children and adolescents with an excess of adiposity. A total of 127 children and adolescents (11?17 years of age; 70% girls) from the HEPAFIT (Exercise Training and Hepatic Metabolism in Overweight/Obese Adolescent) study were included in the present work. BF% was measured on the same day using two BIA analysers (Seca® 206, Allers Hamburg, Germany and Model Tanita® BC-418®, TANITA Corporation, Sportlife Tokyo, Japan), skinfold measurements (Slaughter equation), and DXA (Hologic Horizon DXA System®, Quirugil, Bogotá, Columbia). Agreement between measurements was analysed using t-tests, Bland?Altman plots, and Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (?c). There was a significant correlation between DXA and the other BF% measurement methods (r > 0.430). According to paired t-tests, in both sexes, BF% assessed by BIA analysers or Slaughter equations differ from BF% assessed by DXA (p < 0.001). The lower and upper limits of the differences compared with DXA were 6.3?22.9, 2.2?2.8, and -3.2?21.3 (95% CI) in boys and 2.3?14.8, 2.4?20.1, and 3.9?18.3 (95% CI) in girls for Seca® mBCA, Tanita® BC 420MA, and Slaughter equations, respectively. Concordance was poor between DXA and the other methods of measuring BF% (?c < 0.5). BIA analysers and Slaughter equations underestimated BF% measurements compared to DXA, so they are not interchangeable methods for assessing BF% in Latin American children and adolescents with excess of adiposity.

Project description:Background:The 4-component (4C) model is a criterion method for human body composition that separates the body into fat, water, mineral, and protein, but requires 4 measurements with significant cost and time requirements that preclude wide clinical use. A simplified model integrating only 2 measurements-dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA)-and 10 min of patient time has been proposed. Objective:We aimed to validate a rapid, simplified 4C DXA + BIA body composition model in a clinical population. Design:This was a cross-sectional observational study of 31 healthy adults. Participants underwent whole-body DXA, segmental BIA, air displacement plethysmography (ADP), and total body water (TBW) measurement by deuterium (D2O) dilution. 4C composition was calculated through the use of the Lohman model [DXA mineral mass, D2O TBW, ADP body volume (BV), scale weight] and the simplified model (DXA mineral mass and BV, BIA TBW, scale weight). Accuracy of percentage of fat (%Fat) and protein measurements was assessed via linear regression. Test-retest precision was calculated with the use of duplicate DXA and BIA measurements. Results:Of 31 participants, 23 were included in the analysis. TBWBIA showed good test-retest precision (%CV = 5.2 raw; 1.1 after outlier removal) and high accuracy to TBWD2O [TBWD2O = 0.956*TBWBIA, R2= 0.92, root mean squared error (RMSE) = 2.2 kg]. %Fat estimates from DXA, ADP, D2O, and BIA all showed high correlation with the Lohman model. However, only the 4C simplified model provides high accuracy for both %Fat (R2 = 0.96, RMSE = 2.33) and protein mass (R2= 0.76, RMSE = 1.8 kg). %Fat precision from 4C DXA + BIA was comparable with DXA (root mean square-SD = 0.8 and 0.6 percentage units, respectively). Conclusions:This work validates a simplified 4C method that measures fat, water, mineral, and protein in a 10-min clinic visit. This model has broad clinical application to monitor many conditions including over/dehydration, malnutrition, obesity, sarcopenia, and cachexia.

Project description:IntroductionMethods of body composition estimation such as dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), anthropometry, and bioimpedance (BIA) are used for the estimation of skeletal muscle mass (SMM) and lean body mass (LBM). No previous studies have examined whether these methods generate comparable results, or whether they are valid by using DXA as the reference. The aims of the present investigation were: (a) to assess the differences between DXA, anthropometry, and BIA in the estimation of SMM and LBM, taking into consideration the impact of sex and hydration status; and (b) to examine the agreement of anthropometry and BIA as compared to DXA for the estimation of SMM and LBM.MethodsA descriptive cross-sectional design was followed with 262 healthy young adults (159 males and 103 females). LBM and SMM were assessed by anthropometry with the formulas from Lee et al. and Kulkarni et al. for LBM; and Kerr (opt a), Kerr (opt b), Lee et al., Poortmans, Matiegka, Martin et al., Drinkwater and Ross, and Heymsfield et al. for SMM; by BIA with the formula reported by the TANITA MC-780-MA software for LBM and SMM; and DXA with the formula reported by the Hologic Horizon software for LBM, and the conversion by Kim et al. for SMM.ResultsSignificant differences were found for both SMM and LBM in kg, and percentages between most methods and formulas for the overall sample (p < 0.001-0.003) and divided by sex (p < 0.001-0.035). Hydration status did not have a significant effect on the differences between methods and formulas (p = 0.058-0.870). Lin's coefficient revealed limited agreement among the majority of formulas and methods (CCC = 0.007-0.880). The Bland-Altman analysis showed significant differences in most methods and formulas, both in the overall sample and divided by sex, when using SMM and LBM with DXA as the reference (p < 0.001-0.030).ConclusionThere is a lack of agreement between methods and formulas for assessing SMM and LBM. Sex was found to be a significant factor in this analysis. Furthermore, significant differences were observed between most formulas and methods as compared to DXA, except for the equations to estimate SMM with anthropometry by Poortmans.