An Investigation Into the Differences in Bone Density and Body Composition Measurements Between 2 GE Lunar Densitometers and Their Comparison to a 4-Component Model
التفاصيل البيبلوغرافية
العنوان:
An Investigation Into the Differences in Bone Density and Body Composition Measurements Between 2 GE Lunar Densitometers and Their Comparison to a 4-Component Model
We describe a study to assess the precision of the GE Lunar iDXA and the agreement between the iDXA and GE Lunar Prodigy densitometers for the measurement of regional- and total-body bone and body composition in normal to obese healthy adults. We compare the whole-body fat mass by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) to measurements by a 4-component (4-C) model. Sixty-nine participants, aged 37 ± 12 yr, with a body mass index of 26.2 ± 5.1 kg/cm2, were measured once on the Prodigy and twice on the iDXA. The 4-C model estimated fat mass from body mass, total body water by deuterium dilution, body volume by air displacement plethysmography, and bone mass by DXA. Agreements between measurements made on the 2 instruments and by the 4-C model were analyzed by Bland-Altman and linear regression analyses. Where appropriate, translational cross-calibration equations were derived. Differences between DXA software versions were investigated. iDXA precision was less than 2% of the measured value for all regional- and whole-body bone and body composition measurements with the exception of arm fat mass (2.28%). We found significant differences between iDXA and Prodigy (p < 0.05) whole-body and regional bone, fat mass (FM), and lean mass, with the exception of hip bone mass, area and density, and spine area. Compared to iDXA, Prodigy overestimated FM and underestimated lean mass. However, compared to 4-C, iDXA showed a smaller bias and narrower limits of agreement than Prodigy. No significant differences between software versions in FM estimations existed. Our results demonstrate excellent iDXA precision. However, significant differences exist between the 2 GE Lunar instruments, Prodigy and iDXA measurement values. A divergence from the reference 4-C observations remains in FM estimations made by DXA even following the recent advances in technology. Further studies are particularly warranted in individuals with large FM contents.
