Cross-calibration of two dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry devices for the measurement of body composition in young children.
Cross-calibration of two dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry devices for the measurement of body composition in young children.
This study aimed to cross-calibrate body composition measures from the GE Lunar Prodigy and GE Lunar iDXA in a cohort of young children. 28 children (mean age 3.4 years) were measured on the iDXA followed by the Prodigy. Prodigy scans were subsequently reanalysed using enCORE v17 enhanced analysis (“Prodigy enhanced”). Body composition parameters were compared across three evaluation methods (Prodigy, Prodigy enhanced, iDXA), and adjustment equations were developed. There were differences in the three evaluation methods for all body composition parameters. Body fat percentage (%BF) from the iDXA was approximately 1.5-fold greater than the Prodigy, whereas bone mineral density (BMD) was approximately 20% lower. Reanalysis of Prodigy scans with enhanced software attenuated these differences (%BF: − 5.2% [95% CI − 3.5, − 6.8]; and BMD: 1.0% [95% CI 0.0, 1.9]), although significant differences remained for all parameters except total body less head (TBLH) total mass and TBLH BMD, and some regional estimates. There were large differences between the Prodigy and iDXA, with these differences related both to scan resolution and software. Reanalysis of Prodigy scans with enhanced analysis resulted in body composition values much closer to those obtained on the iDXA, although differences remained. As manufacturers update models and software, researchers and clinicians need to be aware of the impact this may have on the longitudinal assessment of body composition, as results may not be comparable across devices and software versions.
Lyons-Reid, Jaz
0cf7e7b8-ffe9-4ef5-ba37-56b571eaa926
Kenealy, Timothy
c032e16b-65a8-4156-bc79-422f6c0e7079
Albert, Benjamin B.
c2bf4926-6214-421d-b187-91c83966effc
Ward, Kate
39bd4db1-c948-4e32-930e-7bec8deb54c7
Harvey, Nicholas
ce487fb4-d360-4aac-9d17-9466d6cba145
Godfrey, Keith
0931701e-fe2c-44b5-8f0d-ec5c7477a6fd
Chan, Shiao-Yng
3c9d8970-2cc4-430a-86a7-96f6029a5293
Cutfield, Wayne
a01589bd-5b82-49fa-89e1-137e6f59e24d
16 August 2022
Lyons-Reid, Jaz
0cf7e7b8-ffe9-4ef5-ba37-56b571eaa926
Kenealy, Timothy
c032e16b-65a8-4156-bc79-422f6c0e7079
Albert, Benjamin B.
c2bf4926-6214-421d-b187-91c83966effc
Ward, Kate
39bd4db1-c948-4e32-930e-7bec8deb54c7
Harvey, Nicholas
ce487fb4-d360-4aac-9d17-9466d6cba145
Godfrey, Keith
0931701e-fe2c-44b5-8f0d-ec5c7477a6fd
Chan, Shiao-Yng
3c9d8970-2cc4-430a-86a7-96f6029a5293
Cutfield, Wayne
a01589bd-5b82-49fa-89e1-137e6f59e24d
Lyons-Reid, Jaz, Kenealy, Timothy, Albert, Benjamin B., Ward, Kate, Harvey, Nicholas, Godfrey, Keith, Chan, Shiao-Yng and Cutfield, Wayne
(2022)
Cross-calibration of two dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry devices for the measurement of body composition in young children.
Scientific Reports, 12 (13862).
(doi:10.1038/s41598-022-17711-0.).
Abstract
This study aimed to cross-calibrate body composition measures from the GE Lunar Prodigy and GE Lunar iDXA in a cohort of young children. 28 children (mean age 3.4 years) were measured on the iDXA followed by the Prodigy. Prodigy scans were subsequently reanalysed using enCORE v17 enhanced analysis (“Prodigy enhanced”). Body composition parameters were compared across three evaluation methods (Prodigy, Prodigy enhanced, iDXA), and adjustment equations were developed. There were differences in the three evaluation methods for all body composition parameters. Body fat percentage (%BF) from the iDXA was approximately 1.5-fold greater than the Prodigy, whereas bone mineral density (BMD) was approximately 20% lower. Reanalysis of Prodigy scans with enhanced software attenuated these differences (%BF: − 5.2% [95% CI − 3.5, − 6.8]; and BMD: 1.0% [95% CI 0.0, 1.9]), although significant differences remained for all parameters except total body less head (TBLH) total mass and TBLH BMD, and some regional estimates. There were large differences between the Prodigy and iDXA, with these differences related both to scan resolution and software. Reanalysis of Prodigy scans with enhanced analysis resulted in body composition values much closer to those obtained on the iDXA, although differences remained. As manufacturers update models and software, researchers and clinicians need to be aware of the impact this may have on the longitudinal assessment of body composition, as results may not be comparable across devices and software versions.
Text
DXA Calibration_final_rev1_20220719_clean
- Accepted Manuscript
Restricted to Repository staff only
Request a copy
Text
s41598-022-17711-0
- Version of Record
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 29 July 2022
Published date: 16 August 2022
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 469818
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/469818
ISSN: 2045-2322
PURE UUID: 41247211-a8e3-4db2-8343-112fb044937e
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 26 Sep 2022 16:55
Last modified: 17 Mar 2024 03:40
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Jaz Lyons-Reid
Author:
Timothy Kenealy
Author:
Benjamin B. Albert
Author:
Shiao-Yng Chan
Author:
Wayne Cutfield
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics