Journal Mobile Options
Table of Contents
Vol. 56, No. 1, 2010
Issue release date: February 2010
Ann Nutr Metab 2010;56:36–44
(DOI:10.1159/000265849)

Ultrasound Measurement of Total Body Fat in Obese Adolescents

Pineau J.-C. · Lalys L. · Bocquet M. · Guihard-Costa A.-M. · Polak M. · Frelut M.-L. · Peres G. · Dabbas-Tyan M.
aUPR 2147 CNRS, Dynamique de l’évolution humaine, bLM3, CNRS, UMR 8006, ENSAM, cU 845, INSERM, EMI 363, Hôpital Necker, Enfants Malades, dCHU Pitié Salpêtrière, Physiologie du sport, and eEndocrinologie pédiatrique, Saint-Vincent de Paul, Paris, France

Individual Users: Register with Karger Login Information

Please create your User ID & Password





Contact Information











I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.

To view the fulltext, please log in

To view the pdf, please log in

Abstract

Background/Aims: To compare body fat (BF) measurements obtained with a new ultrasound method with those assessed by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) in obese adolescents. Methods: In 94 adolescents (57 females and 37 males) aged 12–19 years and body mass index (BMI) exceeding 30 kg·m–2, the z-score BMI for age was 6.7 (adolescent girls) and 6.6 (adolescent boys) >97th percentile. BF was measured using DEXA and a method based on ultrasound measurements, body weight, height, abdominal circumference and mid-thigh circumference. Results: Obesity class I was noted in 39%, II in 28% and III in 33% of the patients. BF by ultrasound correlated closely with BF by DEXA, in both females (r = 0.958) and males (r = 0.981), with standard errors of the estimates (SEE) being 2.9 and 2.5 kg, respectively. The ultrasound method was more accurate than the skinfold technique (n = 24; SEE: 2.2 vs. 6.5 kg, respectively). In 13 adolescents who had marked weight loss after 6 months of treatment, the decrease in DEXA-measured BF correlated closely with the decrease in ultrasound-measured BF (r = 0.95). Conclusions: Our innovative portable ultrasound technique has advantages in terms of reliability, reproducibility, accuracy and costs for screening and monitoring obese adolescents. A patent application has been submitted. Our method should prove valuable for epidemiological studies.



Copyright / Drug Dosage

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in goverment regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

References

  1. Ziegler O, Debry O: Epidémiologie des obésités de l’adulte; in: Encyclopédie Médicale Chirurgicale (Endocrinologie-Nutrition). Paris, Elsevier, 1997, vol 10-506-B-20, p 7.
  2. Andreyeva T, Sturm R, Ringel JS: Moderate and severe obesity have large differences in health care costs. Obes Res 2004;12:1936–1943.
  3. Genton L, Hans D, Kyle UG, Pichard C: Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and body composition: differences between devices and comparison with reference methods. Nutrition 2002;18:66–70.
  4. Plank LD: Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and body composition. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care 2005;8:305–309.
  5. Mei Z, Grummer-Strawn LM, Thornton JC, Freedman DS, Pierson RN, Dietz WH, Horlick M: Do skinfold measurements provide additional information to body mass index in the assessment of body fatness among children and adolescents? Pediatrics 2007;119:e1306–e1313.
  6. Freedman DS, Wang J, Ogden CL, Thornton JC, Mei Z, Pierson RN, Dietz WH, Horlick M: The prediction of body fatness by BMI and skinfold thicknesses among children and adolescents. Ann Hum Biol 2007;34:183–194.
  7. Jebb SA, Elia M: Techniques for the measurement of body composition: a practical guide. Am J Obes 1993;17:611–621.
  8. Pineau JC, Guihard-Costa AM, Bocquet M: Validation of ultrasound techniques applied to body fat measurement: a comparison between ultrasound techniques, air displacement plethysmography and bioelectrical impedance versus dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Ann Nutr Metab 2007;51:421–427.
  9. Stolk RP, Wink O, Zelissen PMJ, Meijer R, van Gils APG, Grobee DE: Validity and reproducibility of ultrasonography for the measurement of intra-abdominal adipose tissue. Int J Obes Relat Metab Dis 2001;25:1346–1351.
  10. Wirth A, Steinmetz B: Gender differences in changes in subcutaneous and intra-abdominal fat during weight reduction: an ultrasound study. Obes Res 1998;6:393–399.
  11. Armellini F, Zamboni M, Robbi R,Todesco T, Rigo L, Bergamo-Andreis IA, Bosello O: Total and intra-abdominal fat measurements by ultrasound and computerized tomography. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 1993;17:209–214.
  12. Tornaghi G, Raiteri R, Pozzato C, Rispoli A, Bramani M, Cipolat M, Craveri A: Anthropometric or ultrasonic measurements in assessment of visceral fat? A comparative study. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 1994;18:771–775.
  13. Sabir N, Pakdemirli E, Sermez Y, Zencir M, Kazil S: Sonographic assessment of changes in thickness of different abdominal fat layers in response to diet in obese women. J Clin Ultrasound 2003;31:26–30.
  14. Rolland-Cachera MF, Cole TJ, Sempe M, Tichet J, Rossignol C, Charraud A: Body mass index variation: centiles from birth to 87 years. Eur J Clin Nutr 1991;45:13–21.
  15. World Health Organisation: Prevention and Management of the Global Epidemic of Obesity: Report of the WHO Consultation on Obesity. Geneva, WHO, 1998.
  16. von Eyben FE, Mouristen E, Holm J, Montvilas P, Dimcevski G, Suciu G, Helleberg I, Kristensen L, von Eyben R: Intra-abdominal obesity and metabolic risk factors: a study of young adults. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 2003;27:941–949.
  17. Goran MI: Visceral fat in prepubertal children: influence of obesity, anthropometry, ethnicity, gender, diet and growth. Am J Hum Biol 1999;11:201–207.
  18. Roemmich JN, Rogol AD: Hormonal changes during puberty and their relationship to fat distribution. Am J Hum Biol 1999;11:209–224.
  19. Lohman TG, Roche AF, Martorell R: Anthropometric Standardization Reference Manual. Champaign, Human Kinetics, 1988.
  20. Slaughter MH, Lohman TG, Boileau RA, Horswill CA, Stillman RJ, Van Loan M, Bemben DA: Skinfold equations for estimation of body fatness in children and youths. Hum Biol 1988;60:709–723.
  21. Lohman TG: Advances in Body Composition Assessment. Current Issues in Exercise Science Series. Monograph 3. Champaign, Human Kinetics, 1992.
  22. Bland JM, Altman DG: Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;1: 307–310.
  23. Williams CA, Bale P: Bias and limits of agreement between hydrodensitometry, bioelectrical impedance and skinfold calipers measures of percentage body fat. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 1998;77:271–277.
  24. He M, Tan KCB, Li ETS, Kung AWC: Body fat determination by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry and its relation to body mass index and waist circumference in Hong Kong Chinese. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 2001;25:748–752.
  25. Abbot RA, Ball EJ, O’Connor J, Steinbeck KS, Wishart C, Gaskin KJ, Baur LA, Davies PSW: The use of body mass index to predict body composition in children. Ann Hum Biol 2002;29:619–626.
  26. Pietrobelli A, Faith MS, Allison DB, Gallagher D, Chiumello G, Heymsfield SB: Body mass index as a measure of adiposity among children and adolescents: a validation study. J Pediatr 1998;132:204–210.
  27. Gray DS, Bray GA, Bauer M, Kaplan K, Gemayel N, Wood R, Greenway R, Kirk S: Skinfold thickness measurements in obese subjects. Am J Clin Nutr 1990;51:571–577.
  28. Pollock ML, Jackson J: Research progress in validation of clinical methods of assessing body composition. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1984;16:606–615.
  29. Lazzer S, Boirie Y, Montaurier C, Vernet J, Meyer M, Vermorel M: A weight reduction program preserves fat-free mass but not metabolic rate in obese adolescents. Obes Res 2004;12:233–240.
  30. Dao H, Frelut ML, Oberlin F, Peres G, Bourgeois P, Navarro J: Effects of a multidisciplinary weight loss intervention on body composition in obese adolescents. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 2004;28:290–299.


Pay-per-View Options
Direct payment This item at the regular price: USD 38.00
Payment from account With a Karger Pay-per-View account (down payment USD 150) you profit from a special rate for this and other single items.
This item at the discounted price: USD 26.50