2013 Position Development Conference on Bone DensitometryThe Official Positions of the International Society for Clinical Densitometry: Acquisition of Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry Body Composition and Considerations Regarding Analysis and Repeatability of Measures
Section snippets
Background
Task Force 2 was charged with the research and analysis of the published literature covering questions related to the performance and calibration of the dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) systems in relationship to body composition measurements. A total of 8 literature searches were performed in PubMed, with major key words related to DXA whole-body phantoms, fat tissue accuracy and precision, lean tissue accuracy and precision, region definition and analysis procedures, artifacts, and
Questions
- •
What phantoms and procedures should be used for quality control (QC) monitoring and cross-calibration for whole-body outcomes?
- •
What phantoms should be used to assure a DXA system is working within specifications and with stable calibration over time?
- •
How can measures be cross-calibrated between systems from different manufacturers?
- •
How to cross-calibrate measures between systems of the same manufacturer?
- •
- •
How should the accuracy of percent fat, fat mass, and lean mass be ascertained in the clinical
Questions
- •
What is the optimal way to prepare and position a patient for whole body scans?
- •
How should the hands, arms, legs, and feet be positioned?
- •
How should very obese or patients that do not fit within the scan limits be positioned?
- •
Questions
- •
How should whole body scans be analyzed?
- •
How should arms, legs, and head be sectioned from the trunk?
- •
If observed in the scan at the time of analysis, how should removable artifacts be addressed?
- •
If observed in the scan at the time of analysis, how should nonremovable artifacts be addressed?
- •
- •
How should precision be assessed for body composition measures?
- •
What is the minimum precision acceptable for a DXA site?
- •
What is the minimum precision for fat tissue assessment?
- •
What is the minimum precision for
- •
Acknowledgments
We appreciate the comments received from representatives of instrument manufacturers, including Kevin Wilson, Tom Sanchez, and David Ergun.
References (68)
- et al.
Executive summary of the 2013 ISCD Position Development Conference on body composition
J Clin Densitom
(2013) - et al.
First all-solid pediatric phantom for dual X-ray absorptiometry measurements in infants
J Clin Densitom
(2003) - et al.
Cross calibration of Hologic QDR2000 and GE lunar prodigy for whole body bone mineral density and body composition measurements
J Clin Densitom
(2011) - et al.
DXA body composition: theory and practice
Appl Radiat Isot
(1998) - et al.
QDR 4500A dual-energy X-ray absorptiometer underestimates fat mass in comparison with criterion methods in adults
Am J Clin Nutr
(2005) - et al.
Comparison of the effectiveness of 2 dual-energy X-ray absorptiometers with that of total body water and computed tomography in assessing changes in body composition during weight change
Am J Clin Nutr
(2003) - et al.
Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry is a valid tool for assessing skeletal muscle mass in older women
J Nutr
(2007) - et al.
Use of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in obese individuals
Am J Clin Nutr
(1995) - et al.
Can results of the left or right half of a whole body DXA composition study effectively reflect results of a total body composition DXA study?
J Clin Densitom
(2013) - et al.
Accuracy and precision of the Hologic reflection technique for obese whole body scan analysis
J Clin Densitom
(2011)