Introduction: Reliable peripheral quantitative computed tomography (pQCT) assessment is essential to the accurate longitudinal reporting of bone and muscle quality. However, the between-day reliability of pQCT and the influence of age on outcome reliability is currently unknown.
Objective: To quantify the same- and between-day reliability of morphological pQCT at proximal and distal segments of the forearm, shank, and thigh, and explore the influence of participant body size, age, and sex on outcome reliability.
Methods: Men and women (49 % female, 18-85 years, n=72-86) completed two consecutive-day pQCT testing sessions, where repeat measurements were conducted on day-one for technical error, and between-day for biological error quantification. Testing was undertaken following best practice body composition testing guidance, including standardized presentation and consistent time-of-day.
Results: All measurements of bone were classified as having ‘good’ to ‘excellent’ reliability [intraclass correlation coefficient (r=0.786- 0.999], as were measurements of muscle area (ICC r=0.991-0.999) and total fat (r=0.996-0.999). However, between- and same-day muscle density measurements at the thigh and forearm were classified as ‘poor’ (r=0.476) and ‘moderate’ (r=0.622), respectively. Likewise, intramuscular fat area at the thigh was classified as ‘moderate’ (r=0.737) for between-day measurement. Biological error was inflated compared to technical error by an average of 0.4 % for most measurements. Error values tended to increase proportionally with the amount of tissue quantified and males had significantly greater biological error for measurement of distal tibial bone (p<0.002) and trabecular area (p<0.002). Biological error was inflated among older adults for measurement of forearm muscle density (p<0.002).
Conclusions: Most pQCT outcomes can be implemented with confidence, especially outcomes that assess bone area and density at any of the radial, tibial, and femoral sites investigated herein. However, it is important to account for the influence of biological measurement error in further studies, especially for muscle and intramuscular fat outcomes derived by pQCT.
Previous studies have yielded inconsistent results regarding the relationship between obesity and bone mineral density (BMD). The aim of this study was to determine the influence of body composition on BMD and the serum sclerostin level in overweight and obese adults. The study had a cross-sectional design and included 90 men and 118 women with a body mass index ≥25. Fat mass, lean mass, and spinal and pelvic BMD were measured using dual-emission X-ray absorptiometry. Subcutaneous fat, visceral fat, and lean mass were measured between L2 and L3 by 16-slice spiral computed tomography. The serum sclerostin level was determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Pearson analysis showed that fat mass and appendicular lean mass were positively correlated with spinal BMD in both sexes. A positive association of both fat mass and lean mass with pelvic BMD, which was stronger in women, was also found. Partial correlation analysis showed the positive association between fat mass and BMD was significantly attenuated but the positive association between lean mass and pelvic BMD remained after adjustment for age and body weight. A negative correlation was observed between visceral fat and spinal and pelvic BMD only in women, and the positive association between lean mass with pelvic BMD was more obvious in women than in men, indicating body composition seemed to have a greater impact on the BMD in women. The serum sclerostin level was positively associated with BMD but not with body composition. These findings suggest that the correlation between body composition and BMD is influenced by sex and skeletal site.
Purpose: People with spinal cord injury (SCI) experience a considerable loss of bone after the injury. Lumbar spine (LS) bone mineral density (BMD) has been reported to be within the normal range, or even higher when assessed with DXA, in people with SCI; hence, it has been hypothesized that sources of error may spuriously increase LS BMD. The aim of this study was to describe the frequency of potential sources of error that may alter LS BMD measurement in a cohort of individuals with chronic SCI at baseline and over a 2-year period. Methods: We analyzed baseline and 2-year follow up DXA scans (Hologic Discovery QDR 4500, Hologic Inc., MA, USA) previously performed from a cohort of males and females with chronic SCI. Two physicians independently reviewed each scan, commented on whether the scan was appropriate for BMD analysis, should be re-analyzed, or be removed from the dataset, and reported on the presence of potential sources of error in LS BMD measurement. Results: We reviewed 115 lumbar spine DXA scans from 58 participants, and 107 (93.0 %) scans from 52 participants presented at least one potential source of error. At baseline, the average number of potential sources of error per scan was 5.5 ± 1.7 and 5.7 ± 1.5 according to rater 1 and rater 2, respectively. Follow-up scans presented an average of 5.6 ± 1.6 and 5.7 ± 1.4 potential sources of error according to rater 1 and rater 2, respectively. Facet sclerosis, osteophytes and difficulty in detecting bone edges were the most prevalent sources of error. Conclusion: The high frequency of potential sources of error is consistent with current recommendations against the use of LS BMD for fracture risk assessment in people with SCI.