{"title":"Horizon A系统和Lunar iDXA的身体成分比较：OsteoLaus队列","authors":"Colin Vendrami MD, MSc MD-PhD Student (Primary Author) , Enisa Shevroja MD, PhD (Contributing Author) , Guillaume Gatineau MSc (Contributing Author) , Elena Gonzalez Rodriguez MD, PhD (Contributing Author) , Lamy Olivier Prof., MD, PhD (Contributing Author) , Didier Hans Prof., MD, PhD Professor (Contributing Author)","doi":"10.1016/j.jocd.2023.101386","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose/Aims</h3><p>This study aims to compare body composition measures between two different devices of latest generation: Horizon A SystemTM (Hologic, Waltham, MA, USA) and Lunar iDXATM (GE Healthcare, Madison, Wi, USA).</p></div><div><h3>Rationale/Background</h3><p>Dual-energy X-Ray Absorptiometry (DXA) is one of the reference techniques for the assessment of body composition thanks to its reliability, low irradiation, and the capacity to measure regional and total fat, lean and bone parameters. As DXA measurements vary among different devices, it is crucial to assess their similarities and differences.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Post-menopausal women from the 5th visit of the OsteoLaus cohort underwent total body DXA assessment with both devices in the same day, within one hour. Two technicians: one for Horizon A and one for Lunar iDXA performed all the scans. We compared total fat mass (TFM) and percent fat (TPF), total lean mass (TLM), appendicular lean mass (ALM), total bone mineral content (BMC) and density (BMD) between the two DXAs with T-test for means, correlation (r) and with a complete Bland Altman analysis (regression, constant agreement, relative agreement).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>805 participants were analyzed (age 72.9±6.8 years, BMI 25.5±4.5 kg/cm2). Compared to Lunar iDXA, Horizon A measures higher (p< 0.001) mean values for TFM +1418.1 g. (r=0.99), TPF +0.91% (r=0.99) and TLM +1090.3 g (r=0.96). Horizon A measures lower (p< 0.001) mean values for ALM -749.7 g. (r=0.97), BMC -216.3 g. (r=0.85) and BMD - 0.050g/cm2 (r=0.81). The Bland Altman analysis shows different relative and constant agreement for each comparison between the devices (cf. figures).</p></div><div><h3>Implications</h3><p>A trend of higher soft tissues values were seen for Horizon A SystemTM, and of bone for Lunar iDXATM. These results suggest the presence of systematic differences, calibration differences and potential confounders between these two devices. These between-devices differences might be particularly impactfull on the use of these parameters’ cut-offs in clinical setting. Further in-depth analysis with cross-calibration equations is planned. This effort is beneficial for the diagnosis and clinical follow-up of diseases that rely on DXA-derived parameters.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Body composition comparison between Horizon A System and Lunar iDXA: The OsteoLaus Cohort\",\"authors\":\"Colin Vendrami MD, MSc MD-PhD Student (Primary Author) , Enisa Shevroja MD, PhD (Contributing Author) , Guillaume Gatineau MSc (Contributing Author) , Elena Gonzalez Rodriguez MD, PhD (Contributing Author) , Lamy Olivier Prof., MD, PhD (Contributing Author) , Didier Hans Prof., MD, PhD Professor (Contributing Author)\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jocd.2023.101386\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose/Aims</h3><p>This study aims to compare body composition measures between two different devices of latest generation: Horizon A SystemTM (Hologic, Waltham, MA, USA) and Lunar iDXATM (GE Healthcare, Madison, Wi, USA).</p></div><div><h3>Rationale/Background</h3><p>Dual-energy X-Ray Absorptiometry (DXA) is one of the reference techniques for the assessment of body composition thanks to its reliability, low irradiation, and the capacity to measure regional and total fat, lean and bone parameters. As DXA measurements vary among different devices, it is crucial to assess their similarities and differences.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Post-menopausal women from the 5th visit of the OsteoLaus cohort underwent total body DXA assessment with both devices in the same day, within one hour. Two technicians: one for Horizon A and one for Lunar iDXA performed all the scans. We compared total fat mass (TFM) and percent fat (TPF), total lean mass (TLM), appendicular lean mass (ALM), total bone mineral content (BMC) and density (BMD) between the two DXAs with T-test for means, correlation (r) and with a complete Bland Altman analysis (regression, constant agreement, relative agreement).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>805 participants were analyzed (age 72.9±6.8 years, BMI 25.5±4.5 kg/cm2). Compared to Lunar iDXA, Horizon A measures higher (p< 0.001) mean values for TFM +1418.1 g. (r=0.99), TPF +0.91% (r=0.99) and TLM +1090.3 g (r=0.96). Horizon A measures lower (p< 0.001) mean values for ALM -749.7 g. (r=0.97), BMC -216.3 g. (r=0.85) and BMD - 0.050g/cm2 (r=0.81). The Bland Altman analysis shows different relative and constant agreement for each comparison between the devices (cf. figures).</p></div><div><h3>Implications</h3><p>A trend of higher soft tissues values were seen for Horizon A SystemTM, and of bone for Lunar iDXATM. These results suggest the presence of systematic differences, calibration differences and potential confounders between these two devices. These between-devices differences might be particularly impactfull on the use of these parameters’ cut-offs in clinical setting. Further in-depth analysis with cross-calibration equations is planned. This effort is beneficial for the diagnosis and clinical follow-up of diseases that rely on DXA-derived parameters.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1094695023000367\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1094695023000367","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的/目的本研究旨在比较两种最新一代不同设备:Horizon A SystemTM (Hologic, Waltham, MA, USA)和Lunar iDXATM (GE Healthcare, Madison, Wi, USA)之间的身体成分测量。原理/背景双能x射线吸收仪(DXA)是评估身体成分的参考技术之一，因为它的可靠性，低辐射，以及测量区域和总脂肪，瘦和骨参数的能力。由于DXA测量在不同的设备之间有所不同，因此评估它们的相似性和差异性至关重要。方法OsteoLaus队列第5次访问的绝经后妇女在同一天1小时内使用两种装置进行全身DXA评估。两名技术人员:一名负责地平线A，一名负责月球iDXA，负责所有的扫描工作。我们比较了两个DXAs之间的总脂肪量(TFM)和脂肪百分比(TPF)、总瘦质量(TLM)、阑尾瘦质量(ALM)、总骨矿物质含量(BMC)和密度(BMD)，采用均值t检验、相关性(r)和完整的Bland Altman分析(回归、恒定一致、相对一致)。结果共分析805名参与者(年龄72.9±6.8岁，BMI 25.5±4.5 kg/cm2)。与月球iDXA相比，地平线A测量值更高(p<0.001) TFM +1418.1 g (r=0.99)、TPF +0.91% (r=0.99)和TLM +1090.3 g (r=0.96)的平均值。地平线A测量较低(p<平均值为ALM -749.7 g. (r=0.97)， BMC -216.3 g. (r=0.85)和BMD - 0.050g/cm2 (r=0.81)。Bland Altman的分析表明，在设备之间的每次比较中，不同的相对一致性和恒定一致性(参见图表)。结论Horizon A SystemTM有较高软组织值的趋势，Lunar iDXATM有较高骨值的趋势。这些结果表明，这两种设备之间存在系统差异、校准差异和潜在的混杂因素。这些设备之间的差异可能对临床设置中这些参数截止值的使用特别有影响。计划使用交叉校准方程进行进一步深入分析。这一努力对依赖dxa衍生参数的疾病的诊断和临床随访是有益的。
Body composition comparison between Horizon A System and Lunar iDXA: The OsteoLaus Cohort
Purpose/Aims
This study aims to compare body composition measures between two different devices of latest generation: Horizon A SystemTM (Hologic, Waltham, MA, USA) and Lunar iDXATM (GE Healthcare, Madison, Wi, USA).
Rationale/Background
Dual-energy X-Ray Absorptiometry (DXA) is one of the reference techniques for the assessment of body composition thanks to its reliability, low irradiation, and the capacity to measure regional and total fat, lean and bone parameters. As DXA measurements vary among different devices, it is crucial to assess their similarities and differences.
Methods
Post-menopausal women from the 5th visit of the OsteoLaus cohort underwent total body DXA assessment with both devices in the same day, within one hour. Two technicians: one for Horizon A and one for Lunar iDXA performed all the scans. We compared total fat mass (TFM) and percent fat (TPF), total lean mass (TLM), appendicular lean mass (ALM), total bone mineral content (BMC) and density (BMD) between the two DXAs with T-test for means, correlation (r) and with a complete Bland Altman analysis (regression, constant agreement, relative agreement).
Results
805 participants were analyzed (age 72.9±6.8 years, BMI 25.5±4.5 kg/cm2). Compared to Lunar iDXA, Horizon A measures higher (p< 0.001) mean values for TFM +1418.1 g. (r=0.99), TPF +0.91% (r=0.99) and TLM +1090.3 g (r=0.96). Horizon A measures lower (p< 0.001) mean values for ALM -749.7 g. (r=0.97), BMC -216.3 g. (r=0.85) and BMD - 0.050g/cm2 (r=0.81). The Bland Altman analysis shows different relative and constant agreement for each comparison between the devices (cf. figures).
Implications
A trend of higher soft tissues values were seen for Horizon A SystemTM, and of bone for Lunar iDXATM. These results suggest the presence of systematic differences, calibration differences and potential confounders between these two devices. These between-devices differences might be particularly impactfull on the use of these parameters’ cut-offs in clinical setting. Further in-depth analysis with cross-calibration equations is planned. This effort is beneficial for the diagnosis and clinical follow-up of diseases that rely on DXA-derived parameters.
期刊介绍：
Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance.
Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
