Department of Nutrition, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, P.O. Box 26170, Greensboro, NC, 27402-6170, USA.
Physiol Behav. 2011 Apr 18;103(1):117-21. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2010.12.004. Epub 2010 Dec 15.
There are several techniques used to measure body composition in experimental models including dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) and quantitative magnetic resonance (QMR). DEXA/QMR data have been compared in mice, but have not been compared previously in rats. The goal of this study was to compare DEXA and QMR data in rats. We used rats that varied by sex, diet, and age, in addition we compared dissected samples containing subcutaneous (pelt) or visceral fat (carcass). The data means were compared by focusing on the differences between DEXA/QMR data using a series of scatter plots without assuming that either method is more accurate as suggested by Bland and Altman. DEXA/QMR data did not agree sufficiently in carcass or pelt FM or in pelt LBM. The variation observed within these groups suggests that DEXA and QMR measurements are not comparable. Carcass LBM in young rats did yield comparable data once the data for middle-aged rats was removed. The variation in our data may be a result of different direct and indirect measures that DEXA and QMR technologies use to quantify FM and LBM. DEXA measures FM and estimates fat-free mass. In contrast, QMR uses separate equations of magnetic resonance to measure FM, LBM, total body water and free water. We found that QMR overestimated body mass in our middle-aged rats, and this increased the variation between methods. Our goal was to evaluate the precision of DEXA/QMR data in rats to determine if they agree sufficiently to allow direct comparison of data between methods. However DEXA and QMR did not yield the same estimates of FM or LBM for the majority of our samples.
有几种技术可用于测量实验模型中的身体成分,包括双能 X 射线吸收法(DEXA)和定量磁共振(QMR)。DEXA/QMR 数据已在小鼠中进行了比较,但以前尚未在大鼠中进行比较。本研究的目的是比较大鼠的 DEXA 和 QMR 数据。我们使用了不同性别、饮食和年龄的大鼠,此外还比较了含有皮下(皮毛)或内脏脂肪(尸体)的解剖样本。通过不假设任何一种方法更准确(如 Bland 和 Altman 所建议的那样),而是通过关注 DEXA/QMR 数据之间差异的一系列散点图来比较数据均值。在尸体或皮毛 FM 或皮毛 LBM 中,DEXA/QMR 数据差异不够大。在这些组中观察到的变化表明,DEXA 和 QMR 测量值不可比。一旦去除中年大鼠的数据,年轻大鼠的尸体 LBM 就可以得到可比的数据。我们数据中的变化可能是由于 DEXA 和 QMR 技术用于量化 FM 和 LBM 的直接和间接测量方法不同造成的。DEXA 测量 FM 并估计无脂肪量。相比之下,QMR 使用磁共振的单独方程来测量 FM、LBM、总身体水分和自由水。我们发现,QMR 高估了我们中年大鼠的体重,这增加了方法之间的差异。我们的目标是评估 DEXA/QMR 数据在大鼠中的精度,以确定它们是否足够一致,以允许在方法之间直接比较数据。然而,对于我们的大多数样本,DEXA 和 QMR 并没有得出相同的 FM 或 LBM 估计值。