Scan Mode Selection on the GE-Lunar iDXA Densitometer

Precision of the GE Lunar Total Body-Less Head Scan for the Measurement of Three-Compartment Body Composition in Athletes

INTRODUCTION

Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is widely used for the assessment of lean mass (LM), fat mass (FM) and bone mineral content (BMC). When observing standardised protocols, DXA has a high level of precision for the assessment of total body composition, including the head region. However, including the head region may have limited relevance in athletes and can be problematic when positioning taller athletes who exceed scan boundaries. This study investigated the precision of a new total-body-less-head (TBLH) DXA scan for three-compartment body composition measurement in athletes, with outcomes compared to the standard total-body DXA scan.

METHODS

Precision errors were calculated from two consecutive scans with re-positioning (Lunar iDXA, GE Healthcare, Madison, WI), in male and female athletes from a range of sports. TBLH precision was determined from repeat scans in 95 athletes (male n = 55; female n = 40; age: 26.0 ± 8.5 y; body mass: 81.2 ± 20.5 kg; stature: 1.77 ± 0.11 m), and standard total-body scan precision was derived from a sub-sample of 58 athletes (male n = 19; female n = 39; age: 27.6 ± 9.9 y; body mass: 69.6 ± 14.8 kg; stature: 1.72 ± 0.94 m). Data from the sub-sample were also used to compare precision error and 3-compartment body composition outcomes between the standard total-body scan and the TBLH scan.

RESULTS

TBLH precision errors [root mean squared-standard deviation, RMS-SD (coefficient of variation, %CV)] were bone mineral content (BMC): 15.6 g (0.5%), lean mass (LM): 254.3 g (0.4%) and fat mass (FM): 199.4 g (1.3%). These outcomes compared favourably to the precision errors derived from the standard total-body scan [BMC: 12.4 g (0.4%), LM: 202.2 g (0.4%), and FM: 160.8 g (1.1%)]. The TBLH scan resulted in lower BMC (-19.5%), LM (-6.6%), and FM (-4.5%) compared to the total-body scan (BMC: 2,308 vs. 2,865 g; LM: 46,954 vs. 50,276 g; FM: 15,183 vs. 15,888 g, all p<0.005). ConclusionThe TBLH scan demonstrates high in-vivo precision comparable to that of the standard total-body scan in a heterogeneous cohort of athletes. Given the impact of head exclusion on total body composition outcomes, TBLH scans should not be used interchangeably with the standard total-body scan.

Interpretation of Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry-Derived Body Composition Change in Athletes: A Review and Recommendations for Best Practice

Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is a medical imaging device which has become the method of choice for the measurement of body composition in athletes. The objectives of this review were to evaluate published longitudinal DXA body composition studies in athletic populations for interpretation of "meaningful" change, and to propose a best practice measurement protocol. An online search of PubMed and CINAHL via EBSCO Host and Web of Science enabled the identification of studies published until November 2016. Those that met the inclusion criteria were reviewed independently by 2 authors according to their methodological quality and interpretation of body composition change. Twenty-five studies published between 1996 and November 2016 were reviewed (male athletes: 13, female athletes: 3, mixed: 9) and sample sizes ranged from n = 1 to 212. The same number of eligible studies was published between 2013 and 2016, as over the 16 yr prior (between 1996 and 2012). Seven did not include precision error, and fewer than half provided athlete-specific precision error. There were shortfalls in the sample sizes on which precision estimates were based and inconsistencies in the level of pre-scan standardization, with some reporting full standardization protocols and others reporting only single (e.g., overnight fast) or no control measures. There is a need for standardized practice and reporting in athletic populations for the longitudinal measurement of body composition using DXA. Based on this review and those of others, plus the official position of the International Society for Clinical Densitometry, our recommendations and protocol are proposed as a guide to support best practice.