CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 300Bone health and osteoporosis researchBody Composition Measurement TechniquesMedical Imaging and Analysis

Simulated increases in body fat and errors in bone mineral density measurements by DXA and QCT

Open access
Yu, Elaine W, Thomas, Bijoy J, Brown, J Keenan, Finkelstein, Joel S·2012·Journal of Bone and Mineral Research
DOI 10.1002/jbmr.506PMC PMC3864640
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Major alterations in body composition, such as with obesity and weight loss, have complex effects on the measurement of bone mineral density (BMD) by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). The effects of altered body fat on quantitative computed tomography (QCT) measurements are unknown. We scanned a spine phantom by DXA and QCT before and after surrounding with sequential fat layers (up to 12 kg). In addition, we measured lumbar spine and proximal femur BMD by DXA and trabecular spine BMD by QCT in 13 adult volunteers before and after a simulated 7.5 kg increase in body fat. With the spine phantom, DXA BMD increased linearly with sequential fat layering at the normal (p < 0.01) and osteopenic (p < 0.01) levels, but QCT BMD did not change significantly. In humans, fat layering significantly reduced DXA spine BMD values (mean ± SD: −2.2 ± 3.7%, p = 0.05) and increased the variability of measurements. In contrast, fat layering increased QCT spine BMD in humans (mean ± SD: 1.5 ± 2.5%, p = 0.05). Fat layering did not change mean DXA BMD of the femoral neck or total hip in humans significantly, but measurements became less precise. Associations between baseline and fat-simulation scans were stronger for QCT of the spine (r2 = 0.97) than for DXA of the spine (r2 = 0.87), total hip (r2 = 0.80), or femoral neck (r2 = 0.75). Bland-Altman plots revealed that fat-associated errors were greater for DXA spine and hip BMD than for QCT trabecular spine BMD. Fat layering introduces error and decreases the reproducibility of DXA spine and hip BMD measurements in human volunteers. Although overlying fat also affects QCT BMD measurements, the error is smaller and more uniform than with DXA BMD. Caution must be used when interpreting BMD changes in humans whose body composition is changing. © 2012 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jbmr.506

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • DXA-derived aBMD precision declines with increasing BMI and paraspinal fat, which may negatively impact the correlation with spectral localizer radiograph-derived aBMD.

    “It is known that DXA-derived aBMD precision declines with increasing BMI and paraspinal fat,23,24 which may negatively impact the correlation with spectral localizer radiograph-derived aBMD.”

    From In Vivo Bone Mineral Density Assessment With Spectral Localizer Radiographs From Photon-Counting Detector CT (2025) · cites this paper as [23]

    The Introduction states that DXA precision declines with increasing BMI, and the Discussion reports that simulated fat layering worsened DXA precision. The study used circumferential fat layers around normal-weight volunteers, not measurements of paraspinal fat specifically. The proposed effect on correlation with spectral localizer radiograph-derived aBMD is the citing authors’ inference, rather than a finding attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • QCT and HR-pQCT measurements may be less affected by changes in body fat than DXA.

    “Measurements by QCT34 and high resolution peripheral QCT (HR-pQCT)35 may be less affected by changes in body fat.”

    From Bone loss after bariatric surgery: causes, consequences, and management (2014) · cites this paper as [34]

  • After gastric banding, patients typically lose 20-30% of initial body weight and 41-54% of excess body weight.

    “After GB, patients typically lose 20-30% of initial body weight and 41-54% of excess body weight36, 37.”

    From Bone loss after bariatric surgery: causes, consequences, and management (2014) · cites this paper as [37]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Yu, E. W., Thomas, B. J., Brown, J. K., & Finkelstein, J. S.
Affiliations
  • Massachusetts General Hospital (US)
  • The University of Texas at Austin (US)
Corresponding author
Yu, Elaine W
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Bone and Mineral Research
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2011-09-13
Volume
27
Issue
1
Pages
119-124
ISSN
  • 0884-0431 (ISSN-L)
  • 1523-4681
DOI
10.1002/jbmr.506
PMC
PMC3864640
OpenAlex
W2069043426
Cited by
300
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 5
FWCI
14.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model (vor)
Locations
  • Journal of Bone and Mineral Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (K23DK093713, T32DK007028)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Bone health and osteoporosis research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Body Composition Measurement Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Medical Imaging and Analysis
Keywords
dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, quantitative computed tomography, fat mass, body composition, obesity, weight loss, spine phantom, lumbar spine, proximal femur, trabecular bone, measurement reproducibility, osteopenia
MeSH terms
Adipose Tissue, Adult, Computer Simulation, Female, Femur, Humans, Male, Spine, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Absorptiometry, Photon, Bone Density, Phantoms, Imaging

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review