Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2011 Jul;21(7):917-23.
doi: 10.1007/s11695-010-0296-7.

Validity of leg-to-leg bioelectrical impedance analysis to estimate body fat in obesity

Célia Lloret Linares  1 , Cécile Ciangura, Jean-Luc Bouillot, Muriel Coupaye, Xavier Declèves, Christine Poitou, Arnaud Basdevant, Jean-Michel Oppert
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Validity of leg-to-leg bioelectrical impedance analysis to estimate body fat in obesity

Célia Lloret Linares et al. Obes Surg. 2011 Jul.

Abstract

Background: Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) is a safe and easy method of assessing body composition. Its accuracy to predict fat mass (FM) in obesity and the change in FM following weight loss is questioned. Our objective was to compare leg-to-leg BIA to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in the assessment of FM in a large population, the changes in FM after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and to estimate between-method differences (bias) and limits of agreement.

Methods: BIA (Tanita BC-420MA) and DXA (Hologic Discovery W) were used in 5,740 consecutive patients (mean BMI, 37.7 ± 8.2 kg/m(2)) examined in a clinical nutrition department and in 72 women undergoing RYGB (BMI, 47.2 ± 7.2 kg/m(2)). Analyses included correlations between methods and Bland Altman analysis.

Results: In the entire population, BIA significantly overestimated FM in comparison with DXA (1.1 ± 6.1 kg, 0.8 ± 5.6%). FM estimates by each method were significantly correlated in absolute value (kg; r(2) = 0.9 in the whole population), and in percentage (r(2) = 0.6). However, wide limits of agreement were observed. In surgery patients, BIA significantly overestimated FM both before and 12 months after bypass. BIA significantly overestimated changes in FM after RYGB at 3 months (2.9 ± 5.0 kg) and at 12 months (1.9 ± 3.9 kg) but not at 6 months (0.9 ± 5.0 kg; p = 0.08). Estimates of changes in FM by each method were significantly correlated (r (2) = 0.4, 0.6, and 0.9, respectively).

Conclusion: According to the wide limits of agreement, BIA seems more interesting for epidemiological rather than individual use to evaluate body FM and FM changes in obese women undergoing RYGB.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2006 Nov;14(11):2064-70 - PubMed
    1. Am J Clin Nutr. 2005 Jan;81(1):74-8 - PubMed
    1. Am J Clin Nutr. 2001 Apr;73(4):687-702 - PubMed
    1. Clin Nutr. 2004 Dec;23(6):1430-53 - PubMed
    1. Surg Endosc. 2003 Apr;17(4):603-9 - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources