Open AccessThe authors reply: Letter on: “Pitfalls in the measurement of muscle mass: a need for a reference standard” by Clark et al.
Author(s) -
Buckinx Fanny,
Landi Francesco,
Cesari Matteo,
Fieding Roger A.,
Visser Marjolein,
Engelke Klaus,
Maggi Stefania,
Dennison Elaine,
AlDaghri Nasser M.,
Allepaerts Sophie,
Bauer Jurgen,
Bautmans Ivan,
Brandi MariaLuisa,
Bruyère Olivier,
Cederholm Tommy,
Cerreta Francesca,
Cherubini Antonio,
Cooper Cyrus,
CruzJentoft Alphonso,
McCloskey Eugene,
DawsonHughes Bess,
Kaufman JeanMarc,
Laslop Andrea,
Petermans Jean,
Reginster JeanYves,
Rizzoli René,
Robinson Sian,
Rolland Yves,
Rueda Ricardo,
Vellas Bruno,
Kanis John A.
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.803
H-Index - 66
eISSN - 2190-6009
pISSN - 2190-5991
DOI - 10.1002/jcsm.12387
Subject(s) - muscle mass , adipose tissue , medicine , computer science
However, semantics aside, we think that DXA can indeed serve as a reference standard for measuring muscle mass. Obviously, CT and MRI are advanced techniques that can and have been used to obtain important information such as muscle size/volume and more recently amount and distribution of intra‐ and intermuscular adipose tissue. Also individual muscles can be assessed separately. However, with respect to muscle mass, the comparison of DXA with CT/MRI is rather difficult because DXA and QCT/MRI measure different physical parameters