Premium
Visceral and Subcutaneous Adiposity Measurements in Adults: Influence of Measurement Site
Author(s) -
Ellis Kenneth J.,
Grund Birgit,
Visnegarwala Fehmida,
Thackeray Lisa,
Miller Collin G.,
Chesson Charles E.,
ElSadr Wafaa,
Carr Andrew
Publication year - 2007
Publication title -
obesity
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.438
H-Index - 199
eISSN - 1930-739X
pISSN - 1930-7381
DOI - 10.1038/oby.2007.172
Subject(s) - subcutaneous fat , medicine , visceral fat , obesity , adipose tissue , insulin resistance
Objective: Excess abdominal adiposity is a known risk factor for cardiovascular diseases. Computed tomography can be used to examine the visceral (VAT) and subcutaneous (SAT) components of abdominal adiposity, but it is unresolved whether single‐slice or multi‐slice protocols are needed. Research Method and Procedures: Nine computed tomography scans were obtained in the lumbar spine region of 24 adults. The nine slices were obtained at three intervertebral positions (L2–L3, L3–L4, and L4–L5) and at 7 mm above and below these locations. Intra‐site and inter‐site differences in SAT, VAT, total adipose tissue, and the VAT/SAT ratio were examined using ANOVA and confidence intervals for pairwise differences between means. Results: Intervertebral SAT values increased from 103.1 ± 50.9 (standard deviation) cm 2 at L2–L3 to 153.3 ± 68.8 cm 2 at L4–L5, whereas the corresponding VAT values decreased from 164.3 ± 125.4 to 126.0 ± 82.7 cm 2 . The VAT/SAT ratio was not constant, decreasing from 1.8 ± 1.4 to 0.9 ± 0.7. Repeated‐measures ANOVA indicated significant inter‐ and intra‐site differences ( p ≤ 0.02) for SAT, VAT, and the VAT/SAT ratio at L3−L4 and L4−L5 ( p < 0.001). Discussion: These differences show the limitation of using a single‐slice assessment of abdominal fat distribution, both for a subject and between subjects. Furthermore, the sizeable differences in the intra‐site scans indicate that precise repositioning is needed for longitudinal studies. In summary, our findings suggest that a multi‐site imaging protocol may provide a more complete assessment of abdominal fat stores and distribution than use of a single site.