Obesity surgery · 2002
Ultrasound measurement of visceral and subcutaneous fat in morbidly obese patients before and after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding: comparison with computerized tomography and with anthropometric measurements.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Pontiroli A E, Pizzocri P, Giacomelli M, Marchi M, Vedani P, Cucchi E, Orena C, Folli F, Paganelli M, Ferla G
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: There are now a variety of methods to assess body fat distribution, anthropometric (waist circumference and waist/hip W/H ratio), computed tomography (CT), and ultrasound (US) measurements, with CT considered as the reference method. Bariatric surgery leads to a significant and usually durable weight loss in morbidly obese patients; when assessing its results, it is of interest to measure changes of total fat tissue and of body fat distribution.
METHODS: In this study, we compared anthropometric, US, and CT measurements of body fat distribution under basal conditions and 1 year after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB); 120 morbidly obese patients were considered at baseline, and 40 patients were re-evaluated 1 year after LAGB.
RESULTS: Thickness of visceral and subcutaneous fat measured through CT and US methods was superimposable both under basal conditions and 1 year after LAGB, and the highest correlation was found between CT and US data on visceral fat, followed by CT and US data on subcutaneous fat; a fair correlation was also found between CT and US data on visceral fat and waist circumference.
CONCLUSION: We suggest that evaluation of body fat distribution is accomplished by US instead of CT measurement, because of its lower cost and low exposure risk. Waist circumference stands as a reasonable surrogate of both methods, while W/H ratio is poorly correlated with other measures of body fat distribution.
METHODS: In this study, we compared anthropometric, US, and CT measurements of body fat distribution under basal conditions and 1 year after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB); 120 morbidly obese patients were considered at baseline, and 40 patients were re-evaluated 1 year after LAGB.
RESULTS: Thickness of visceral and subcutaneous fat measured through CT and US methods was superimposable both under basal conditions and 1 year after LAGB, and the highest correlation was found between CT and US data on visceral fat, followed by CT and US data on subcutaneous fat; a fair correlation was also found between CT and US data on visceral fat and waist circumference.
CONCLUSION: We suggest that evaluation of body fat distribution is accomplished by US instead of CT measurement, because of its lower cost and low exposure risk. Waist circumference stands as a reasonable surrogate of both methods, while W/H ratio is poorly correlated with other measures of body fat distribution.