Comparison Of Trunk/Legs To Trunk/Total Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometric Indexes Of Abdominal Obesity In Differentiation Of Cushing’s And Obese Women
Date Issued
2020
Author(s)
Slagjana Maksimoska
Abstract
Objectives: Patients with Cushing’s syndrome (CS) are obese or overweight, and have abdominal, visceral adiposity. Accurate quantitative assessment of the visceral adiposity is essential in the evaluation of potential risk for the development of
serious medical illnesses. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) method is the gold standard for assessment of bone
health and body composition that provides accurate, comprehensive, precise measurements of total and regional body fat
distribution. Determination of DXA indexes cut-off point values of abdominal obesity is very important to discover obese
women with abdominal obesity.
Material and Methods: DXA assessment of body composition and body fat distribution was performed in two groups of
women, each consisting of 21 subjects: 1st group of Cushing’s syndrome with clinically confirmed CS with Body Mass Index (BMI) (30.03±6.49 kg/m2) and age of 42.98±13.27 years and 2nd group of obese women (O), matched with CS according to their BMI (29.91±6.12 kg/m2) and age (41.04±12.85 years). Trunk tissue mass (Tr-T) and trunk fat mass (Tr-F) and
their percentages values, trunk tissue percent fat (Tr-T%f) and trunk fat percent (Tr-F%) were determined. Legs and total
tissue mass (L-T; To-T) and legs and total fat mass (L-F; To-F) and their percentages (L-T%f; To-T%f) and (L-F%; To-F%)
were determined also. Their ratios Tr/L-T and Tr/To-T, Tr/L-F and Tr/To-F, Tr/L-T%f and Tr/To-T%f, Tr/L-F% and Tr/To-F
% were determined as indexes of central, abdominal obesity and their cut-off point values that best differentiate CS women
from O were determined. Sensitivity (S), specificity (Sp), positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV)
and DG (diagnostic accuracy) of these idexes were determined.
Results: Tr/L-T and Tr/To-T values in CS were significantly higher compared to O as well as Tr/L-F and Tr/To-F values in
CS were also significantly higher compared to O (p<0.0001). Tr/L-T%f and Tr/To-T%f values in CS as well as Tr/L-F%
and Tr/To-F% values in CS were significantly higher compared to O (p<0.0001). Tr/To-T cut-off point value of 0.52 and
Tr/L-T cut-off point value of 1.6 best differentiated CS from O for DG of 88.89%. Tr/To-F cut-off point value of 0.53 and
Tr/L-F of 1.8 best differentiated CS from O for DG of 83.33% and 88.89%. Tr/To-T%F and Tr/L-T%f best differentiated
CS from O for DG of 69.44% and 72.22% respectively. Tr/To-F% and Tr/L-F% best differentiated CS from O for DG of
72.22% and 77.78%. Tr/To-T, Tr/L-T, Tr/T-F and Tr/L-F differentiated CS and O with higher diagnostic accuracy compared
to their percentage values.
Conclusion: All examined indexes confirmed abdominal, visceral obesity in CS with significantly higher values in CS
compared to matched obese women. Tr/To-T and Tr/L-T as well as Tr/To-F and Tr/L-F indexes differentiated CS from
obese women with very similar diagnostic accuracy. Percentage ratios of the DXA indexes differentiated the two examined
groups with lower diagnostic accuracy and are not useful in diagnosing the abdominal obesity.
serious medical illnesses. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) method is the gold standard for assessment of bone
health and body composition that provides accurate, comprehensive, precise measurements of total and regional body fat
distribution. Determination of DXA indexes cut-off point values of abdominal obesity is very important to discover obese
women with abdominal obesity.
Material and Methods: DXA assessment of body composition and body fat distribution was performed in two groups of
women, each consisting of 21 subjects: 1st group of Cushing’s syndrome with clinically confirmed CS with Body Mass Index (BMI) (30.03±6.49 kg/m2) and age of 42.98±13.27 years and 2nd group of obese women (O), matched with CS according to their BMI (29.91±6.12 kg/m2) and age (41.04±12.85 years). Trunk tissue mass (Tr-T) and trunk fat mass (Tr-F) and
their percentages values, trunk tissue percent fat (Tr-T%f) and trunk fat percent (Tr-F%) were determined. Legs and total
tissue mass (L-T; To-T) and legs and total fat mass (L-F; To-F) and their percentages (L-T%f; To-T%f) and (L-F%; To-F%)
were determined also. Their ratios Tr/L-T and Tr/To-T, Tr/L-F and Tr/To-F, Tr/L-T%f and Tr/To-T%f, Tr/L-F% and Tr/To-F
% were determined as indexes of central, abdominal obesity and their cut-off point values that best differentiate CS women
from O were determined. Sensitivity (S), specificity (Sp), positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV)
and DG (diagnostic accuracy) of these idexes were determined.
Results: Tr/L-T and Tr/To-T values in CS were significantly higher compared to O as well as Tr/L-F and Tr/To-F values in
CS were also significantly higher compared to O (p<0.0001). Tr/L-T%f and Tr/To-T%f values in CS as well as Tr/L-F%
and Tr/To-F% values in CS were significantly higher compared to O (p<0.0001). Tr/To-T cut-off point value of 0.52 and
Tr/L-T cut-off point value of 1.6 best differentiated CS from O for DG of 88.89%. Tr/To-F cut-off point value of 0.53 and
Tr/L-F of 1.8 best differentiated CS from O for DG of 83.33% and 88.89%. Tr/To-T%F and Tr/L-T%f best differentiated
CS from O for DG of 69.44% and 72.22% respectively. Tr/To-F% and Tr/L-F% best differentiated CS from O for DG of
72.22% and 77.78%. Tr/To-T, Tr/L-T, Tr/T-F and Tr/L-F differentiated CS and O with higher diagnostic accuracy compared
to their percentage values.
Conclusion: All examined indexes confirmed abdominal, visceral obesity in CS with significantly higher values in CS
compared to matched obese women. Tr/To-T and Tr/L-T as well as Tr/To-F and Tr/L-F indexes differentiated CS from
obese women with very similar diagnostic accuracy. Percentage ratios of the DXA indexes differentiated the two examined
groups with lower diagnostic accuracy and are not useful in diagnosing the abdominal obesity.
File(s)![Thumbnail Image]()
![Thumbnail Image]()
Loading...
Name
Congress MLD 2020 AbstractBook.pdf
Size
12.12 MB
Format
Adobe PDF
Checksum
(MD5):0a4430829c31303c511e9c3b9c67f636
Loading...
Name
Congress MLD 2020 Abstract Book Cover.pdf
Size
929.02 KB
Format
Adobe PDF
Checksum
(MD5):5de1a50a3b03fe1a112b52a8bb377e7c