ArticleJournal of clinical densitometry : the official journal of the International Society for Clinical Densitometry
Visceral adipose tissue in obesity: A comparison between DXA and MRI measures.
Article in Journal of clinical densitometry : the official journal of the International Society for Clinical Densitometry. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bioimpedance: From Body Composition Assessment to Emerging Technologies in Clinical Nutrition.Nutrients · 2026Review
- From Continuous-Flow Mechanical Circulatory Support to Heart Transplantation: Hemodynamic, Immunometabolic, and Body Composition Determinants of Rehabilitation Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Update on Obesity and Its Relationship to Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease and Associated Risk Factors.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWhile magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) accurately measures visceral adipose tissue (VAT), it is costly and time-consuming. Dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) offers a faster, more affordable alternative. However, prior comparisons between DXA and MRI often involve different anatomical locations, limiting accuracy assessments. This study aims to compare VAT volume measurements from DXA and MRI at the same anatomical location (L3 vertebra). We hypothesized that both methods would yield similar VAT results. Methodology This is a retrospective, cross-sectional study that analyzed 50 pairs of matched MRI and DXA scans from 28 non-diabetic participants with obesity (18-65 years, BMI range of ≥30 to ≤55 kg/m2). VAT was measured at the L3 vertebral body region by manual manipulation of the android region of interest (ROI) within the DXA (Hologic Horizon A; Hologic Inc., Marlborough, MA, USA) scan, and manual segmentation of the MRI-VAT (3T MR system , Siemens Prisma, Erlangen, Germany). MRI-VAT was expressed as total segmented volume (MRI-VATtsv) and fat fraction-corrected volume (MRI-VATffv). A linear mixed-effects model (LMM) was used to compare VAT estimates, accounting for within-subject variability. Bland-Altman analysis assessed agreement and bias. Results DXA-VAT was significantly higher than both MRI-VATtsv (+68 mL; p = 0.0038) and MRI-VATffv (+154.7 mL; p < 0.001), despite showing a strong correlation (R = 0.80; p < 0.001). Bland-Altman analysis showed a positive bias for DXA-VAT compared to MRI-VATtsv (LoA: 442, -396 mL) and MRI-VATffv (LoA: 519, -209.5 mL). Conclusion In obese adults, DXA and MRI showed strong agreement for VAT measurement at the L3 vertebra, but DXA consistently yielded higher VAT values compared to MRI. These findings indicate that DXA offers a practical means of estimating VAT, but systematic bias and limited agreement relative to MRI highlight important differences in absolute VAT quantification.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.