Reproducibility of ultrasonography as a method to measure abdominal and visceral fat;Avaliação da reprodutibilidade ultrassonográfica como método para medida da gordura abdominal e visceral

Radiologia Brasileira

Volumn 42, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 353-357

  Diniz, Angélica Lemos Debs ^a   Tomé, Raphael Alves Ferreira ^a   Debs, Cecília Lemos ^a   Carraro, Renata ^a   Borges Roever, Leonardo ^a   Pinto, Rogério de Melo Costa ^a  

^a FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF UBERLÂNDIA   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Abdominal fat; Metabolic syndrome; Ultrasound

Indexed keywords

EID: 74949140811     PISSN: 01003984     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1590/s0100-39842009000600007     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Radominski RB, Vezozzo DP, Cerri GG, et al. O uso da ultra-sonografia na avaliação da distribuição de gordura abdominal. Arq Bras Endocrinol Metab. 2000;44:5-12.
2. Timar O, Sestier F, Levy E. Metabolic syndrome X: a review. Can J Cardiol. 2000;16:779-89.
3. World Health Organization. Obesity: preventing and managing the global epidemic. Report of a WHO consultation. World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser. 2000;894:i-xii, 1-253.
4. van der Kooy K, Seidell JC. Techniques for the measurement of visceral fat: a practical guide. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 1993;17:187-96.
5. Hirooka M, Kumagi T, Kurose K, et al. A technique for the measurement of visceral fat by ultrasonography: comparison of measurements by ultrasonography and computed tomography. Intern Med. 2005;44:794-9.
6. Armellini F, Zamboni M, Robbi R, et al. Total and intra-abdominal fat measurements by ultrasound and computerized tomography. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 1993;17:209-14.
7. Pineau JC, Guihard-Costa AM, Bocquet M. Validation of ultrasound techniques applied to body fat measurement. A comparison between ultra-sound techniques, air displacement plethysmography and bioelectrical impedance vs. dual-en-ergy X-ray absorptiometry. Ann Nutr Metab. 2007;51:421-7.
8. Pozzato C, Radaelli G, Dall'Asta C, et al. MRI in identifying hepatic steatosis in obese children and relation to ultrasonography and metabolic findings. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2008;47:493-9.
9. Liu KH, Chan YL, Chan WB, et al. Sonographic measurement of mesenteric fat thickness is a good correlate with cardiovascular risk factors: com-parison with subcutaneous and preperitoneal fat thickness, magnetic resonance imaging and an-thropometric indexes. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2003;27:1267-73.
10. Gong W, Ren H, Tong H, et al. A comparison of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging to assess visceral fat in the metabolic syndrome. Asia Pac J Clin Nutr. 2007;16 Suppl 1:339-45.
11. Weir JP. Quantifying test-retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient and the SEM. J Strength Cond Res. 2005;19:231-40.
12. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;1(8476): 307-10.
13. Sturm W, Sandhofer A, Engl J, et al. Influence of visceral obesity and liver fat on vascular structure and function in obese subjects. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2009;17:1783-8.
14. Ribeiro-Filho FF, Faria AN, Azjen S, et al. Methods of estimation of visceral fat: advantages of ultrasonography. Obes Res. 2003;11:1488-94.
15. Armellini F, Zamboni M, Rigo L, et al. The contribution of sonography to the measurement of intra-abdominal fat. J Clin Ultrasound. 1990;18: 563-7.
16. Sabir N, Pakdemirli E, Sermez Y, et al. Sonographic assessment of changes in thickness of different abdominal fat layers in response to diet in obese women. J Clin Ultrasound. 2003;31:26-30.
17. Stolk RP, Wink O, Zelissen PM, et al. Validity and reproducibility of ultrasonography for the mea-surement of intra-abdominal adipose tissue. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2001;25:1346-51.
18. Tornaghi G, Raiteri R, Pozzato C, et al. Anthropometric or ultrasonic measurements in assess-ment of visceral fat? A comparative study. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 1994;18:771-5.