A single axial CT image at the third lumbar vertebra (L3) was used to examine body composition parameters (9 (link)). Body composition parameters were quantified using Slice-O-Matic 5.0 software (TomoVision), based on density thresholds in Hounsfield units (HU); 29 to +150 for SM, −190 to −30 for SAT, and −150 to −50 for VAT. Total cross-sectional areas were measured in cm2 for SM, VAT and SAT and mean HU densities were reported for SMD. Incomplete cross-sectional areas of SM and SAT in CT scans (e.g., due to poor positioning or large body size of the patient) were estimated in MATLAB. Cross-sectional areas were normalized for height squared (m2) to obtain SMI (cm2/m2), subcutaneous adipose tissue index (SATI, cm2/m2) and VAT index (VATI, cm2/m2) (10 (link)). All CT scan analyses were performed by one trained researcher (J.S.F.M.) following a standardized protocol. A small subset (n=30) was analyzed by a second researcher to assess interrater reproducibility by calculating intraclass correlation coefficients (0.992 for SMI, 0.999 for VAT and 0.979 for SAT).
Protocol detail
Body Composition Assessment Using CT Scans
Partial Protocol Preview
This section provides a glimpse into the protocol.
The remaining content is hidden due to licensing restrictions, but the full text is available at the following link:
Access Free Full Text.
Corresponding Organization : Radboud University Nijmegen
Other organizations : Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation
Top 5 similar protocols
Variable analysis
independent variables
- None explicitly mentioned
- Total cross-sectional areas (cm^2) for skeletal muscle (SM), visceral adipose tissue (VAT), and subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT)
- Mean Hounsfield unit (HU) densities for skeletal muscle density (SMD)
- Skeletal muscle index (SMI, cm^2/m^2)
- Subcutaneous adipose tissue index (SATI, cm^2/m^2)
- Visceral adipose tissue index (VATI, cm^2/m^2)
- Density thresholds in Hounsfield units (HU): 29 to +150 for SM, -190 to -30 for SAT, and -150 to -50 for VAT
- CT scan analyses performed by one trained researcher (J.S.F.M.) following a standardized protocol
- A small subset (n=30) analyzed by a second researcher to assess interrater reproducibility, with intraclass correlation coefficients calculated (0.992 for SMI, 0.999 for VAT and 0.979 for SAT)
- None explicitly mentioned
- None explicitly mentioned
Annotations
Based on most similar protocols
Etiam vel ipsum. Morbi facilisis vestibulum nisl. Praesent cursus laoreet felis. Integer adipiscing pretium orci. Nulla facilisi. Quisque posuere bibendum purus. Nulla quam mauris, cursus eget, convallis ac, molestie non, enim. Aliquam congue. Quisque sagittis nonummy sapien. Proin molestie sem vitae urna. Maecenas lorem.
Sign up for free or login to display all annotations
As authors may omit details in methods from publication, our AI will look for missing critical information across the 5 most similar protocols.
About PubCompare
Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.
We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.
However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.
Ready to get started?
Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required
Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!