Comparison between DXA and MRI for the Visceral Fat Assessment in Athletes.

The use of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) may be invalid for assessing athletes with larger bodies, larger lean body mass, and thicker trunks. This study compared the athletes' visceral adipose tissue (VAT) assessed using DXA and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Eighty-two Japanese male collegiate athletes from 18 sports participated in this study. VAT was assessed using the dual-energy scan that coincided with the 4th lumbar vertebra. The sum of eight magnetic resonance slices corresponding to the region of the dual-energy scan was used for comparison. The VAT volume was higher with the dual-energy scan than with MRI (difference: 35 cm3, p<0.01). A significant correlation was noted between the volumes measured using both modalities (r=0.88, p<0.01). Magnetic resonance-derived volumes less than 600 cm3 showed a stronger significant correlation with dual-energy-derived volumes. However, magnetic resonance-derived VAT volumes exceeding 600 cm3 were not significantly correlated with dual-energy-derived volumes. In conclusion, VAT volumes derived from DXA were larger and significantly correlated with those derived from MRI across a wide range of values. Methods using DXA for assessing the visceral fat volume may require adjustment to estimate abdominal visceral fat volume in athletes, with care taken when using such methods for heavyweight athletes.

Validity of Combination Use of Activity Record and Accelerometry to Measure Free-Living Total Energy Expenditure in Female Endurance Runners.

Yoshida, A, Ishikawa-Takata, K, Tanaka, S, Suzuki, N, Nakae, S, Murata, H, Taguchi, M, and Higuchi, M. Validity of combination use of activity record and accelerometry to measure free-living total energy expenditure in female endurance runners. J Strength Cond Res 33(11): 2962-2970, 2019-Herein, we attempted to prove the validity of a new approach to assessing total energy expenditure (TEE) that combines activity recording and accelerometry in athletes. Eight female endurance runners participated in this study. We measured TEE over 8 days in the regular training season by using the doubly labeled water (DLW) method. In the combined method, an activity record of the rating of perceived exertion (RPE) was used to estimate energy expenditure (EE) during the training period, whereas a triaxial accelerometer was used to evaluate EE during the nontraining time over the TEE measurement period using the DLW method. Training EE was calculated from the subjects' individual rating of perceived exertion-EE correlations provided by the exercise tolerance test. Resting metabolic rate (RMR) was measured using indirect calorimetry. There were no significant differences in TEE, activity-induced EE (AEE), or physical activity level (PAL; TEE/RMR) between the DLW method and the combined method (TEE, 3,032 ± 344 vs. 3,033 ± 495 kcal·d; AEE, 1,585 ± 303 vs. 1,586 ± 442 kcal·d; and PAL, 2.68 ± 0.37 vs. 2.68 ± 0.48, respectively). Significant positive correlations and no systematic errors were observed in AEE and PAL. Intraclass correlation coefficients were high (TEE, 0.785; AEE, 0.841; and PAL, 0.779, respectively). These findings suggest that the combined method has high validity against the DLW method. Thus, the combined method would be able to estimate free-living TEE in the regular training season for female endurance runners.