DXA, bioelectrical impedance, ultrasonography and biometry for the estimation of fat and lean mass in cats during weight loss

Background: Few equations have been developed in veterinary medicine compared to human medicine to predict body composition. The present study was done to evaluate the influence of weight loss on biometry (BIO), bioimpedance analysis (BIA) and ultrasonography (US) in cats, proposing equations to estimate fat (FM) and lean (LM) body mass, as compared to dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) as the referenced method. For this were used 16 gonadectomized obese cats (8 males and 8 females) in a weight loss program. DXA, BIO, BIA and US were performed in the obese state (T0; obese animals), after 10% of weight loss (T1) and after 20% of weight loss (T2). Stepwise regression was used to analyze the relationship between the dependent variables (FM, LM) determined by DXA and the independent variables obtained by BIO, BIA and US. The better models chosen were evaluated by a simple regression analysis and means predicted vs. determined by DXA were compared to verify the accuracy of the equations. Results: The independent variables determined by BIO, BIA and US that best correlated (p < 0.005) with the dependent variables (FM and LM) were BW (body weight), TC (thoracic circumference), PC (pelvic circumference), R (resistance) and SFLT (subcutaneous fat layer thickness). Using Mallows'Cp statistics, p value and r(2), 19 equations were selected (12 for FM, 7 for LM); however, only 7 equations accurately predicted FM and one LM of cats. Conclusions: The equations with two variables are better to use because they are effective and will be an alternative method to estimate body composition in the clinical routine. For estimated lean mass the equations using body weight associated with biometrics measures can be proposed. For estimated fat mass the equations using body weight associated with bioimpedance analysis can be proposed.

Biometry and fetal weight estimation by two-dimensional and three-dimensional ultrasonography: an intraobserver and interobserver reliability and agreement study

Objective To evaluate and compare the intraobserver and interobserver reliability and agreement for the biparietal diameter (BPD), abdominal circumference (AC), femur length (FL) and estimated fetal weight (EFW) obtained by two-dimensional ultrasound (2D-US) and three-dimensional ultrasound (3D-US). Methods Singleton pregnant women between 24 and 40 weeks were invited to participate in this study. They were examined using 2D-US in a blinded manner, twice by one observer, intercalated by a scan by a second observer, to determine BPD, AC and FL. In each of the three examinations, three 3D-US datasets (head, abdomen and thigh) were acquired for measurements of the same parameters. We determined EFW using Hadlock's formula. Systematic errors between 3D-US and 2D-US were examined using the paired t-test. Reliability and agreement were assessed by intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), limits of agreement (LoA), SD of differences and proportion of differences below arbitrary points. Results We evaluated 102 singleton pregnancies. No significant systematic error between 2D-US and 3D-US was observed. The ICC values were higher for 3D-US in both intra- and interobserver evaluations; however, only for FL was there no overlap in the 95% CI. The LoA values were wider for 2D-US, suggesting that random errors were smaller when using 3D-US. Additionally, we observed that the SD values determined from 3D-US differences were smaller than those obtained for 2D-US. Higher proportions of differences were below the arbitrarily defined cut-off points when using 3D-US. Conclusion 3D-US improved the reliability and agreement of fetal measurements and EFW compared with 2D-US.

Comparison and evaluation of ocular biometry using a new noncontact optical low-coherence reflectometer

To evaluate a new high-resolution noncontact biometer (Lenstar; Haag-Streit AG, Koeniz, Switzerland) using optical low-coherence reflectometry and to compare the clinical measurements with those obtained from the IOLMaster (Carl Zeiss, Jena, Germany) and the Pachmumeter (Haag-Streit AG).