Ultrasound measurement of visceral and subcutaneous fat in morbidly obese patients before and after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding

Comparison with computerized tomography and with anthropometric measurements

Antonio E. Pontiroli, P. Pizzocri, M. Giacomelli, M. Marchi, P. Vedani, E. Cucchi, C. Orena, F. Folli, M. Paganelli, G. Ferla

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

65 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: There are now a variety of methods to assess body fat distribution, anthropometric (waist circumference and waist/hip W/H ratio), computed tomography (CT), and ultrasound (US) measurements, with CT considered as the reference method. Bariatric surgery leads to a significant and usually durable weight loss in morbidly obese patients; when assessing its results, it is of interest to measure changes of total fat tissue and of body fat distribution. Methods: In this study, we compared anthropometric, US, and CT measurements of body fat distribution under basal conditions and 1 year after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB); 120 morbidly obese patients were considered at baseline, and 40 patients were re-evaluated 1 year after LAGB. Results: Thickness of visceral and subcutaneous fat measured through CT and US methods was superimposable both under basal conditions and 1 year after LAGB, and the highest correlation was found between CT and US data on visceral fat, followed by CT and US data on subcutaneous fat; a fair correlation was also found between CT and US data on visceral fat and waist circumference. Conclusion: We suggest that evaluation of body fat distribution is accomplished by US instead of CT measurement, because of its lower cost and low exposure risk. Waist circumference stands as a reasonable surrogate of both methods, while W/H ratio is poorly correlated with other measures of body fat distribution.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)648-651
Number of pages4
JournalObesity Surgery
Volume12
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 2002

Fingerprint

Intra-Abdominal Fat
Subcutaneous Fat
Stomach
Body Fat Distribution
Tomography
Waist Circumference
Bariatric Surgery
Hip
Weight Loss
Fats
Costs and Cost Analysis

Keywords

  • Bariatric surgery
  • Body fat distribution
  • Gastric banding
  • Laparoscopy
  • Morbid obesity
  • Ultrasound
  • Visceral fat

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Ultrasound measurement of visceral and subcutaneous fat in morbidly obese patients before and after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding : Comparison with computerized tomography and with anthropometric measurements. / Pontiroli, Antonio E.; Pizzocri, P.; Giacomelli, M.; Marchi, M.; Vedani, P.; Cucchi, E.; Orena, C.; Folli, F.; Paganelli, M.; Ferla, G.

In: Obesity Surgery, Vol. 12, No. 5, 10.2002, p. 648-651.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{3a1480c5d4454390acd826a8ca1b9362,
title = "Ultrasound measurement of visceral and subcutaneous fat in morbidly obese patients before and after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding: Comparison with computerized tomography and with anthropometric measurements",
abstract = "Background: There are now a variety of methods to assess body fat distribution, anthropometric (waist circumference and waist/hip W/H ratio), computed tomography (CT), and ultrasound (US) measurements, with CT considered as the reference method. Bariatric surgery leads to a significant and usually durable weight loss in morbidly obese patients; when assessing its results, it is of interest to measure changes of total fat tissue and of body fat distribution. Methods: In this study, we compared anthropometric, US, and CT measurements of body fat distribution under basal conditions and 1 year after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB); 120 morbidly obese patients were considered at baseline, and 40 patients were re-evaluated 1 year after LAGB. Results: Thickness of visceral and subcutaneous fat measured through CT and US methods was superimposable both under basal conditions and 1 year after LAGB, and the highest correlation was found between CT and US data on visceral fat, followed by CT and US data on subcutaneous fat; a fair correlation was also found between CT and US data on visceral fat and waist circumference. Conclusion: We suggest that evaluation of body fat distribution is accomplished by US instead of CT measurement, because of its lower cost and low exposure risk. Waist circumference stands as a reasonable surrogate of both methods, while W/H ratio is poorly correlated with other measures of body fat distribution.",
keywords = "Bariatric surgery, Body fat distribution, Gastric banding, Laparoscopy, Morbid obesity, Ultrasound, Visceral fat",
author = "Pontiroli, {Antonio E.} and P. Pizzocri and M. Giacomelli and M. Marchi and P. Vedani and E. Cucchi and C. Orena and F. Folli and M. Paganelli and G. Ferla",
year = "2002",
month = "10",
doi = "10.1381/096089202321019620",
language = "English",
volume = "12",
pages = "648--651",
journal = "Obesity Surgery",
issn = "0960-8923",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Ultrasound measurement of visceral and subcutaneous fat in morbidly obese patients before and after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding

T2 - Comparison with computerized tomography and with anthropometric measurements

AU - Pontiroli, Antonio E.

AU - Pizzocri, P.

AU - Giacomelli, M.

AU - Marchi, M.

AU - Vedani, P.

AU - Cucchi, E.

AU - Orena, C.

AU - Folli, F.

AU - Paganelli, M.

AU - Ferla, G.

PY - 2002/10

Y1 - 2002/10

N2 - Background: There are now a variety of methods to assess body fat distribution, anthropometric (waist circumference and waist/hip W/H ratio), computed tomography (CT), and ultrasound (US) measurements, with CT considered as the reference method. Bariatric surgery leads to a significant and usually durable weight loss in morbidly obese patients; when assessing its results, it is of interest to measure changes of total fat tissue and of body fat distribution. Methods: In this study, we compared anthropometric, US, and CT measurements of body fat distribution under basal conditions and 1 year after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB); 120 morbidly obese patients were considered at baseline, and 40 patients were re-evaluated 1 year after LAGB. Results: Thickness of visceral and subcutaneous fat measured through CT and US methods was superimposable both under basal conditions and 1 year after LAGB, and the highest correlation was found between CT and US data on visceral fat, followed by CT and US data on subcutaneous fat; a fair correlation was also found between CT and US data on visceral fat and waist circumference. Conclusion: We suggest that evaluation of body fat distribution is accomplished by US instead of CT measurement, because of its lower cost and low exposure risk. Waist circumference stands as a reasonable surrogate of both methods, while W/H ratio is poorly correlated with other measures of body fat distribution.

AB - Background: There are now a variety of methods to assess body fat distribution, anthropometric (waist circumference and waist/hip W/H ratio), computed tomography (CT), and ultrasound (US) measurements, with CT considered as the reference method. Bariatric surgery leads to a significant and usually durable weight loss in morbidly obese patients; when assessing its results, it is of interest to measure changes of total fat tissue and of body fat distribution. Methods: In this study, we compared anthropometric, US, and CT measurements of body fat distribution under basal conditions and 1 year after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB); 120 morbidly obese patients were considered at baseline, and 40 patients were re-evaluated 1 year after LAGB. Results: Thickness of visceral and subcutaneous fat measured through CT and US methods was superimposable both under basal conditions and 1 year after LAGB, and the highest correlation was found between CT and US data on visceral fat, followed by CT and US data on subcutaneous fat; a fair correlation was also found between CT and US data on visceral fat and waist circumference. Conclusion: We suggest that evaluation of body fat distribution is accomplished by US instead of CT measurement, because of its lower cost and low exposure risk. Waist circumference stands as a reasonable surrogate of both methods, while W/H ratio is poorly correlated with other measures of body fat distribution.

KW - Bariatric surgery

KW - Body fat distribution

KW - Gastric banding

KW - Laparoscopy

KW - Morbid obesity

KW - Ultrasound

KW - Visceral fat

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=18644381731&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=18644381731&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1381/096089202321019620

DO - 10.1381/096089202321019620

M3 - Article

VL - 12

SP - 648

EP - 651

JO - Obesity Surgery

JF - Obesity Surgery

SN - 0960-8923

IS - 5

ER -