Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 19, 2025

Author Spotlight: Implementation of BIVA for Analyzing Disease Risk Factors in Patients with Low Body Cell Mass
Published on: July 14, 2023
Skeletal muscle estimation using magnetic-resonance-imaging-based equations for dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and
Grant M Tinsley1, Christian LaValle2, Christian Rodriguez2
1Energy Balance & Body Composition Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology and Sport Management, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, USA. grant.tinsley@ttu.edu.
Background/Objectives:
Skeletal muscle mass (SMM) estimation is important but challenging in clinical settings. Criterion methods, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), are often inaccessible. However, surrogate methods, such as dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and multi-frequency bioelectrical impedance analysis (MFBIA), can use MRI-based equations to estimate SMM, although the agreement between these methods is unclear.
Subjects/Methods:
Total and segmental SMM were estimated with DXA and MFBIA using MRI-based equations in 313 healthy adults (120 M, 193 F; age 30.2 ± 13.0 y; BMI 24.6 ± 4.0 kg/m2). DXA total SMM was estimated using the Kim and McCarthy equations, and segmental SMM was estimated using the McCarthy equations. Relationships between DXA and MFBIA SMM were examined using Deming regression, Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (CCC), equivalence testing, Bland-Altman analysis, and related tests.
Results:
Strong linear relationships were observed for total (R2 0.95, CCC 0.96-0.97), leg (R2 0.90, CCC 0.85) and arm (R2 0.93, CCC 0.93) SMM in the entire sample. Kim equation SMM demonstrated statistical equivalence with MFBIA for total SMM, but the Deming regression slope differed from 1 and proportional bias was present. McCarthy equation total SMM exhibited a regression slope that did not differ from 1, and no proportional bias was present in the entire sample. However, equivalence with MFBIA was not observed. Systematically higher leg and arm SMM values were observed with DXA as compared to MFBIA.
Conclusions:
While DXA and MFBIA total SMM generally exhibited strong agreement, higher appendicular SMM by DXA highlights technical differences between methods.

