Sex- and age-specific percentiles of body composition indices for Chinese adults using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry

Abstract

PurposeThe aims of the study were to develop sex- and age-specific percentiles for lean mass index (LMI), appendicular LMI (aLMI), fat mass index (FMI), and body fat distribution indices in Chinese adults using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), and to compare those indices with those of other ethnicities using the US NHANES data.MethodsWhole-body and regional lean mass and fat mass (FM) were measured using DXA in 5688 healthy males (n = 1693) and females (n = 3995) aged 20–90 years. Body fat distribution indices were expressed as % fat trunk/% fat legs, trunk/appendicular FM ratio (FMR), and android/gynoid FMR. Percentile curves of LMI, aLMI, FMI, and body fat distribution indices were obtained by the Lambda–Mu–Sigma method.ResultsThe aLMI and LMI were negatively associated with age, decreasing from the fifth decade for males, but were not associated with age in females. Females had more total FM than males, whereas males had greater central adiposity (% fat trunk/% fat legs ratio, trunk/appendicular FMR, and android/gynoid FMR) than females. Moreover, FMI and body fat distribution indices consistently increased with age in both sexes, especially in women. In comparison with white, black, and Mexican populations in the USA, Chinese adults had lower total FM, but had greater central adiposity (% fat trunk/% fat legs ratio and trunk/appendicular FMR). Additionally, older white and Mexican populations showed greater decreases for aLMI and LMI than their Chinese counterparts.ConclusionsWe present the sex- and age-specific percentiles for aLMI, LMI, FMI, and body fat distribution indices by DXA in Chinese adults, which may refine the individual assessment of the nutritional status of Chinese adults.

Body composition indices in Brazilian adults: age-specific and sex-specific percentile curves

“…Since approximately 43% of our sample is in the overweight or obesity range, the lean mass loss assessed by the SMI height may have been underestimated, corroborating the hypothesis that increased adiposity may reflect an increase in the lean mass when using this index (6,16). Most studies evaluating the percentiles of body composition indices (15,(18)(19)(20)(21)33) used the Baumgartner and cols. definition (8), while data with SMI adjusted for body weight and BMI were scarce.…”

“…We found significant differences between sexes for the various body composition data. Women had higher adiposity and man had higher values of lean mass, a fact already observed in other ethnic groups (15,18,20,26). BMI was similar between the sexes, confirming the weakness of this index as a measure of body composition (4).…”

“…(8) was not confirmed in our sample, differing from most of the authors. This result may be due to the fact that the other studies included, for the most part, elderly individuals (18)(19)(20)27). SMI height does not consider fat mass in its adjustment from ALM, overestimating lean mass in overweight or obese individuals (6).…”

“…It was decided to adjust a third degree polynomial function that promotes smoothing of the curves, suppressing small variations in its shape and allowing better visualization (25). The 50th percentiles of SMI height , FMI, and BF percentage were compared with reference values for the non-Hispanic and Mexican whites and blacks, derived from the GE Healthcare Lunar DXA system, published by the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 1999-2004 (21) as well as data of Chinese population (18). The 50 th percentile of LCMI total and LCMI regional were compared with secondary data from NHANES 1999-2004, but derived from the Hologic DXA system model without distinction of ethnicity (2).…”

“…In addition, the emergence of a new research topic associating lean mass deficit with cardiometabolic outcomes increased the interest in lean mass in adults, since, for years, discussions of the clinical implications involved only the elderly population (14)(15)(16)(17). Thus, the development of reference values according to age and sex in different populations, especially among adults, has become fundamental (15,(18)(19)(20)(21).…”