澄清和标准化双能x射线吸收测量术语,以便准确的科学交流和临床诊断准确性。

IF 6.5 1区 医学 Q1 NUTRITION & DIETETICS
Jonathan P Bennett, Carla M Prado, Maria Cristina Gonzalez, Steven B Heymsfield
{"title":"澄清和标准化双能x射线吸收测量术语,以便准确的科学交流和临床诊断准确性。","authors":"Jonathan P Bennett, Carla M Prado, Maria Cristina Gonzalez, Steven B Heymsfield","doi":"10.1016/j.ajcnut.2025.06.023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The evaluation of skeletal muscle (SM) mass has significant clinical and research relevance in the diagnosis and management of conditions, such as malnutrition, sarcopenia, sarcopenic obesity, and cancer cachexia. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is now the most widely used method for estimating SM mass; however, it does not directly measure SM but instead provides proxies that require careful interpretation. A major issue in the field is the inconsistent and sometimes incorrect use of DXA-derived terminology in both scientific literature and clinical practice, leading to potential misdiagnoses and inaccurate research conclusions. This review highlights the importance of using proper terminology and the errors that arise when DXA-based estimates of SM mass are misrepresented. Focusing on the appendicular regions, where most SM is located, we first describe the principles of DXA measurement, including its ability to quantify appendicular lean soft tissue (ALST) and appendicular lean mass (ALM) and their relationship to appendicular skeletal muscle (ASM). We then examined inconsistencies in manufacturer-reported DXA outputs and common reporting errors in the literature, particularly the interchangeable use of ALST and ASM. Additionally, we present data demonstrating how these inconsistencies impact the clinical assessment of sarcopenia and influence population-level prevalence estimates. ALM refers to all nonfat components of the arms and legs, whereas ALST also removes bone mass. Both measures include non-SM components and are, therefore, larger than SM. To address the use of these terms, we propose standardizing DXA terminology and reporting practices in both research and clinical settings. We also highlight the importance of consistent terminology in other clinical and field-based methods of body composition assessment, including bioelectrical impedance analysis and 3-dimensional optical imaging. These recommendations will enhance the clarity of SM-related measures (e.g., ALST, ALM), improve diagnostic accuracy, and facilitate meaningful comparisons across studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":50813,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Clinical Nutrition","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clarification and standardization of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry terminology for accurate scientific communication and clinical diagnostic accuracy.\",\"authors\":\"Jonathan P Bennett, Carla M Prado, Maria Cristina Gonzalez, Steven B Heymsfield\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ajcnut.2025.06.023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The evaluation of skeletal muscle (SM) mass has significant clinical and research relevance in the diagnosis and management of conditions, such as malnutrition, sarcopenia, sarcopenic obesity, and cancer cachexia. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is now the most widely used method for estimating SM mass; however, it does not directly measure SM but instead provides proxies that require careful interpretation. A major issue in the field is the inconsistent and sometimes incorrect use of DXA-derived terminology in both scientific literature and clinical practice, leading to potential misdiagnoses and inaccurate research conclusions. This review highlights the importance of using proper terminology and the errors that arise when DXA-based estimates of SM mass are misrepresented. Focusing on the appendicular regions, where most SM is located, we first describe the principles of DXA measurement, including its ability to quantify appendicular lean soft tissue (ALST) and appendicular lean mass (ALM) and their relationship to appendicular skeletal muscle (ASM). We then examined inconsistencies in manufacturer-reported DXA outputs and common reporting errors in the literature, particularly the interchangeable use of ALST and ASM. Additionally, we present data demonstrating how these inconsistencies impact the clinical assessment of sarcopenia and influence population-level prevalence estimates. ALM refers to all nonfat components of the arms and legs, whereas ALST also removes bone mass. Both measures include non-SM components and are, therefore, larger than SM. To address the use of these terms, we propose standardizing DXA terminology and reporting practices in both research and clinical settings. We also highlight the importance of consistent terminology in other clinical and field-based methods of body composition assessment, including bioelectrical impedance analysis and 3-dimensional optical imaging. These recommendations will enhance the clarity of SM-related measures (e.g., ALST, ALM), improve diagnostic accuracy, and facilitate meaningful comparisons across studies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50813,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Clinical Nutrition\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Clinical Nutrition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajcnut.2025.06.023\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NUTRITION & DIETETICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Clinical Nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajcnut.2025.06.023","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

骨骼肌(SM)质量的评估在营养不良、肌肉减少症、肌肉减少性肥胖和癌症恶病质等疾病的诊断和治疗中具有重要的临床和研究意义。双能x射线吸收法(DXA)是目前最广泛使用的估算SM质量的方法;但是,它不直接测量SM,而是提供需要仔细解释的代理。该领域的一个主要问题是,在科学文献和临床实践中,dxa衍生术语的使用不一致,有时甚至不正确,从而导致潜在的误诊和不准确的研究结论。这篇综述强调了使用正确术语的重要性,以及当基于dxa的SM质量估计被歪曲时产生的错误。针对大多数SM位于的阑尾区域,我们首先描述了DXA测量的原理,包括其量化阑尾瘦软组织(ALST)和阑尾瘦质量(ALM)的能力以及它们与阑尾骨骼肌(ASM)的关系。然后,我们检查了制造商报告的DXA输出的不一致性和文献中常见的报告错误,特别是ALST和ASM的可互换使用。此外,我们提供的数据表明,这些不一致如何影响肌少症的临床评估和人群水平的患病率估计。ALM指的是手臂和腿部的所有非脂肪成分,而ALST也去除骨量。这两种测量都包括非SM成分,因此比SM更大。为了解决这些术语的使用问题,我们建议在研究和临床环境中标准化DXA术语和报告实践。我们还强调了在其他临床和基于现场的身体成分评估方法中一致术语的重要性,包括生物电阻抗分析和三维光学成像。这些建议将提高sm相关措施(如ALST、ALM)的清晰度,提高诊断准确性,并促进研究间有意义的比较。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Clarification and standardization of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry terminology for accurate scientific communication and clinical diagnostic accuracy.

The evaluation of skeletal muscle (SM) mass has significant clinical and research relevance in the diagnosis and management of conditions, such as malnutrition, sarcopenia, sarcopenic obesity, and cancer cachexia. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is now the most widely used method for estimating SM mass; however, it does not directly measure SM but instead provides proxies that require careful interpretation. A major issue in the field is the inconsistent and sometimes incorrect use of DXA-derived terminology in both scientific literature and clinical practice, leading to potential misdiagnoses and inaccurate research conclusions. This review highlights the importance of using proper terminology and the errors that arise when DXA-based estimates of SM mass are misrepresented. Focusing on the appendicular regions, where most SM is located, we first describe the principles of DXA measurement, including its ability to quantify appendicular lean soft tissue (ALST) and appendicular lean mass (ALM) and their relationship to appendicular skeletal muscle (ASM). We then examined inconsistencies in manufacturer-reported DXA outputs and common reporting errors in the literature, particularly the interchangeable use of ALST and ASM. Additionally, we present data demonstrating how these inconsistencies impact the clinical assessment of sarcopenia and influence population-level prevalence estimates. ALM refers to all nonfat components of the arms and legs, whereas ALST also removes bone mass. Both measures include non-SM components and are, therefore, larger than SM. To address the use of these terms, we propose standardizing DXA terminology and reporting practices in both research and clinical settings. We also highlight the importance of consistent terminology in other clinical and field-based methods of body composition assessment, including bioelectrical impedance analysis and 3-dimensional optical imaging. These recommendations will enhance the clarity of SM-related measures (e.g., ALST, ALM), improve diagnostic accuracy, and facilitate meaningful comparisons across studies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
12.40
自引率
4.20%
发文量
332
审稿时长
38 days
期刊介绍: American Journal of Clinical Nutrition is recognized as the most highly rated peer-reviewed, primary research journal in nutrition and dietetics.It focuses on publishing the latest research on various topics in nutrition, including but not limited to obesity, vitamins and minerals, nutrition and disease, and energy metabolism. Purpose: The purpose of AJCN is to: Publish original research studies relevant to human and clinical nutrition. Consider well-controlled clinical studies describing scientific mechanisms, efficacy, and safety of dietary interventions in the context of disease prevention or health benefits. Encourage public health and epidemiologic studies relevant to human nutrition. Promote innovative investigations of nutritional questions employing epigenetic, genomic, proteomic, and metabolomic approaches. Include solicited editorials, book reviews, solicited or unsolicited review articles, invited controversy position papers, and letters to the Editor related to prior AJCN articles. Peer Review Process: All submitted material with scientific content undergoes peer review by the Editors or their designees before acceptance for publication.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信