The authors reply: Letter on: "Pitfalls in the measurement of muscle mass: a need for a reference standard" by Clark et al

Fanny Buckinx, Francesco Landi, Matteo Cesari, Roger A. Fieding, Marjolein Visser, Klaus Engelke, Stefania Maggi, Elaine Dennison, Nasser M. Al-Daghri, Sophie Allepaerts, Jurgen Bauer, Ivan Bautmans, Maria-Luisa Brandi, Olivier Bruyère, Tommy Cederholm, Francesca Cerreta, Antonio Cherubini, Cyrus Cooper, Alphonso Cruz-Jentoft, Eugene McCloskeyBess Dawson-Hughes, Jean-Marc Kaufman, Andrea Laslop, Jean Petermans, Jean-Yves Reginster, René Rizzoli, Sian Robinson, Yves Rolland, Ricardo Rueda, Bruno Vellas, John A. Kanis

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/Letter to the editorAcademic

Abstract

However, semantics aside, we think that DXA can indeed serve as a reference standard for measuring muscle mass. Obviously, CT and MRI are advanced techniques that can and have been used to obtain important information such as muscle size/volume and more recently amount and distribution of intra- and intermuscular adipose tissue. Also individual muscles can be assessed separately. However, with respect to muscle mass, the comparison of DXA with CT/MRI is rather difficult because DXA and QCT/MRI measure different physical parameters.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1272-1274
JournalJournal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle
Volume9
Issue number7
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2018

Cite this