Skip to main navigation Skip to main content
  • KSBMR

JBM : Journal of Bone Metabolism

OPEN ACCESS
ABOUT
BROWSE ARTICLES
EDITORIAL POLICIES
FOR CONTRIBUTORS

Page Path

1
results for

"Ok-Yi Jeong"

Article category

Keywords

Publication year

Authors

Funded articles

"Ok-Yi Jeong"

Original Article

Validation of Dual Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry and Nuclear Magnetic Resonance in the Analysis of Body Composition in Mice
Kyung-Wan Baek, Ji-Seok Kim, Jin Sung Park, So-Jeong Kim, Yong-Chan Ha, Ok-Yi Jeong, Jun-Il Yoo
J Bone Metab 2020;27(4):291-299.
Published online November 30, 2020
DOI: https://doi.org/10.11005/jbm.2020.27.4.291
Background
As an instrument for measuring body composition in experimental animals, dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is ideal for accuracy, cost, and measurement efficiency. However, there is too little insight into the effectiveness of the various aspects of applying DXA to experimental animals. We investigated whether to compare and verify the precision and accuracy of DXA and nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) animal body composition analyzers.
Methods
We used 30 Institution of Cancer Research mice in the study. First, in order to evaluate the reproducibility of DXA and NMR, we did repeated measurements by repositioning each mouse in anesthesia and euthanasia states. Subsequently, the accuracy of each device was evaluated by comparing the weight measured before the experiment, the weight of the tissue extracted from the mice after the experiment, and the measured DXA and NMR. In addition, when measuring the body composition of animals, we compared the time and the measurable body composition parameters and summarized the advantages and disadvantages of the 2 devices.
Results
Compared to NMR, DXA had the advantage of a fast measurement of bone composition and rapid image analysis. In addition, DXA showed a higher correlation (>95%) with fat mass, lean mass baseline than did NMR (>85%).
Conclusions
In conclusion, DXA was confirmed to have higher precision and measurement accuracy than did NMR. Therefore, DXA is an effective method for evaluating the body composition of experimental animals.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  Crossref logo
  • 1. Small animal DXA instrument comparison and validation
    Jennifer C. Coulombe, David E. Maridas, Jarred L. Chow, Mary L. Bouxsein
    Bone.2024; 178: 116923.     CrossRef
  • 2. Changes in aquaporins expression due to acute water restriction in naturally aging mice
    So-Jeong Kim, Kyung-Wan Baek, Youn-Kwan Jung, Ji-Seok Kim, Bo-Gyu Kim, Hak Sun Yu, Jin Sung Park, Jun-Il Yoo
    Journal of Physiology and Biochemistry.2023; 79(1): 71.     CrossRef
  • 3. Antiobesity Effects of Lactobacillus paracasei Subsp. paracasei, L. casei 431 on High-Fat Diet-Induced Obese Rats
    Yun Jeong Shin, Jung-Min Bae, Hye-Rin Cho, Patience Mahoro, Hye Hyun Kim, Seon Hwa Kim, Tae Hoon Kim, Min-Jung Bae
    Journal of Medicinal Food.2023; 26(7): 445.     CrossRef
  • 4. Impact of Two Whole-Body Vibration Exercise Protocols on Body Composition of Patients with Metabolic Syndrome: A Randomized Controlled Trial
    Aline Reis-Silva, Ana C. Coelho-Oliveira, Elzi Martins-Anjos, Márcia Cristina Moura-Fernandes, Alessandra Mulder, Vinicius Layter Xavier, Vanessa A. Mendonça, Ana C. R. Lacerda, Laisa Liane Paineiras-Domingos, Redha Taiar, Alessandro Sartorio, Mario Berna
    International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.2022; 20(1): 436.     CrossRef
  • 5. Screening for Sarcopenia (Physical Frailty) in the COVID-19 Era
    Amira Mohammed Ali, Hiroshi Kunugi, Gerardo Garcia-Rivas
    International Journal of Endocrinology.2021; 2021: 1.     CrossRef
  • 15,894 View
  • 140 Download
  • Crossref