Skip to main content

Research Repository

Advanced Search

A comparison of two different software packages for the analysis of body composition using computed tomography images

Rollins, Katie E.; Awwad, Amir; MacDonald, Ian A.; Lobo, Dileep N.

A comparison of two different software packages for the analysis of body composition using computed tomography images Thumbnail


Authors

KATIE OLLIVERE Katie.Rollins@nottingham.ac.uk
Clinical Associate Professor

Amir Awwad

Ian A. MacDonald

DILEEP LOBO dileep.lobo@nottingham.ac.uk
Professor of Gastrointestinal Surgery



Abstract

Objectives: Body composition analysis from computed tomography (CT) imaging has become widespread. However, the methodology used is far from established. Two main software packages are in common usage for body composition analysis, with results used interchangeably. However, the equivalence of these has not been well established. The aim of this study was to compare the results of body composition analysis performed using the two software packages to assess their equivalence.

Methods: Tri-phasic abdominal CT scans from 50 patients were analysed for a range of body composition measures at the third vertebral level using OsiriX (v7.5.1, Pixmeo, Switzerland) and SliceOmatic (v5.0, TomoVision, Montreal, Canada) software packages. Measures analysed were skeletal muscle index (SMI), fat mass (FM), fat free mass (FFM) and mean skeletal muscle Hounsfield Units (SMHU).

Results: The overall mean SMI calculated using the two software packages was significantly different (SliceOmatic 51.33 vs. OsiriX 53.77, p<0.0001), and this difference remained significant for non-contrast and arterial scans. When FM and FFM were considered, again the results were significantly different (SliceOmatic 33.7kg vs. OsiriX 33.1kg, p<0.0001; SliceOmatic 52.1kg vs. OsiriX 54.2kg, p<0.0001, respectively), and this difference remained for all phases of CT. Finally, when mean SMHU was analysed, this was also significantly different (SliceOmatic 32.7 HU vs. OsiriX 33.1 HU, p=0.046).

Conclusions: All four body composition measures were statistically significantly different by the software package used for analysis, however the clinical significance of these differences is doubtful. Nevertheless, the same software package should be utilised if serial measurements are being performed.

Citation

Rollins, K. E., Awwad, A., MacDonald, I. A., & Lobo, D. N. (2019). A comparison of two different software packages for the analysis of body composition using computed tomography images. Nutrition, 57, 92-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nut.2018.06.003

Journal Article Type Article
Acceptance Date Jun 19, 2018
Online Publication Date Jul 11, 2018
Publication Date Jan 15, 2019
Deposit Date Jul 12, 2018
Publicly Available Date Jul 11, 2018
Journal Nutrition
Print ISSN 0899-9007
Electronic ISSN 1873-1244
Publisher Elsevier
Peer Reviewed Peer Reviewed
Volume 57
Pages 92-96
DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nut.2018.06.003
Keywords Computed tomography; Body composition; Sarcopenia; myosteatosis; OsiriX; SliceOMatic
Public URL https://nottingham-repository.worktribe.com/output/945873
Publisher URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899900718305926
Contract Date Jul 12, 2018

Files


Accepted Manuscript A Comparison of Two Different Software Packages.pdf (631 Kb)
PDF

Version
AM - Accepted Manuscript





You might also like



Downloadable Citations