Key result
Ultrasonographic intra-abdominal thickness correlated well with CT intra-abdominal fat area (r = 0.669, p < 0.001), supporting its use for evaluating intra-abdominal fat deposits.
Why the study?
Does ultrasonography accurately measure intra-abdominal fat deposits compared to computed tomography in obese females?
Cross-Sectional (n=50)
Does ultrasonography accurately measure intra-abdominal fat deposits compared to computed tomography in obese females?
Ultrasonography provides a reliable and direct method for evaluating intra-abdominal fat deposits, correlating well with computed tomography.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Ultrasonography may offer a non-radiating alternative for intra-abdominal fat assessment in obese females; leaves open prospective validation before clinical adoption.
A study was conducted on a group of 50 obese females with a mean body mass index of 39 +/- 16, aged 19 years, in order to determine if sonography could be adopted as a direct means for measuring intra-abdominal fat deposits. Adipose tissue evaluation was performed by computed tomography (CT) and ultrasonography (using 3.5-MHz and 5-MHz probes) at the L4 level. CT intra-abdominal fat area (VAT) and ultrasonography visceral thickness from abdominal muscle to aorta were the values mainly considered. Ultrasonographic intra-abdominal thickness correlated well with VAT (r = 0.669, p less than 0.001), supporting the hypothesis that ultrasonography could be useful in the direct evaluation of intra-abdominal fat deposits.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Armellini et al. (1990) conducted a cross-sectional in Obesity (n=50). Ultrasonography vs. Computed tomography (CT) was evaluated on Correlation between ultrasonographic intra-abdominal thickness and CT intra-abdominal fat area (VAT) (r = 0.669, p=<0.001). Ultrasonographic intra-abdominal thickness correlated well with CT intra-abdominal fat area (r = 0.669, p < 0.001), supporting its use for evaluating intra-abdominal fat deposits.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: