Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
How bioimpedance compares to DEXA for measuring dog body fat
By German, Alexander J et al.·Published in American journal of veterinary research·2010·Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, United Kingdom·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: Comparison of a bioimpedance monitor with dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry for noninvasive estimation of percentage body fat in dogs.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A study involving 24 dogs tested a portable bioimpedance monitor to measure body fat percentage and compared it to a more traditional method called dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA). While the bioimpedance monitor showed good precision overall, it sometimes gave inaccurate results, especially for dogs with very high or low body fat. This means it might not be the best choice for vets to use in practice when assessing a dog's body composition. The DEXA method remains more reliable for determining body fat, especially during weight loss management.
People also search for: dog body fat measurement · dog weight loss monitoring · portable body fat monitor for dogs
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess performance of a portable bioimpedance monitor for measurement of body composition in dogs. ANIMALS: 24 client-owned dogs. PROCEDURES: Percentage body fat was measured via dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) and with a portable bioimpedance monitor, and body condition score (BCS) was measured by use of a 9-integer scale. RESULTS: Although the precision of the bioimpedance monitor was good, this varied among dogs. Body position (standing vs sternal) had no effect on bioimpedance results. There was a significant association between results determined via DEXA and bioimpedance, but this association was weaker than between DEXA and BCS. When agreement was assessed via Bland-Altman plot, the bioimpedance monitor under- and overestimated values at high and low body fat percentages, respectively. In 9 dogs, body fat measurements were taken before and after weight loss to determine the proportional loss of tissue mass during weight management. There was a significant difference in the estimated percentage of weight lost as fat between the DEXA and bioimpedance methods. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Although percentage body fat measured by use of a portable bioimpedance monitor correlated well with values determined via DEXA, the imprecision and inaccuracy in dogs with high percentage body fat could make the monitor inappropriate for clinical practice.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20367047/