Accuracy of Longitudinal Assessment of Visceral Adipose Tissue by Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry in Children with Obesity

Table 2

Univariate and multiple linear regression illustrating the relationship between VAT CSA, volume, and area measured by MRI (gold standard) and DXA in all participants.

A	Variable	r value	R^2 value	Β (95% CI)	SE	value
MRI-VAT CSA
Model 1	DXA-VAT CSA	0.90	0.81	0.964 (0.840–1.087)	0.061	<0.001
Model 2						<0.001
	Body fat %	0.80	0.64	0.485 (0.119–0.851)	0.183	0.010
	DXA-VAT CSA	0.91	0.83	0.768 (0.579–0.957)	0.094	<0.001
MRI-VAT volume
Model 3	DXA-VAT volume	0.90	0.82	0.979 (0.855–1.103)	0.062	<0.001
Model 4						<0.001
	Body fat %	0.82	0.68	0.636 (0.284–0.987)	0.175	0.001
	DXA-VAT volume	0.92	0.85	0.722 (0.540–0.904)	0.091	<0.001
MRI-VAT mass
Model 5	DXA-VAT mass	0.90	0.81	0.979 (0.855–1.103)	0.062	<0.001
Model 6						<0.001
	Body fat %	0.82	0.68	0.637 (0.286–0.989)	0.175	0.001
	DXA-VAT mass	0.92	0.85	0.721 (0.540–0.903)	0.091	<0.001

SE, standard error; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; DXA, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry; VAT, visceral adipose tissue; CSA, cross-sectional area. Models 1, 3, and 5 describe linear regression results for baseline MRI-VAT where corresponding DXA-VAT outcomes were entered as dependent variables. Models 2, 4, and 6 describe multiple regression results for the aforementioned models, accounting for body fat %.