The authors reply: Letter on: "Pitfalls in the measurement of muscle mass: a need for a reference standard" by Clark et al

Buckinx F, Landi F, Cesari M, Fieding RA, Visser M, Engelke K, Maggi S, Dennison E, Al-Daghri NM, Allepaerts S, Bauer J, Bautmans I, Brandi ML, Bruyere O, Cederholm T, Cerreta F, Cherubini A, Cooper C, Cruz-Jentoft A, Mccloskey E, Dawson-Hughes B, Kaufman JM, Laslop A, Petermans J, Reginster JY, Rizzoli R, Robinson S, Rolland Y, Rueda R, Vellas B, Kanis JA (2018)


Publication Type: Journal article, Letter

Publication year: 2018

Journal

Book Volume: 9

Pages Range: 1272-1274

Journal Issue: 7

DOI: 10.1002/jcsm.12387

Abstract

However, semantics aside, we think that DXA can indeed serve as a reference standard for measuring muscle mass. Obviously, CT and MRI are advanced techniques that can and have been used to obtain important information such as muscle size/volume and more recently amount and distribution of intra- and intermuscular adipose tissue. Also individual muscles can be assessed separately. However, with respect to muscle mass, the comparison of DXA with CT/MRI is rather difficult because DXA and QCT/MRI measure different physical parameters.

Authors with CRIS profile

Involved external institutions

How to cite

APA:

Buckinx, F., Landi, F., Cesari, M., Fieding, R.A., Visser, M., Engelke, K.,... Kanis, J.A. (2018). The authors reply: Letter on: "Pitfalls in the measurement of muscle mass: a need for a reference standard" by Clark et al. Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle, 9(7), 1272-1274. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jcsm.12387

MLA:

Buckinx, Fanny, et al. "The authors reply: Letter on: "Pitfalls in the measurement of muscle mass: a need for a reference standard" by Clark et al." Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle 9.7 (2018): 1272-1274.

BibTeX: Download