Comparison of the Discovery A and Stratos DR densitometers for assessing whole‐body and regional bone mineral density and body composition

Abstract

AbstractPurposeThe agreement between the Stratos DR and Discovery A densitometers was assessed for measurements of whole‐body (WB) and regional fat mass (FM), fat‐free soft tissue (FFST) and bone mineral density (BMD). Moreover, the precision of the Stratos DR was also evaluated.MethodsFifty participants (35 women, 70%) were measured consecutively, once on the Discovery A and once on the Stratos DR. In a subgroup of participants (n = 29), two successive measurements with the Stratos DR were also performed.ResultsFM, FFST and BMD measured with the two devices were highly correlated, with a coefficient of correlation ranging from 0.80 to 0.99. Bland‐Altman analyses indicated significant bias between the two devices for all measurements. Thus, compared to the Discovery A, the Stratos DR underestimated WB BMD and WB and regional FM and FFST, with the exception of trunk FM and visceral adipose tissue (VAT), which were overestimated. Precision error for the Stratos DR, when expressed as root mean square‐coefficient of variation (RMS‐CV%) for FM, was 1.4% for WB, 3.0% for the gynoid and android regions, and 15.9% for VAT. The RMS‐CV% for FFST was 1.0% for WB. The root mean square of standard deviation for WB BMD was 0.018 g/cm², corresponding to a 1.4% CV. The least significant change was 0.050 g/cm² (SD), and 4.0% was considered to be a significant biological change.ConclusionsDifferences between the Stratos DR and Discovery A measurements are significant and require the use of translational cross‐calibration equations. For most of the BMD and body composition parameters, our results demonstrated good Stratos DR precision.