153 Body composition measurement methods in preterm infants 7 Table 7. Magnetic Resonance Imaging to estimate body composition in preterm infants Author, year, country Measurement method Reference method Study setting Results Quality assessment Subjects N° preterms Time of assessment Dyke, 2018, United States of America Rapid whole body imaging No reference method for fat (free) mass. A weighing scale used as reference for weight 25 preterm and term infants 15 (GA 25.9 + 1.3 weeks) Term (equivalent) age Results include preterm as well as term infants MRI calculated whole-body mass correlated closely with measured body weight (R2= 0.87;P < 0.001) Bias fat mass percentage 0.37% for repeated measurements Limit of agreement + 1.3%, i.e. good agreement (study population mean fat mass percentage 25.5%) Level of evidence 2 Strengths & limitations Assessment of agreement with reference method – Assessment of intra- and interobserver variability – Repeated measurements + Coefficients of variance assessed – Sensitivity analysis – Bootstrapping analysis – Cross validation group – External validation – Large study population – Exclusively preterm infants – GA: gestational age; MRI: magnetic resonance imaging Large study population > 100 participants Levels of evidence based on the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine’s Levels of Evidence (15) Level 1: Validating cohort study with good reference standards*; or clinical decision rule tested within one clinical center. Level 2: Exploratory cohort study with good reference standards; clinical decision rule after derivation, or validated only on split-sample or databases Level 3: Non-consecutive study; or without consistently applied reference standards Level 4: Case-control study, poor or non-independent reference standard Level 5: Expert opinion without explicit critical appraisal, or based on physiology, bench research or “first principles”
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw