Faculty Sponsor Name

Dr. Katherine H. Ingram

Additional Faculty

Dr. Janeen Anderson, Nursing, jamason1@Kennesaw.edu

Abstract (300 words maximum)

Two Models for Assessment of Body Composition during Pregnancy and Their Associations with Insulin Resistance

Ami Eho, Calah Coleman, Janeen Amason, Katherine H. Ingram (mentor)

Introduction: High levels of body fat are associated with cardiometabolic conditions, like insulin resistance, a precursor to diabetes. It is challenging to study these associations in pregnancy because body water levels fluctuate widely. The best known formula—the four-compartment model (4CM)— is unsuitable to use during pregnancy because it requires bone mineral content (BMC) from dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA), which can only be used postpartum because of radiation exposure.

Objective: This study compares the associations between two formulas used to measure body fat content (a 4CM and a two compartment model (2CM) that does not require BMC) and insulin resistance during pregnancy.

Methods: At 20 weeks gestation, 33 pregnant women (73.1% white, aged 27.6±4.2 years, BMI 27.6±6.3) received body composition measures: body density (BD) via air displacement plethysmography (BodPod) and total body water (TBW) via bioelectrical impedance (InBody 720). Bone mineral content (BMC) was measured post-partum using DEXA. Body fat was calculated by 4CM (Selinger: [(2.747/BD) - .714(TBW/wght) +1.129(BMC/wght) - 2.037] x 100) and 2CM (Van Raaij: Wght-(TBW/0.732)). Insulin resistance was calculated by the Homeostasis Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR= fasting insulin (mU/L) x fasting glucose (mg/dL)/405) measured from fasting blood measures collected at 24-26 weeks gestation. Correlation analyses were used to assess relationships among the two body composition models and HOMA-IR.

Results: The mean percent body fat was 40.5 ±7.1% using 4CM and 38.7 ±7.3% using 2CM. Both formulas were in close agreement with one another (r=.970, p<.001). HOMA-IR was strongly correlated to both 4CM (r=.524, p=.009) and 2CM (r=.547, p=.006).

Conclusion: The results indicate that estimating body composition using a 2CM would be an appropriate substitute for a 4CM in pregnant women.

Project Type

Poster

Share

COinS
 

Two Models for Assessment of Body Composition during Pregnancy and Their Associations with Insulin Resistance

Two Models for Assessment of Body Composition during Pregnancy and Their Associations with Insulin Resistance

Ami Eho, Calah Coleman, Janeen Amason, Katherine H. Ingram (mentor)

Introduction: High levels of body fat are associated with cardiometabolic conditions, like insulin resistance, a precursor to diabetes. It is challenging to study these associations in pregnancy because body water levels fluctuate widely. The best known formula—the four-compartment model (4CM)— is unsuitable to use during pregnancy because it requires bone mineral content (BMC) from dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA), which can only be used postpartum because of radiation exposure.

Objective: This study compares the associations between two formulas used to measure body fat content (a 4CM and a two compartment model (2CM) that does not require BMC) and insulin resistance during pregnancy.

Methods: At 20 weeks gestation, 33 pregnant women (73.1% white, aged 27.6±4.2 years, BMI 27.6±6.3) received body composition measures: body density (BD) via air displacement plethysmography (BodPod) and total body water (TBW) via bioelectrical impedance (InBody 720). Bone mineral content (BMC) was measured post-partum using DEXA. Body fat was calculated by 4CM (Selinger: [(2.747/BD) - .714(TBW/wght) +1.129(BMC/wght) - 2.037] x 100) and 2CM (Van Raaij: Wght-(TBW/0.732)). Insulin resistance was calculated by the Homeostasis Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR= fasting insulin (mU/L) x fasting glucose (mg/dL)/405) measured from fasting blood measures collected at 24-26 weeks gestation. Correlation analyses were used to assess relationships among the two body composition models and HOMA-IR.

Results: The mean percent body fat was 40.5 ±7.1% using 4CM and 38.7 ±7.3% using 2CM. Both formulas were in close agreement with one another (r=.970, p<.001). HOMA-IR was strongly correlated to both 4CM (r=.524, p=.009) and 2CM (r=.547, p=.006).

Conclusion: The results indicate that estimating body composition using a 2CM would be an appropriate substitute for a 4CM in pregnant women.