Artificial intelligence and body composition

Emergence of imaging technology beyond the clinical setting: Utilization of mobile health tools for at-home testing

Body composition assessment plays a pivotal role in understanding health, disease risk, and treatment efficacy. This narrative review explores two primary aspects: imaging techniques, namely ultrasound (US) and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), and the emergence of artificial intelligence (AI) and mobile health apps in telehealth for body composition. Although US is valuable for assessing subcutaneous fat and muscle thickness, DXA accurately quantifies bone mineral content, fat mass, and lean mass. Despite their effectiveness, accessibility and cost remain barriers to widespread adoption. The integration of AI-powered image analysis may help explain tissue differentiation, whereas mobile health apps offer real-time metabolic monitoring and personalized feedback. New apps such as MeThreeSixty and Made Health and Fitness offer the advantages of clinic-based imaging techniques from the comfort of home. These innovations hold the potential for individualizing strategies and interventions, optimizing clinical outcomes, and empowering informed decision-making for both healthcare professionals and patients/clients. Navigating the intricacies of these emerging tools, critically assessing their validity and reliability, and ensuring inclusivity across diverse populations and conditions will be crucial in harnessing their full potential. By integrating advancements in body composition assessment, healthcare can move beyond the limitations of traditional methods and deliver truly personalized, data-driven care to optimize well-being.

Advances in body composition: a 100-year journey

Knowledge of human body composition at the dawn of the twentieth century was based largely on cadaver studies and chemical analyses of isolated organs and tissues. Matters soon changed by the nineteen twenties when the Czech anthropologist Jindřich Matiegka introduced an influential new anthropometric method of fractionating body mass into subcutaneous adipose tissue and other major body components. Today, one century later, investigators can not only quantify every major body component in vivo at the atomic, molecular, cellular, tissue-organ, and whole-body organizational levels, but go far beyond to organ and tissue-specific composition and metabolite estimates. These advances are leading to an improved understanding of adiposity structure-function relations, discovery of new obesity phenotypes, and a mechanistic basis of some weight-related pathophysiological processes and adverse clinical outcomes. What factors over the past one hundred years combined to generate these profound new body composition measurement capabilities in living humans? This perspective tracks the origins of these scientific innovations with the aim of providing insights on current methodology gaps and future research needs.

Muscle parameters in fragility fracture risk prediction in older adults: A scoping review

Half of osteoporotic fractures occur in patients with normal/osteopenic bone density or at intermediate or low estimated risk. Muscle measures have been shown to contribute to fracture risk independently of bone mineral density. The objectives were to review the measurements of muscle health (muscle mass/quantity/quality, strength and function) and their association with incident fragility fractures and to summarize their use in clinical practice. This scoping review follows the PRISMA-ScR guidelines for reporting. Our search strategy covered the three overreaching concepts of 'fragility fractures', 'muscle health assessment' and 'risk'. We retrieved 14 745 references from Medline Ovid SP, EMBASE, Web of Science Core Collection and Google Scholar. We included original and prospective studies on community-dwelling adults aged over 50 years that analysed an association between at least one muscle parameter and incident fragility fractures. We systematically extracted 17 items from each study, including methodology, general characteristics and results. Data were summarized in tables and graphically presented in adjusted forest plots. Sixty-seven articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria. In total, we studied 60 muscle parameters or indexes and 322 fracture risk ratios over 2.8 million person-years (MPY). The median (interquartile range) sample size was 1642 (921-5756), age 69.2 (63.5-73.6) years, follow-up 10.0 (4.4-12.0) years and number of incident fragility fractures 166 (88-277). A lower muscle mass was positively/not/negatively associated with incident fragility fracture in 28 (2.0), 64 (2.5) and 10 (0.2 MPY) analyses. A lower muscle strength was positively/not/negatively associated with fractures in 53 (1.3), 57 (1.7 MPY) and 0 analyses. A lower muscle function was positively/not/negatively associated in 63 (1.9), 45 (1.0 MPY) and 0 analyses. An in-depth analysis shows how each single muscle parameter was associated with each fragility fractures subtype. This review summarizes markers of muscle health and their association with fragility fractures. Measures of muscle strength and function appeared to perform better for fracture risk prediction. Of these, hand grip strength and gait speed are likely to be the most practical measures for inclusion in clinical practice, as in the evaluation of sarcopenia or in further fracture risk assessment scores. Measures of muscle mass did not appear to predict fragility fractures and might benefit from further research, on D3-creatine dilution test, lean mass indexes and artificial intelligence methods.