Evaluation of Body Composition in Competitive Male Marathon

Runners

M. Marra

, A. Di Gregorio

, P. Alicante

, O. Di Vincenzo

, R. Sammarco

, E. Speranza

, I. Cioffi

and L. Scalfi

Department of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, Federico II University of Naples, Via S. Pansini 5, 80131, Naples, Italy

Department of Public Health, Federico II University of Naples, Via S. Pansini 5, 80131, Naples, Italy

Keywords: Multi-frequency BIA, Phase Angle, Marathon Runner.

Abstract: The marathon is a long-distance running event with an official distance of 42.195 km. Different

anthropometric variables were related to endurance running performance such as weight, body fat, the sum

of skin-fold thickness and circumferences of limbs. Aim of this study was to compare antropometric

measurements, multifrequency (MF) BIA and phase angle between competitive marathon runners and

sedentary adult individuals. Fifty-seven subjects were studied, 28 Marathon runners and 29 Control subjects.

Anthropometry variables and skinfold thicknesses were determined according to standard procedure. MF BIA

was performed using a multi-frequency analyzer. Biolectrical impedance index (BI index) and MF BIA ratios

were calculated for the whole body. Competitive marathon runners had lower body weight and BMI

compared to control subjects. There was a significant decrease of arm and forearm circumferences in the

marathon runners, with no difference between groups with respect to thigh circumference and calf

circumference; they also exhibited lower skinfold thicknesses. Mean MF BIA ratios and phase angle were

increased in the marathon group for the whole-body than control group. The use of simple methods, that are

properly applied, can provide useful information for the study of body composition. In particular, the

combination of anthropometry and BIA can provide a series of information that concerns both muscle mass

and fat mass of the body.

1 INTRODUCTION

Running is a popular sport discipline which can be

performed over several different distances, the

marathon being a event over 42.195 km.

It it well known that endurance performances are

associated with a variety of variables such as gender,

length and duration of performance, ambient

conditions, etc. Diet and body composition may also

significative affect training and physical performance

(Burke LM 2007, De Garay 1974; Etheridge 2008;

Giampietro M. 2009; Maughan RS 2007; Gibala

2007; Sawka 2007). Endurance running performance

was related to different anthropometric variables such

as body mass, body height, body mass index, body

fat, the sum of skin-fold thickness, single skin-fold

thicknesses at the upper and lower body, length of

legs and circumferences of limbs (Timothy 1988;

Knechille 2011; Costill DL 1970; Pollok ML 1977).

Much less is known about the use in endurance

athletes of bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA),

another widely used bedside method for assessing

body composition. In particular, impedance ratios

(IR) and phase angle (PhA) are raw BIA variables

(see Methods section) of interest because they may be

related to muscle quality, being proxy of body cell

mass, the ratio between extracellular and intracellular

water, cell integrity, etc.

The objective of the present paper was to compare

antropometric measurements, IR and PhA in

marathon runners and sedentary adult individuals.

2 MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this cross-sectional study fifty-seven healthy

subjects were studied: twenty-eight marathon runners

(personal best marathon time in the last year <195

min) and 29 control subjects with sedentary lifestyle

and aerobic physical activity <60 min/week (and no

significant resistance training).

158

Marra, M., Gregorio, A., Alicante, P., Vincenzo, O., Sammarco, R., Speranza, E., Ciofﬁ, I. and Scalﬁ, L.

Evaluation of Body Composition in Competitive Male Marathon Runners.

DOI: 10.5220/0007232301580160

In Proceedings of the 6th International Congress on Sport Sciences Research and Technology Support (icSPORTS 2018), pages 158-160

ISBN: 978-989-758-325-4

Anthropometry: according to standard

procedures, the following anthropometric variables

were measured: weight, height, circumferences (arm,

forearm, thigh, etc.), skinfold thicknesses (upper

limb, trunk, lower limb) (Timothy 1988; Knechille

2011; Costill DL 1970; Pollok ML 1977).

Bioelectrical impedance analysis. Multifrequency

(MF) BIA was performed using a multi-frequency

analyzer (Human IM Touch, DS Medica, Milano,

Italia) on both the dominant and non dominant sides

of the body. Impedance (Z) was measured at 5, 10,

50, 100 and 250 kHz injecting an alternating current

of 0.5 mA. Biolectrical impedance index (BI index)

was obtained at different frequencies by dividing the

square of height by Z at different frequencies. IRs was

calculated as the ratios between Z at high frequencies

(50-100-250 kHz) and Z at low frequency (5 kHz).

Finally, PhA at 50 kHz was also considered.

3 RESULTS

Marathon runners had lower body weight and BMI

compared to control subjects (Table 1).

Table 1: Anthropometric measurements of 28

marathon runners and 29 controls.

Marathon

Runners

(n.28)

Controls

(n.29)

Age

39.4

9.5

41.1

9.3

Height

174

5.6

176

6.5

Weight

70.0*

8.5

77.7

5.8

BMI

kg/m²

22.9*

2.3

24.8

0.8

They exhibited (Table 2) a significant decrease of

arm circumference, with no difference between

groups emerged with respect to thigh and calf

circumference. The marathon runners also had lower

skinfold thicknesses (triceps, biceps, subscapular,

suprailiac, thigh and calf), showing a definite

decrease in subcutaneous fat. BI index was lower in

the marathon runners, but the differences compared

to control subjects disappeared after adjusting for

body weight.

In the marathon runners impedance was higher

and BI indexes lower at each of the frequencies

considered (Table 3). In addition, a decrease of IR and

increase of PhA emerged.

Table 2: Circumferences and skinfold thickness in of

28 marathon runners and 29 controls.

Marathon Runners

(n. 29)

Controls

(n. 28)

mean

Circumferences (cm)

Arms

28.0*

2.7

31.2

2.5

Waist

82.4*

7.8

86.8

5.8

Thigh

51.4

2.9

51.8

4.5

Calf

38.1

8.9

37.3

2.6

Skinfold (mm)

Bicipital

3.7*

1.6

4.8

1.3

Tricipital

7.5*

2.8

10.8

3.3

Iliac

6.2*

2.8

12.2

5.1

Subscapular

10.4*

3.1

14.0

2.3

* p< 0.05 vs. controls

Table 3: Impedance, BI-Index, Phase Angle and Multi-

frequencies ratio in of 28 marathoners and 29 control.

Marathon

Runners

(n. 28)

Controls

(n. 29)

Mea

mean

Impedance

(ohm)

5 kHz

586

533

0,001

10 kHz

566

518

0,001

50 kHz

495

456

0,003

100 kHz

462

429

0,007

250 kHz

427

399

0,019

BI-Index

(cm²/ohm)

5 kHz

52,2

6,1

59,4

8,6

0,001

10 kHz

53,9

6,4

61,1

8,9

0,001

kHz

61,9

7,2

69,5

10,2

0,002

100 kHz

66,3

7,8

74,0

11,1

0,004

250 kHz

71,7

8,9

79,4

11,7

0,008

Phase

Angle

(°)

7,9

0,8

7,2

0,8

0,006

Multifrequency ratio

5 kHz/50

kHz

119

2,2

117

2,6

0,036

5 kHz/100

kHz

127

3,2

124

3,8

0,009

10 kHz/50

kHz

115

1,9

114

2,0

0,148

10 kHz/100

kHz

123

2,5

121

3,1

0,019

Multi_frequencies ratio x 100

Evaluation of Body Composition in Competitive Male Marathon Runners

159

4 DISCUSSION

The use of simple methods, when properly applied,

can provide useful information for evaluating body

composition in endurance athletes. In particular, the

combination of anthropometry and BIA gives a

number of information that concerns both muscle

mass and fat mass of the body (Rodriguez NR 2009;

Sprugnarosa A. 1971).

The results of the present study clearly showed a

significant difference between groups in IR and PhA,

suggesting in marathon runners both lower ratio

between extracellular and intracellular water and

greater body cell mass.

Further studies areneeded to ascertain whether the

measurement of IR and phase angle (raw BIA

variables) may really help assessing muscle quality in

athletes and its changes with training.

REFERENCES

Burke LM., Nutrition strategies for the marathon: fuel for

training and racing. Sports Med. 2007;37(4-5):344-347.

Costill D.L., Bowers R., Kammer W.F., 1970. Skinfold

estimates of body fat among marathon runners. Med.

Sci. Sports 2: 93-95.

De Garay A.L., Levine L., Carter J.E.L., 1974. Genetic and

Anthropological Studies of Olympic Athletes.

Academic Press, Inc. New York, N.Y.

Etheridge.T., Philp, A. and Watt, P.W. (2008) A single

protein meal increases recovery of muscle function

following an acute eccentric exercise bout. Applied

Physiology, Nutrition and Metabolism 33, 483-488.

Giampietro M., 2009. L’alimentazione per l’esercizio fisico

e lo sport. Roma: Il Pensiero Sientifico Editore.

Gibala M., Protein metabolism and endurance exercise.

Sports Med. 2007;37(4-5):337-40.

Knechtle B., Knechtle P, Rosemann T., Senn O., 2011.

What is associated with race performance in male 100-

km ultra-marathoners- anthropometry, training or

marathon best time?. J. Sports Sci., 1-7.

Maughan RJ., Depiesse F, Geyer H; International

Association of Athletics Federations. The use of dietary

supplements by athletes. J Sports Sci. 2007;25 Suppl

1:S103-13.

Pollock M.L., Gettman L.R., Jackson A., Ayres J., Ward A.,

Linnerudl A.C., 1977. Body composition of elite class

distance runners. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 301:361-370.

Rodriguez NR., DiMarco NM, Langley S; American

Dietetic Association; Dietetians of Canada; American

College of Sports Medicine. Position of the American

Dietetic Association, Dietitians of Canada, and the

American College of Sports Medicine: Nutrition and

athletic performance. J Am Diet Assoc. 2009

Mar;109(3):509-27.

Sawka MN., Burke LM, Eichner ER, et al., 2007. American

College of Sports Medicine position stand. Exercise

and fluid replacement. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 39: 377–

390.

Sprynarosa A., Parizkova J., 1971. Functional capacity and

body composition in top weight-lifters, swimmers,

runners, and skiers. Int. Z. Angew. Physiol. 29: 184-

194.

Timothy G Lohman., Alex F Roche; Reynaldo Martorell,

1988. Anthropometric standardization reference

manual.

icSPORTS 2018 - 6th International Congress on Sport Sciences Research and Technology Support

160