Back to Search
Start Over
Body Composition in Dialysis Patients: A Functional Assessment of Bioimpedance Using Different Prediction Models
- Source :
- Journal of Renal Nutrition, 25(2), 121-128. W B Saunders Co-Elsevier Inc
- Publication Year :
- 2015
- Publisher :
- Elsevier BV, 2015.
-
Abstract
- OBJECTIVES: The assessment of body composition (BC) in dialysis patients is of clinical importance given its role in the diagnosis of malnutrition and sarcopenia. Bioimpedance techniques routinely express BC as a 2-compartment (2-C) model distinguishing fat mass (FM) and fat-free mass (FFM), which may be influenced by the hydration of adipose tissue and fluid overload (OH). Recently, the BC monitor was introduced which applies a 3-compartment (3-C) model, distinguishing OH, adipose tissue mass, and lean tissue mass. The aim of this study was to compare BC between the 2-C and 3-C models and assess their relation with markers of functional performance (handgrip strength [HGS] and 4-m walking test), as well as with biochemical markers of nutrition. METHODS: Forty-seven dialysis patients (30 males and 17 females) (35 hemodialysis, 12 peritoneal dialysis) with a mean age of 64.8 +/- 16.5 years were studied. 3-C BC was assessed by BC monitor, whereas the obtained resistivity values were used to calculate FM and FFM according to the Xitron Hydra 4200 formulas, which are based on a 2-C model. RESULTS: FFM (3-C) was 0.99 kg (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27 to 1.71, P = .008) higher than FFM (2-C). FM (3-C) was 2.43 kg (95% CI, 1.70-3.15, P < .001) lower than FM (2-C). OH was 1.4 +/- 1.8 L. OH correlated significantly with DeltaFFM (FFM 3-C - FFM 2-C) (r = 0.361; P < .05) and DeltaFM (FM 3-C - FM 2-C) (r = 0.387; P = .009). HGS correlated significantly with FFM (2-C) (r = 0.713; P < .001), FFM (3-C) (r = 0.711; P < .001), body cell mass (2-C) (r = 0.733; P < .001), and body cell mass (3-C) (r = 0.767; P < .001). Both physical activity (r = 0.456; P = .004) and HGS (r = 0.488; P = .002), but not BC, were significantly related to walking speed. CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences between 2-C and 3-C models were observed, which are partly explained by the presence of OH. OH, which was related to DeltaFFM and DeltaFM of the 2-C and 3-C models, is therefore an important parameter for the differences in estimation of BC parameters of the 2-C and 3-C models. Both FFM (3-C) and FFM (2-C) were significantly related to HGS. Bioimpedance, HGS, and the 4-m walking test may all be valuable tools in the multidimensional nutritional assessment of both hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis patients.
- Subjects :
- Male
medicine.medical_specialty
medicine.medical_treatment
Urology
Nutritional Status
Medicine (miscellaneous)
Adipose tissue
Dialysis patients
Peritoneal dialysis
Fat mass
Renal Dialysis
Electric Impedance
medicine
Humans
Renal Insufficiency, Chronic
Nutrition and Dietetics
Hand Strength
business.industry
Walking test
Middle Aged
Nutrition Surveys
medicine.disease
Confidence interval
Body Fluids
Surgery
Adipose Tissue
Nephrology
Sarcopenia
Body Composition
Exercise Test
Female
Hemodialysis
business
human activities
Subjects
Details
- ISSN :
- 10512276
- Volume :
- 25
- Database :
- OpenAIRE
- Journal :
- Journal of Renal Nutrition
- Accession number :
- edsair.doi.dedup.....168a83895e28edf8bb82ba82c8b97019