Bioelectrical impedance analysis in clinical practice: A new perspective on its use beyond body composition equations

Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition and Metabolic Care

Volumn 8, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 311-317

  Barbosa Silva, Maria Cristina G ^a,c   Barros, Aluísio J D ^b  

^a CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF PELOTAS   (Brazil)

^b FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF PELOTAS   (Brazil)

^c NONE   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Bioelectrical impedance analysis; Bioelectrical impedance vector analysis; Phase angle; Prognostic factors

Indexed keywords

AGE DISTRIBUTION; BIOENERGY; BODY COMPOSITION; CLINICAL PRACTICE; EVALUATION; FLUID BALANCE; HUMAN; IMPEDANCE; NUTRITIONAL REQUIREMENT; PROGNOSIS; REVIEW; SEX RATIO;

EID: 17844378715     PISSN: 13631950     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.mco.0000165011.69943.39     Document Type: Review

References (56)

1. Kyle UG, Bosaeus I, De Lorenzo AD, et al. Bioelectrical impedance analysis - part II: utilization in clinical practice. Clin Nutr 2004; 23:1430-1453. An outstanding review of the validity of BIA utilization in several clinical situations. This review highlights the lack of accuracy from using BIA equations in some clinical settings to estimate body composition and fluid compartmentalization.
2. Piccoli A, Nescolarde LD, Rosell J. Conventional and vectoral analysis of bioimpedance in clinical practice [in Spanish]. Nefrologia 2002; XXII:228-238.
3. Buchholz AC, Bartok C, Schoeller DA. The validity of bioelectrical impedance models in clinical populations. Nutr Clin Pract 2004; 19:433-446. An excellent review about the theory and assumptions underlying the BIA method and its validity in clinical populations. The authors concluded that the method has some limitations in clinical settings, mainly in individual and single assessments.
4. Kyle UG, Bosaeus I, De Lorenzo AD, et al. Bioelectrical impedance analysis - part I: review of principles and methods. Clin Nutr 2004; 23:1226-1243. An outstanding review of the principles and methods of BIA, including a table of BIA equations published since 1990 and an up-to-date bibliography.
5. Piccoli A, Pastori G, Guizzo M, et al. Equivalence of information from single versus multiple frequency bioimpedance vector analysis in hemodialysis. Kidney Int 2005; 67:301-313. This new study shows that the information obtained using the BIVA method is similar to 50 kHz or multifrequency BIA instruments in haemodialysis patients.
6. Heitmann BL, Kondrup J, Engelhart M, et al. Changes in fat free mass in overweight patients with rheumatoid arthritis on a weight reducing regimen. A comparison of eight different body composition methods. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 1994; 18:812-819.
7. Selberg O, Selberg D. Norms and correlates of bioimpedance phase angle in healthy human subjects, hospitalized patients, and patients with liver cirrhosis. Eur J Appl Physiol 2002; 86:509-516.
8. Baumgartner RN, Chumlea WC, Roche AF. Bioelectric impedance phase angle and body composition. Am J Clin Nutr 1988; 48:16-23.
9. Kyle UG, Genton L, Karsegard VL, et al. Percentiles (10, 25, 75 and 90th) for phase angle (PhA), determined by bioelectrical impedance (BIA), in 2740 healthy adults aged 20-75 yr. Clin Nutr 2004; 23:758.
10. Dittmar M. Reliability and variability of bioimpedance measures in normal adults: effects of age, gender, and body mass. Am J Phys Anthropol 2003; 122:361-370. This paper shows that the variability of BIA measures depends on age, sex and body mass and it highlights the importance of physical activity in PA decrease over ageing.
11. Marra M, Pasanisi F, Scalfi L, et al. The prediction of basal metabolic rate in young adult, severely obese patients using single-frequency bioimpedance analysis. Acta Diabetol 2003; 40(Suppl. 1):S139-S141.
12. Barbosa-Silva MCG, Barros AJD, Wang J, Pierson Jr RN. Bioelectrical impedance analysis: population reference values for phase angle by age and sex. Am J Clin Nutr 2005; in press.
13. Kyle UG, Genton L, Slosman DO, Pichard C. Fat-free and fat mass percentiles in 5225 healthy subjects aged 15 to 98 years. Nutrition 2001; 17:534-541.
14. Savino F, Cresi F, Grasso G, et al. The Biagram Vector: a graphical relation between reactance and phase angle measured by bioelectrical analysis in infants. Ann Nutr Metab 2004; 48:84-89. A study of PA variation in the first year of life.
15. GIBI Brazilian Group for Bioimpedance Study. Total body bioelectrical impedance measurement as a progressive outcome prediction and therapeutic index in the comparison between septic and non septic patients. A multicenter Brazilian study. R Metab Nutr 1995; 2:159-170.
16. Ott M, Fischer H, Polat H, et al. Bioelectrical impedance analysis as a predictor of survival in patients with human immunodeficiency virus infection. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Hum Retrovirol 1995; 9:20-25.
17. Schwenk A, Beisenherz A, Römer K, et al. Phase angle from bioelectrical impedance analysis remains an independent predictive marker in HIV-infected patients in the era of highly active antiretroviral treatment. Am J Clin Nutr 2000; 72:496-501.
18. Toso S, Piccoli A, Gusella M, et al. Altered tissue electric properties in lung cancer patients as detected by bioelectric impedance vector analysis. Nutrition 2000; 16:120-124.
19. Gupta D, Lammersfeld CA, Burrows JL, et al. Bioelectrical impedance phase angle in clinical practice: implications for prognosis in advanced colorectal cancer. Am J Clin Nutr 2004; 80:1634-1638. One of two studies, using the same methodology (retrospective review) in pancreatic and colorectal cancer patients. This study shows that PA is a strong predictor of survival in advanced colorectal cancer, and the authors raise interesting questions about the meaning and utility of PA in clinical practice.
20. Gupta D, Lis CG, Dahlk SL, et al. Bioelectrical impedance phase angle as a prognostic indicator in advanced pancreatic cancer. Br J Nutr 2004; 92:957-962. One of two studies, using the same methodology (retrospective review) in pancreatic and colorectal cancer patients. This study shows that PA is a strong predictor of survival in advanced pancreatic cancer, and the authors raise interesting questions about the meaning and utility of PA in clinical practice.
21. Di Iorio BR, Scalfi L, Terracciano V, Bellizzi V. A systematic evaluation of bioelectrical impedance measurement after hemodialysis session. Kidney Int 2004; 65:2435-2440. This study identifies the dry-weight state (the first 120 min after the end of haemodialysis) as the best moment to perform BIA in these patients.
22. Maggiore Q, Nigrelli S, Ciccarelli C, et al. Nutritional and prognostic correlates of bioimpedance indexes in hemodialysis patients. Kidney Int 1996; 50:2103-2108.
23. Chertow GM, Lazarus JM, Lew NL, et al. Bioimpedance norms for the hemodialysis population. Kidney Int 1997; 52:1617-1621.
24. Mushnick R, Fein PA, Mittman N, et al. Relationship of bioelectrical impedance parameters to nutrition and survival in peritoneal dialysis patients. Kidney Int 2003; 64(Suppl. 87):53-56. This study shows PA to be a strong prognostic index in a cohort of peritoneal dialysis patients.
25. Fein PA, Gundumalla G, Jorden A, et al. Usefulness of bioelectrical impedance analysis in monitoring nutrition status and survival of peritoneal dialysis patients. Adv Periton Dial 2002; 18:195-199.
26. Pupim LB, Caglar K, Hakim RM, et al. Uremic malnutrition is a predictor of death independent of inflammatory status. Kidney Int 2004; 66:2054-2060. A well performed prospective cohort study that shows that nutritional markers, such as serum prealbumin and albumin, and PA are independent prognostic factors in haemodialysis patients, even after adjustment for inflammatory status, here represented by C-reactive protein.
27. Barbosa-Silva MCG, Barros AJD, Post CLA, et al. Can bioelectrical impedance analysis identify malnutrition in preoperative nutrition assessment? Nutrition 2003; 19:422-426. This study shows that BIA can detect some alterations produced by malnutrition in tissue electrical properties. Malnourished patients, assessed by SGA, have a lower PA and BCM and higher ECM/BCM than normal patients.
28. Edefonti A, Picca M, Damiani B, et al. Prevalence of malnutrition assessed by bioimpedance analysis and anthropometry in children on peritoneal dialysis. Periton Dial Int 2001; 21:172-179.
29. Nagano M, Suita S, Fukuoka TY. The validity of bioelectrical impedance phase angle for nutritional assessment in children. J Pediatr Surg 2000; 35:1035-1039.
30. Mika C, Herpertz-Dahlmann B, Heer M, Holtkamp K. Improvement of nutritional status as assessed by multifrequency BIA during 15 weeks of refeeding in adolescent girls with anorexia nervosa. J Nutr 2004; 134:3026-3030.
31. Glew RH, Conn CA, Bhanji R, et al. Survey of the growth characteristics and body composition of Fulani children in a rural hamlet in northern Nigeria. J Trop Pediatr 2003; 49:313-322.
32. Shah S, Whaken C, Kotler DP, et al. Severity of human immunodeficiency virus infection is associated with decreased phase angle, fat mass and body cell mass in adults with pulmonary tuberculosis infection in Uganda. J Nutr 2001; 131:2843-2847.
33. Van Lettow M, Kumwenda JJ, Harries AD, et al. Malnutrition and the severity of lung disease in adults with pulmonary tuberculosis in Malawi. Int J Tubercl Lung Dis 2004; 8:211-217. This study shows the relationship between the severity of lung disease and malnutrition, evaluated by BMI and BIA parameters. A significantly lower PA value is found in more advanced lung disease.
34. de Luis DA, Aller R, Bachiller P, et al. Influence of hormonal status and oral intake on phase angle in HIV-infected men. Nutrition 2004; 20:731-734. This study shows that somatomedin C influences PA in HIV-infected patients, even after controlling for other factors. The PA cut-off (mean value) used in this study is quite high (8.2° and could be explained by the young population studied (mean age 39.1 years).
35. Zdolsek HJ, Lindahl OA, Ängquist K, Sjöberg F. Non-invasive assessment of intercompartmental fluids shifts in burn victims. Burns 1998; 24:233-240.
36. VanderJagt DJ, Trujillo MR, Bode-Thomas F, et al. Phase angle correlates with n-3 fatty acids and cholesterol in red cells of Nigerian children with sickle cell disease. Lipids Health Dis 2003; 2:2-9. This study suggests that PA could detect alterations in the lipid composition of membranes.
37. VanderJagt DJ, Huang Y-S, Chuang L-T, et al. Phase angle and n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids in sickle cell disease. Arch Dis Child 2002; 87:252-254.
38. Johansen KL, Kaysen GA, Young BS, et al. Longitudinal study of nutritional, body composition, and physical function in hemodialysis patients. Am J Clin Nutr 2003; 77:842-846. This is a very interesting longitudinal study showing that PA and measures of physical activity and function were more sensitive than other body composition measures to identify adverse changes in a cohort of haemodialysis patients.
39. Lukaski HC. Regional bioelectrical impedance analysis: applications in health and medicine. Acta Diabetol 2003; 40(Suppl. 1):S196-S199. This study presents the utilization of regional BIA.
40. Di Iorio B, Cillo N, Cirillo M, de Santo NG. Charlson comorbidity index is a predictor of outcomes in incident hemodialysis patients and correlates with phase angle and hospitalization. Int J Artif Organs 2004; 27:330-336. This study shows that PA is a predictor of mortality in haemodialysis patients in a multivariate analysis, even after adjustment for other clinical prognostic factors such as the Charlson co-morbidity index, haemoglobin, albumin and days of hospitalization.
41. Dumler F, Kilates C. Body composition analysis by bioelectrical impedance in chronic maintenance dialysis patients: comparisons to the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III. J Ren Nutr 2003; 13:166-172. A large study comparing chronic maintenance dialysis patients and NHANES III subjects. The analysis was stratified by race and sex, with significant differences in BIVA and PA values between healthy and dialysis populations.
42. Wong HS, Boey LM, Morad Z. Body composition by bioelectrical impedance analysis in renal transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 2004; 36:2186-2187. This study shows that PA is more sensitive than body composition parameters to differentiate renal transplant recipients from healthy control individuals.
43. Coroas A, de Oliveira JGG, Sampaio S, et al. Bioimpedance analysis highlights changes in body composition at the early stages of impairment of kidney transplant function. J Ren Nutr 2004; 14:157-163. This study found differences in fluid compartmentalization and PA from BIA between transplant and healthy subjects, suggesting that BIA can be a good method to monitor renal function in graft kidneys.
44. Guida B, De Nicola L, Pecoraro P, et al. Abnormalities of bioimpedance measures in overweight and obese hemodialyzed patients. Int J Obes 2001; 25:265-272.
45. Piccoli A. Patterns of bioelectrical impedance vector analysis: learning from electrocardiography and forgetting electric circuit models. Nutrition 2002; 18:520-521.
46. Piccoli A, Pillon L, Dumler F. Impedance vector distribution by sex, race, body mass index, and age in the United States: standard references intervals as bivariate Z scores. Nutrition 2002; 18:153-167.
47. Piccoli A, Nigrelli S, Caberlotto A, et al. Bivariate normal values of the bioelectrical impedance vector in adult and elderly populations. Am J Clin Nutr 1995; 61:269-270.
48. Buffa R, Floris G, Marini E. Migration of the bioelectrical impedance vector in healthy elderly subjects. Nutrition 2003; 19:917-921. This study shows the migration of the mean impedance vector in both sexes after the age of 80 years. This change is caused by the capacitive component (capacitive reactance) with a consequent decrease in PA.
49. Guida B, Trio R. Pecoraro P, et al. Impedance vector distribution by body mass index and conventional bioelectrical impedance analysis in obese women. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis 2003; 13:72-79.
50. Savino F, Maccario S, Cresi F, et al. Bioimpedance vector analysis in breastfed and formula-fed infants in the first six months of life. Adv Exp Med Biol 2004; 554:501-504. A study of BIVA variation during the first 6 months of life.
51. De Palo T, Messina G, Edefonti A, et al. Normal values of the biolectrical impedance vector in childhood and puberty. Nutrition 2000; 16:417-424.
52. Nescolarde L, Piccoli A, Roman A, et al. Bioelectrical impedance vector analysis in haemodialysis patients: relation between oedema and mortality. Physiol Meas 2004; 25:1271-1280. A very well performed study, with a good explanation of the BIVA method. In this study, BIVA has an excellent sensitivity to identify oedema patients and its utility to predict survival in haemodialysis patients.
53. Mancini A, Grandaliano G, Magarelli P, Allegretti A. Nutritional status in hemodialysis patients and bioimpedance vector analysis. J Ren Nutr 2003; 13:199-204.
54. Pillon L, Piccoli A, Lowrie EG, Lazarus JM. Vector length as a proxy for the adequacy of ultrafiltration in hemodialysis. Kidney Int 2004; 66:1266-1271. This study shows that the vector length of the BIVA method is a predictor of mortality in haemodialysis patients, even after adjusting for PA and other confounding variables.
55. Piccoli A. Bioelectrical impedance vector distribution in peritoneal dialysis patients with different hydration status. Kidney Int 2004; 65:1050-1063. A very well performed study, showing the utility of the BIVA method to evaluate hydration status in peritoneal dialysis patients. There is also a good criticism about the validity of BIA regression equations and their source of errors.
56. Toso S, Piccoli A, Guselia M, et al. Bioimpedance vector pattern in cancer patients without versus locally advanced or disseminated disease. Nutrition 2003; 19:510-514. A very interesting study showing that the BIVA pattern differs among cancer patients according to their disease stage.