4.4 Article

Validity of Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis for Measuring Changes in Body Water and Percent Fat After Bariatric Surgery

Journal

OBESITY SURGERY
Volume 24, Issue 6, Pages 847-854

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11695-014-1182-5

Keywords

Total body water; Fat mass; Weight loss; Bariatric surgery

Categories

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health
  2. J&J Ethicon Scientific
  3. NIH-NIDDK
  4. Covidien
  5. EndoGastric Solutions
  6. Nutrisystem
  7. WL Gore Associates
  8. [RO1-DK-72507]
  9. [P30-DK-26687]
  10. [UL1 TR000040]
  11. [T32 DK091227]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Few studies have validated bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) following bariatric surgery. We examined agreement of BIA (Tanita 310) measures of total body water (TBW) and percent body fat (%fat) before (T0) and 12 months (T12) after bariatric surgery, and change between T0 and T12 with reference measures: deuterium oxide dilution for TBW and three-compartment model (3C) for %fat in a subset of participants (n = 50) of the Longitudinal Assessment of Bariatric Surgery-2. T0 to T12 median (IQR) change in deuterium TBW and 3C %fat was -6.4 L (6.4 L) and -14.8 % (13.4 %), respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between deuterium and BIA determined TBW [median (IQR) difference: T0 -0.1 L (7.1 L), p = 0.75; T12 0.2 L (5.7 L), p = 0.35; Delta 0.35 L(6.3 L), p = 1.0]. Compared with 3C, BIA underestimated %fat at T0 and T12 [T0 -3.3 (5.6), p < 0.001; T12 -1.7 (5.2), p = 0.04] but not change [0.7 (8.2), p = 0.38]. Except for %fat change, Bland-Altman plots indicated no proportional bias. However, 95 % limits of agreement were wide (TBW 15-22 L, %fat 19-20 %). BIA may be appropriate for evaluating group level response among severely obese adults. However, clinically meaningful differences in the accuracy of BIA between individuals exist.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available