4.8 Article Proceedings Paper

Bioelectrical impedance analysis is a useful bedside technique to assess malnutrition in cirrhotic patients with and without ascites

期刊

HEPATOLOGY
卷 32, 期 6, 页码 1208-1215

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO
DOI: 10.1053/jhep.2000.20524

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Protein-calorie malnutrition is associated with poor prognosis in chronic liver disease, but reliable assessment is hampered by changes in body water. We prospectively evaluated the effect of fluid retention on bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) as a simple method for the estimation of body cell mass (BCMBIA) in 41 patients with cirrhosis (n = 20 with ascites; n = 21 without ascites) using total body potassium counting (BCMTBP) as a reference method. Arm muscle area and creatinine-derived lean body mass were compared with total body potassium data. In patients total body potassium was 24.4% lower than in controls and this loss was more severe in patients with ascites (-34.1%; P <.01). BCMBIA and BCMTBP were closely correlated in controls (r(2) =.87, P <.0001), patients without ascites (r(2) =.94, P <.0001) and patients with ascites (r(2) =,56, P <.0001). Removal of 6.2 +/- 3 L of ascites had only minor effects on BCMBIA (deviation of -0.18 kg/L ascites). Limits of agreement between both methods were wider in patients with ascites than in patients without (6.2 vs. 4.2 kg). In patients without ascites arm muscle area (r(2) =.64; P <.001) and lean body mass (r(2) =.55; P <.001) correlated significantly with total body potassium, but not in patients with ascites. For assessment of protein malnutrition in patients with cirrhosis, body cell mass determination by use pf BIA offers a considerable advantage over other widely available but less accurate methods like anthropometry or the creatinine approach. Despite some limitations in patients with ascites, BIA is a reliable bedside tool for the determination of body cell mass in cirrhotic patients with and without ascites.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据