Estimation of total body water from bioelectrical impedance spectroscopy in oncology outpatients receiving radiotherapy and agreement with three prediction equations

Isenring, E., Colombo, M., Cross, G., Kellett, E. and Swaney, L. (2009) Estimation of total body water from bioelectrical impedance spectroscopy in oncology outpatients receiving radiotherapy and agreement with three prediction equations. Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics, 22 1: 50-54. doi:10.1111/j.1365-277X.2008.00919.x


Author Isenring, E.
Colombo, M.
Cross, G.
Kellett, E.
Swaney, L.
Title Estimation of total body water from bioelectrical impedance spectroscopy in oncology outpatients receiving radiotherapy and agreement with three prediction equations
Journal name Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 1365-277X
Publication date 2009-02
Sub-type Article (original research)
DOI 10.1111/j.1365-277X.2008.00919.x
Volume 22
Issue 1
Start page 50
End page 54
Total pages 5
Place of publication Oxford, U.K.
Publisher Wiley Interscience
Language eng
Subject 1112 Oncology and Carcinogenesis
1111 Nutrition and Dietetics
Formatted abstract
Background:
Bioelectrical impedance spectroscopy (BIS) may be more accurate in determining total body water (TBW) than bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA). The present study compared the agreement between three TBW prediction equations developed using BIA and BIS-derived TBW in oncology outpatients.

Methods:
A cross-sectional, observational study was conducted in 37 outpatients receiving radiotherapy (27 males/10 females, aged 68.3 ± 10.2 years). TBW was estimated by BIS (TBWBIS) and three BIA TBW prediction equations (TBWca-u: underweight cancer patients; TBWca-n: normal-weight cancer patients; and TBWrad: patients receiving radiotherapy). Bland–Altman analyses determined agreement between methods. BIS-derived TBW using new resistivity constants was calculated.

Results:

The mean ± SD of TBW estimated by BIS was 39.8 ± 8.3 L, which was significantly different from the prediction equations; TBWrad 35.1 ± 7.9 L, TBWca-u 33.1 ± 7.5 L and TBWca-n 32.3 ± 7.3 L, (P < 0.001). Using new resistivity constants, TBW was 36.2 ± 8.1 L but this still differed from the equations (P < 0.001). Bias between TBWBIS and that predicted by the equations was in the range 4.7–7.4 L or 1.1–3.9 L using new resistivity constants.

Conclusions:
TBW estimated by BIS cannot be directly compared with oncology-specific BIA equations, suggesting that BIS cannot be used at the group level in outpatients receiving radiotherapy. There was a reduced bias with BIS using new resistivity constants; however, further research should determine any advantage of BIS over BIA in this population.
Keyword Bioelectrical impedance spectroscopy
Body composition
Dietetics
Oncology
Radiotherapy
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Provisional Code
Institutional Status Non-UQ

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article (original research)
Collections: Excellence in Research Australia (ERA) - Collection
School of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences Publications
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 1 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article | Citations
Scopus Citation Count Cited 1 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Mon, 30 Nov 2009, 15:30:42 EST