Bioelectrical impedance vector analysis in critically ill patients: a prospective, clinician-blinded investigation

Sarah L Jones, Aiko Tanaka, Glenn M Eastwood, Helen Young, Leah Peck, Rinaldo Bellomo, Johan Mårtensson, Sarah L Jones, Aiko Tanaka, Glenn M Eastwood, Helen Young, Leah Peck, Rinaldo Bellomo, Johan Mårtensson

Abstract

Introduction: Assessment of fluid status in critically ill patients is challenging. We aimed to assess the feasibility and validity of bioelectrical impedance vector analysis (BIVA) as a measure of hydration in critically ill patients.

Methods: We performed twice-daily BIVA measurements and fluid balance calculations and recorded physiological variables in mechanically ventilated patients within 24 h of intensive care unit (ICU) admission for up to 5 days. Treating clinicians were blinded to BIVA results.

Results: We performed 344 BIVA measurements in 61 patients. According to BIVA, 14 patients (23%) were dehydrated, 22 (36%) were normally hydrated and 25 (41%) were overhydrated upon ICU admission. Patients with normal BIVA hydration were less sick, had fewer comorbidities and had less deranged physiology than patients found to be dehydrated or overhydrated with BIVA. Cumulative fluid balance increased in patients found to be dehydrated with BIVA by a mean of 3.4±2.2 L, whereas in patients found to be overhydrated with BIVA, it decreased by a mean of 4.5±6.9 L. In patients found to be normally hydrated with BIVA, fluid balance remained unchanged. BIVA-defined hydration increased with 1 L (median change 1.5%, P =0.09) or 2 L (median change 0.7%, P =0.09) of calculated fluid gains. BIVA-defined hydration decreased (median change -0.8%, P =0.02) with a negative cumulative fluid balance of >2 L. BIVA-defined hydration between first and last measurement correlated with the corresponding change in fluid balance (ρ =0.25, P =0.05).

Conclusions: BIVA is feasible in critically ill patients. Its validity is supported by the observed characteristics of patients with different degrees of BIVA hydration upon admission and by different fluid management of such patients by blinded clinicians. The sensitivity of repeated BIVA hydration measurements to detect fluid accumulation or fluid balance changes <2 L was low, however. These contradictory findings provide the rational basis for studies of BIVA-assisted fluid management in ICU patients.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Examples of values obtained with the Renal EFG BIVA™ Technology. BIVA bioelectrical impedance vector analysis, H height, PA phase angle, Xc reactance, BCM body cell mass
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Selection of study patients. BIVA bioelectrical impedance vector analysis, ICU intensive care unit
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Cumulative fluid balance during the first 4 days in the intensive care unit (ICU) in patients with dehydration, normal hydration and overhydration on admission. Values are mean ± SE. BIVA bioelectrical impedance vector analysis
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Mean daily hydration determined by bioelectrical impedance vector analysis (BIVA) in patients with dehydration (a), normal hydration (b) and overhydration (c) upon admission. P values represent repeated-measures analysis of variance for change in hydration level over time
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Changes in hydration determined by bioelectrical impedance vector analysis (BIVA) (a), central venous pressure (CVP) (b) and lactate (c) versus changes in cumulative fluid balance and changes in BIVA hydration versus changes in lactate (d) between the time points of the first and last BIVA recordings

References

    1. Marik PE, Baram M, Vahid B. Does central venous pressure predict volume responsiveness? A systematic review of the literature and the tale of seven mares. Chest. 2008;134:172–8. doi: 10.1378/chest.07-2331.
    1. Kumar A, Anel R, Bunnell E, Habet K, Zanotti S, Marshall S, et al. Pulmonary artery occlusion pressure and central venous pressure fail to predict ventricular filling volume, cardiac performance, or the response to volume infusion in normal subjects. Crit Care Med. 2004;32:691–9. doi: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000114996.68110.C9.
    1. Michard F, Teboul JL. Predicting fluid responsiveness in ICU patients: a critical analysis of the evidence. Chest. 2002;121:2000–8. doi: 10.1378/chest.121.6.2000.
    1. Perren A, Markmann M, Merlani G, Marone C, Merlani P. Fluid balance in critically ill patients: should we really rely on it? Minerva Anesthesiol. 2011;77:802–11.
    1. Schneider A, Baldwin I, Freitag E, Glassford N, Bellomo R. Estimation of fluid status changes in critically ill patients: fluid balance or electronic bed weight? J Crit Care. 2012;27:745.e7–e12. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2011.12.017.
    1. Schneider AG, Thorpe C, Delbridge K, Matalanis G, Bellomo R. Electronic bed-weighing vs daily fluid balance changes after cardiac surgery. J Crit Care. 2013;28:1113.e1–e5. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2013.07.056.
    1. Stevenson LW, Perloff JK. The limited availability of physical signs for estimating hemodynamics in chronic heart failure. JAMA. 1989;261:884–8. doi: 10.1001/jama.1989.03420060100040.
    1. Di Somma S, Navarin S, Giordano S, Spadini F, Lippi G, Cervellin G, et al. The emerging role of biomarkers and bioimpedance in evaluating hydration status in patients with acute heart failure. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2012;50:2093–105. doi: 10.1515/cclm-2012-0289.
    1. Kushner RF, Schoeller GA, Fjeld CR, Danford L. Is the impedance index (ht2/R) significant in predicting total body water? Am J Clin Nutr. 1992;56:835–9.
    1. Lukaski HC, Hall CB, Siders WA. Assessment of hydration status in women during pregnancy and postpartum with bioelectrical impedance vectors. Nutrition. 2007;23:543–50. doi: 10.1016/j.nut.2007.05.001.
    1. Ronco C, Kaushik M, Valle R, Aspromonte N, Peacock WF., 4th Diagnosis and management of fluid overload in heart failure and cardio-renal syndrome: the “5B” approach. Semin Nephrol. 2012;32:129–41. doi: 10.1016/j.semnephrol.2011.11.016.
    1. Uszko-Lencer N, Bothmer F, Van Pol PE, Schols AM. Measurement of body composition in chronic heart failure: a comparison of methods. Eur J Heart Fail. 2006;8:208–14. doi: 10.1016/j.ejheart.2005.07.007.
    1. Piccoli A. the Italian Hemodialysis-Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis (HD-BIA) Study Group. Identification of operational clues to dry weight prescription in haemodialysis using bioimpedance vector analysis. Kidney Int. 1998;53:1036–43. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1755.1998.00843.x.
    1. Jha V, Jairam A, Sharma MC, Sakhuja V, Piccoli A, Parthasarathy S. Body composition analysis with bioelectric impedance in adult Indians with ESRD: comparison with healthy population. Kidney Int. 2006;69:1649–53. doi: 10.1038/sj.ki.5000293.
    1. Pillon L, Piccoli A, Lowrie EG, Lazarus JM, Chertow GM. Vector length as a proxy for the adequacy of ultrafiltration in haemodialysis. Kidney Int. 2004;66:1266–71. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1755.2004.00881.x.
    1. Onofriescu M, Hogas S, Voroneanu L, Apetrii M, Nistor I, Kanbay M, et al. Bioimpedance-guided fluid management in maintenance haemodialysis: a pilot randomised controlled trial. Am J Kidney Dis. 2014;64:111–8. doi: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2014.01.420.
    1. Piccoli A, Condognotto M, Pasesntin P, Naso A. Combined evaluation of nutrition and hydration in dialysis patients with bioelectrical impedance vector analysis (BIVA) Clin Nutr. 2014;33:673–7. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2013.08.007.
    1. Peacock WF., 4th Use of bioimpedance vector analysis in critically ill and cardiorenal patients. Contrib Nephrol. 2010;165:226–35. doi: 10.1159/000313762.
    1. Piccoli A. Bioelectric impedance measurement for fluid status assessment. Contrib Nephrol. 2010;164:143–52. doi: 10.1159/000313727.
    1. Piccoli A, Pittoni G, Facco E, Favaro E, Pillon L. Relationship between central venous pressure and bioimpedance vector analysis in critically ill patients. Crit Care Med. 2000;28:132–7. doi: 10.1097/00003246-200001000-00022.
    1. Basso F, Berdin G, Virzi GM, Mason G, Piccinni P, Day S, et al. Fluid management in the intensive care unit: bioelectrical impedance vector analysis as a tool to assess hydration status and optimal fluid balance in critically ill patients. Blood Purif. 2013;36:192–9. doi: 10.1159/000356366.
    1. Chen H, Buyun W, Gong D, Liu Z. Fluid overload at start of continuous renal replacement therapy is associated with poorer clinical condition and outcome: a prospective observational study on the combined use of bioimpedance vector analysis and serum N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide measurement. Crit Care. 2015;19:135. doi: 10.1186/s13054-015-0871-3.

Source: PubMed

3
Suscribir