BACKGROUND & AIMS: The use of phase angle (PhA) and raw parameters of bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) has gained attention as alternative to conventional error-prone calculation of body composition in disease. This review investigates the clinical relevance and applicability of PhA and Bioelectrical Impedance Vector Analysis (BIVA) which uses the plot of resistance and reactance normalized per height. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted using Medline identifying studies relevant to this review until March 2011. We included studies on the use of PhA or BIVA derived from tetrapolar BIA in out- and in-patient settings or institutionalized elderly. RESULTS: Numerous studies have proven the prognostic impact of PhA regarding mortality or postoperative complications in different clinical settings. BIVA has been shown to provide information about hydration and body cell mass and therefore allows assessment of patients in whom calculation of body composition fails due to altered hydration. Reference values exist for PhA and BIVA facilitating interpretation of data. CONCLUSION: PhA, a superior prognostic marker, should be considered as a screening tool for the identification of risk patients with impaired nutritional and functional status, BIVA is recommended for further nutritional assessment and monitoring, in particular when calculation of body composition is not feasible.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: The use of phase angle (PhA) and raw parameters of bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) has gained attention as alternative to conventional error-prone calculation of body composition in disease. This review investigates the clinical relevance and applicability of PhA and Bioelectrical Impedance Vector Analysis (BIVA) which uses the plot of resistance and reactance normalized per height. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted using Medline identifying studies relevant to this review until March 2011. We included studies on the use of PhA or BIVA derived from tetrapolar BIA in out- and in-patient settings or institutionalized elderly. RESULTS: Numerous studies have proven the prognostic impact of PhA regarding mortality or postoperative complications in different clinical settings. BIVA has been shown to provide information about hydration and body cell mass and therefore allows assessment of patients in whom calculation of body composition fails due to altered hydration. Reference values exist for PhA and BIVA facilitating interpretation of data. CONCLUSION: PhA, a superior prognostic marker, should be considered as a screening tool for the identification of risk patients with impaired nutritional and functional status, BIVA is recommended for further nutritional assessment and monitoring, in particular when calculation of body composition is not feasible.
Authors: Mathias Plauth; William Bernal; Srinivasan Dasarathy; Manuela Merli; Lindsay D Plank; Tatjana Schütz; Stephan C Bischoff Journal: Clin Nutr Date: 2019-01-16 Impact factor: 7.324
Authors: L Nescolarde; H Lukaski; A De Lorenzo; B de-Mateo-Silleras; M P Redondo-Del-Río; M A Camina-Martín Journal: Eur J Clin Nutr Date: 2016-07-06 Impact factor: 4.016
Authors: F de Blasio; M G Santaniello; F de Blasio; G Mazzarella; A Bianco; L Lionetti; F M E Franssen; L Scalfi Journal: Eur J Clin Nutr Date: 2017-09-13 Impact factor: 4.016
Authors: Georgi Vassilev; Till Hasenberg; Johannes Krammer; Peter Kienle; Ulrich Ronellenfitsch; Mirko Otto Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2017-03 Impact factor: 4.129