Reliability of bioelectrical impedance analysis in the evaluation of the nutritional status of hemodialysis patients - a comparison with Mini Nutritional Assessment.

INTRODUCTION

Protein-energy wasting (PEW) is a strong predictive factor for morbidity and mortality in patients who have end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA) is an important and confirmed tool to evaluate PEW that has been recommended by many guidelines. Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) is a noninvasive technique for assessing body composition. The aim of the present study was to analyze the reliability of BIA in malnutrition diagnosis by comparing it with standard MNA in a group of 100 ESRD patients.

METHODS

One hundred ESRD patients who were medically stable and under dialysis treatment for at least 6 months were enrolled to the study. Monthly assessed serum creatinine, albumin, C-reactive protein (CRP), and lipid profiles from the last 6 months prior to the study were retrospectively collected. A standard Full-MNA and body composition analyses were applied to all patients. Body compositions were analyzed with the BIA technique using the Body Composition Analyzer (Tanita BC-420 MA; Tanita, Tokyo, Japan). Patients were classified into three groups according to MNA scores as PEW (n = 15, score <17), moderate PEW or risk group (n = 49, score 17-23.5), and well-nourished (n = 36, score ≥ 24) patients.

RESULTS

Mean duration of maintenance hemodialysis treatment was significantly shorter in the PEW group compared to both of the other groups described (P = .015). Well-nourished and risk groups had lower CRP and higher albumin levels compared to PEW patients; however, these values were statistically similar in these two groups (P = .018, .01, respectively). According to BIA findings, well-nourished patients had the highest fat ratio, fat mass, muscle mass, visceral fat mass, and fat-free mass compared to both moderate the PEW/risk and the PEW groups (P < .05). Risk group patients also had higher muscle mass, visceral fat mass, and fat-free mass values compared to the PEW group (P < .05). A correlation analysis revealed that MNA scores were positively correlated with albumin (P = .005), creatinine (P = .049), fat mass (P = .045), muscle mass (P = .001), visceral fat ratio (P = .007), and BMI (P = .047) and in negative correlation with CRP (r = -0.357, P = .0001) levels.

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend BIA as a complementary diagnostic tool to evaluate nutritional status of ESRD along with MNA, anthropometric measures, and classical biochemical markers.