Advertisement

Intensive Care Medicine

, Volume 42, Issue 9, pp 1445–1453 | Cite as

Fat-free mass at admission predicts 28-day mortality in intensive care unit patients: the international prospective observational study Phase Angle Project

  • Ronan ThibaultEmail author
  • Anne-Marie Makhlouf
  • Aurélien Mulliez
  • M. Cristina Gonzalez
  • Gintautas Kekstas
  • Nada Rotovnik Kozjek
  • Jean-Charles Preiser
  • Isabel Ceniceros Rozalen
  • Sylvain Dadet
  • Zeljko Krznaric
  • Kinga Kupczyk
  • Fabienne Tamion
  • Noël Cano
  • Claude Pichard
  • Phase Angle Project Investigators
Original

Abstract

Purpose

Phase angle as measured by bioelectrical impedance analysis reflects fat-free mass. Fat-free mass loss relates to worse prognosis in chronic diseases. Primary aim of this study was: to determine the association between fat-free mass at intensive care unit admission and 28-day mortality.

Methods

Ten centres in nine countries participated in this multicentre prospective observational study. The inclusion criteria were age >18 years; expected length of stay >48 h; absence of pacemaker, heart defibrillator implant, pregnancy and lactation. Fat-free mass was assessed by measurement of the 50-kHz phase angle at admission. The primary endpoint was 28-day mortality. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was used to assess prediction of 28-day mortality by fat-free mass at ICU admission. The variables associated with 28-day mortality were analysed by means of multivariable logistic regression.

Results

Of the 3605 patients screened, 931 were analysed: age 61 ± 16 years, male 60 %, APACHE II 19 ± 9, body mass index 26 ± 6, day 1 phase angle 4.5° ± 1.9°. Day 1 phase angle was lower in patients who eventually died than in survivors (4.1° ± 2.0° vs. 4.6° ± 1.8°, P = 0.001). The day 1 phase angle AUC for 28-day mortality was 0.63 [0.58–0.67]. In multivariable analysis, the following were independently associated with 28-day mortality: age (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.014 [95 % confidence interval 1.002–1.027], P = 0.03), day 1 phase angle (aOR 0.86 [0.78–0.96], P = 0.008), APACHE II (aOR 1.08 [1.06–1.11], P < 0.001), surgical patient (aOR 0.51 [0.33–0.79], P = 0.002), and admission for other diagnosis (aOR 0.39 [0.21–0.72], P = 0.003). A multivariable combined score improved the predictability of 28-day mortality: AUC = 0.79 [0.75–0.82].

Conclusion

Low fat-free mass at ICU admission is associated with 28-day mortality. A combined score improves mortality predictability.

Trial registration: NCT01907347 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Keywords

Bioelectrical impedance analysis Severity of illness index Body composition Critical illness Critical care outcomes 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully thank Gaëlle Emvalomenos and Thora Theodorsdottir for their help in recruiting patients at Geneva University Hospital and database management and all of the nursing staff and physicians in all the investigating centres. We especially thank Dr. Fabrice Kwiatkowski, biostatistician, at Jean Perrin’s Cancer Centre, Clermont-Ferrand, France, for his careful review of all statistical analyses.

Phase Angle Project Investigators: Séverine Graf, Claudia P Heidegger (Geneva), Marcio Guerreiro, Silvana Orlandi (Pelotas), Andrius Klimasauskas, Gintare Sostakaite (Vilnius University), Kristina Gorjup, Katja Kogovšek, Katja Kopriva Pirtovšek (Ljubljana), Michelle Norrenberg, Karen Rizkallah, François Wéry (Brussels), Ali Ait Hssain, Bruno Pereira, Bertrand Souweine (Clermont-Ferrand), Steven Grange, Antoine Marchalot, Pauline Bernier-Enguerrand (Rouen), Marlena Jakubczyk, Aleksandra Różowicz, Stanisław Kłęk (Bydgoszcz, Skawina), Ana Kunovic (Zagreb).

Compliance with ethical standards

Funding

The Phase Angle Project was supported by the European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) as a fellowship Grant 2012 allocated to Ronan Thibault. Additional research Grants (5 % of the main funding by ESPEN) were obtained from Bioparhom, Le Bourget-du-Lac, France and the public Foundation Nutrition 2000Plus, Switzerland.

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Kyle UG, Bosaeus I, De Lorenzo AD et al (2004) Bioelectrical impedance analysis—part I: review of principles and methods. Clin Nutr 23:1226–1243CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kyle UG, Bosaeus I, De Lorenzo AD et al (2004) Bioelectrical impedance analysis—part II: utilization in clinical practice. Clin Nutr 23:1430–1453CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Thibault R, Genton L, Pichard C (2012) Body composition: why, when and for who? Clin Nutr 31:435–447CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pichard C, Kyle UG, Perrier A, Vermeulen B, Unger P (2004) Nutritional assessment: lean body mass depletion at hospital admission is associated with an increased length of stay. Am J Clin Nutr 79:613–618PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gupta D, Lammersfeld CA, Burrows JL et al (2004) Bioelectrical impedance phase angle in clinical practice: implications for prognosis in advanced colorectal cancer. Am J Clin Nutr 80:1634–1638PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Schwenk A, Beisenherz A, Römer K, Kremer G, Salzberger B, Elia M (2000) Phase angle from bioelectrical impedance analysis remains an independent predictive marker in HIV-infected patients in the era of highly active antiretroviral treatment. Am J Clin Nutr 72:496–501PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hill GL (1992) Jonathan E. Rhoads Lecture. Body composition research: implications for the practice of clinical nutrition. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 16:197–218CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Faisy C, Rabbat A, Kouchakji B, Laaban JP (2000) Bioelectrical impedance analysis in estimating nutritional status and outcome of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and acute respiratory failure. Intensive Care Med 26:518–525CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Thibault R, Heidegger CP, Methot C et al (2009) relationship between bioelectrical phase angle se angle, sofa score and mortality in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Clin Nutr 4:36Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Heyland DK, Dhaliwal R, Jiang X, Day AG (2011) Identifying critically ill patients who benefit the most from nutrition therapy: the development and initial validation of a novel risk assessment tool. Crit Care 15:R268CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hekmat K, Doerr F, Kroener A et al (2010) Prediction of mortality in intensive care unit cardiac surgical patients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 38:104–109CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Le Gall JR, Lemeshow S, Saulnier F (1993) A new simplified acute physiology score (SAPS II) based on a European/North American multicenter study. JAMA 270:2957–2963CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Heidegger CP, Berger MM, Graf S et al (2013) Optimization of energy provision with supplemental parenteral nutrition (SPN) in critically ill patients: a randomised controlled clinical trial. Lancet 381:385–393CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Doig GS, Simpson F, Sweetman EA et al (2013) Early parenteral nutrition in critically ill patients with short-term relative contraindications to early enteral nutrition: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 309:2130–2138CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hanley JA, McNeil BJ (1982) The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 143:29–36CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Swets JA (1988) Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems. Science 240:1285–1293CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bosy-Westphal A, Danielzik S, Dörhöfer RP, Later W, Wiese S, Müller MJ (2006) Phase angle from bioelectrical impedance analysis: population reference values by age, sex, and body mass index. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 30:309–316CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gupta D, Lammersfeld CA, Vashi PG et al (2009) Bioelectrical impedance phase angle in clinical practice: implications for prognosis in stage IIIB and IV non-small cell lung cancer. BMC Cancer 9:37CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gupta D, Lammersfeld CA, Burrows JL et al (2014) Bioelectrical impedance phase angle in clinical practice: implications for prognosis in advanced colorectal cancer. Am J Clin Nutr 80:1634–1638Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gupta D, Lis CG, Dahlk SL, Vashi PG, Grutsch JF, Lammersfeld CA (2004) Bioelectrical impedance phase angle as a prognostic indicator in advanced pancreatic cancer. Br J Nutr 92:957–962CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Paiva SI, Borges LR, Halpern-Silveira D, Assunçao MC, Barros AJ, Gonzalez MC (2010) Standardized phase angle from bioelectrical impedance analysis as prognostic factor for survival in patients with cancer. Support Care Cancer 19:187–192CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Desport JC, Marin B, Funalot B, Preux PM, Couratier P (2008) Phase angle is a prognostic factor for survival in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Amyotroph Later Scler 9:273–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wirth R, Volkert D, Rösler A, Sieber CC, Bauer JM (2010) Bioelectric impedance phase angle is associated with hospital mortality of geriatric patients. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 51:290–294CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mushnick R, Fein PA, Mittman N, Goel N, Chattopadhyay J, Avram MM (2003) Relationship of bioelectrical impedance parameters to nutrition and survival in peritoneal dialysis patients. Kidney Int Suppl 87:S53–S56CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Selberg O, Selberg D (2002) Norms and correlates of bioimpedance phase angle in healthy human subjects, hospitalized patients, and patients with liver cirrhosis. Eur J Appl Physiol 86:509–516CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Schwenk A, Beisenherz A, Römer K, Kremer G, Salzberger B, Elia M (2000) Phase angle from bioelectrical impedance analysis remains an independent predictive marker in HIV-infected patients in the era of highly active antiretroviral treatment. Am J Clin Nutr 72:496–501PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Barbosa-Silva MC, Barros AJ (2005) Bioelectric impedance and individual characteristics as prognostic factors for post-operative complications. Clin Nutr 24:830–838CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wischmeyer PE, San-Millan I (2015) Winning the war against ICU-acquired weakness: new innovations in nutrition and exercise physiology. Crit Care 16:56Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Pichard C, Oshima T, Berger MM (2015) Energy deficit is clinically relevant for critically ill patients: yes. Intensive Care Med 41:335CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hoffer LJ, Bistrian BR (2015) Energy deficit is clinically relevant for critically ill patients: no. Intensive Care Med 41:339CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Jones SL, Tanaka A, Eastwood GM et al (2015) Bioelectrical impedance vector analysis in critically ill patients: a prospective, clinician-blinded investigation. Crit Care 19:290CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Buch E, Bradfield J, Larson T, Horwich T (2012) Effect of bioimpedance body composition analysis on function of implanted cardiac devices. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 35:681–684CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Meyer P, Makhlouf AM, Mondouagne Engkolo LP et al (2016) Safety of bioelectrical impedance analysis in patients equipped with implantable cardioverter defibrillators. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. doi: 10.1177/0148607116633823

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg and ESICM 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ronan Thibault
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Anne-Marie Makhlouf
    • 1
  • Aurélien Mulliez
    • 3
  • M. Cristina Gonzalez
    • 4
  • Gintautas Kekstas
    • 5
  • Nada Rotovnik Kozjek
    • 6
  • Jean-Charles Preiser
    • 7
  • Isabel Ceniceros Rozalen
    • 8
  • Sylvain Dadet
    • 9
  • Zeljko Krznaric
    • 10
  • Kinga Kupczyk
    • 11
  • Fabienne Tamion
    • 12
  • Noël Cano
    • 13
  • Claude Pichard
    • 1
  • Phase Angle Project Investigators
  1. 1.Nutrition UnitGeneva University HospitalsGenevaSwitzerland
  2. 2.Nutrition Unit, Department of Endocrinology, Diabetology and Nutrition, INSERM U991CHU Rennes–Université Rennes 1RennesFrance
  3. 3.Department of Biostatistics, Direction of Clinical Research and Innovation (DRCI)CHU Clermont-FerrandClermont-FerrandFrance
  4. 4.Post-graduate Program in Health and BehaviorCatholic University of PelotasPelotasBrazil
  5. 5.Department of Intensive CareVilnius University HospitalVilniusLithuania
  6. 6.Clinical Nutrition UnitInstitute of OncologyLjubljanaSlovenia
  7. 7.Department of Intensive CareHôpital Universitaire ErasmeBrusselsBelgium
  8. 8.Department of Intensive CareClinic USP PalmaplanasPalma de MajorqueSpain
  9. 9.Department of NutritionCHU Clermont-FerrandClermont-FerrandFrance
  10. 10.Departement of Internal MedicineUniversity Hospital Center ZagrebZagrebCroatia
  11. 11.Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, University Hospital No. 1, Collegium Medicum Nicolaus Copernicus UniversityBydgoszczPoland
  12. 12.Department of Intensive CareCHU RouenRouenFrance
  13. 13.Centre de Recherche en Nutrition Humaine d’Auvergne (CRNH)CHU Clermont-FerrandClermont-FerrandFrance

Personalised recommendations