4.2 Article

Bioelectrical impedance spectroscopy to estimate fluid balance in critically ill patients

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s10877-015-9706-7

关键词

Bioelectric impedance; Water-electrolyte balance; Body weight; Critical care

资金

  1. Department of Anesthesiology and Critical care

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fluid management is a crucial issue in intensive-care medicine. This study evaluated the feasibility and reproducibility of bioimpedance spectroscopy to measure body-water composition in critically ill patients, and compared fluid balance and daily changes in total body water (TBW) measured by bioimpedance. This observational study included 25 patients under mechanical ventilation. Fluid balance and bioimpedance measurements were recorded on 3 consecutive days. Whole-body bioimpedance spectroscopy was performed with exact or ideal body weights entered into the device, and with or without ICU monitoring. Reproducibility of bioimpedance spectroscopy was very good in all conditions despite ICU monitoring and mechanical ventilation. Bioimpedance measurements using an ideal body weight varied significantly, making the weighing procedure necessary. Comparison of fluid balance and daily changes in body weight provided the best correlation (rho = 0.74; P < 0.0001). Daily changes in TBW were correlated with fluid balance (Spearman coefficient rho = 0.31; P = 0.003) and this correlation was improved after exclusion of patients with a SOFA score > 10 (rho = 0.36; P = 0.05) and with extracorporeal circulation (rho = 0.50; P = 0.005). Regardless of the technique used to estimate volume status, important limits of agreement were observed. Non-invasive determination of body-water composition using bioimpedance spectroscopy is feasible in critically ill patients but requires knowledge of the patient's weight. The best method to assess volume status after fluid resuscitation and the value gained from information about body composition provided by bioimpedance techniques needs further evaluation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据