The effect of electrode placement in measuring ipsilateral/contralateral segmental bioelectrical impedance

No Abstract

Reference values for whole body and cerebral multi-frequency bio-impedance data in neonates less than 12 h postpartum

Multiple frequency bio-electrical impedance analysis (MFBIA) may be useful for monitoring fluid balance in newborn infants or to provide early prediction of the outcome following perinatal asphyxia. A reference range of data is needed for identification of babies with abnormal impedance values. This was a cross-sectional observational study in 84 term and near-term healthy neonates less than 12 h postpartum. Whole body and cerebral MFBIA measurements were performed at the bedside in the post-natal ward. Gestational age, post-natal age, gender, birthweight, head circumference and foot length measures were recorded. Reference values for impedance at the characteristic frequency (Z(C)) and resistance at zero frequency (R-0) are reported for whole body and cerebral impedance. Significant correlations (p < 0.05) were observed between whole body impedance and birthweight, footlength and head circumference. Females had a significantly higher whole body R0 than males. Cerebral impedance did not correlate significantly with any of the demographic measures and therewere no gender differences observed for cerebral impedance. The reference range for whole body multi-frequency bio-impedance values in term and near-term infants within the first 12 h postpartum can be calculated from the footlength (FL) using the following equations: Z(C) = (942.9 - 4.818* FL) +/- 124.6 Omega; R-0 = (1042 - 4.520(*)FL) +/- 135.5 Omega. For cerebral impedance the reference range is 29.5-48.7 Omega for Z(C) and 33.7-58.0 Omega for R-0.

Bioimpedance spectrometry in the determination of body water compartments: Accuracy and clinical significance

Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) offers the potential for a simple, portable and relatively inexpensive technique for the in vivo measurement of total body water (TBW). The potential of BIA as a technique of body composition analysis is even greater when one considers that body water can be used as a surrogate measure of lean body mass. However, BIA has not found universal acceptance even with the introduction of multi-frequency BIA (MFBIA) which, potentially, may improve the predictive accuracy of the measurement. There are a number of reasons for this lack of acceptance, although perhaps the major reason is that no single algorithm has been developed which can be applied to all subject groups. This may be due, in part, to the commonly used wrist-to-ankle protocol which is not indicated by the basic theory of bioimpedance, where the body is considered as five interconnecting cylinders. Several workers have suggested the use of segmental BIA measurements to provide a protocol more in keeping with basic theory. However, there are other difficulties associated with the application of BIA, such as effects of hydration and ion status, posture and fluid distribution. A further putative advantage of MFBIA is the independent assessment not only of TBW but also of the extracellular fluid volume (ECW), hence heralding the possibility of,being able to assess the fluid distribution between these compartments. Results of studies in this area have been, to date, mixed. Whereas strong relationships of impedance values at low frequencies with ECW, and at high frequencies with TBW, have been reported, changes in impedance are not always well correlated with changes in the size of the fluid compartments (assessed by alternative and more direct means) in pathological conditions. Furthermore, the theoretical advantages of Cole-Cole modelling over selected frequency prediction have not always been apparent. This review will consider the principles, methodology and applications of BIA. The principles and methodology will,be considered in relation to the basic theory of BIA and difficulties experienced in its application. The relative merits of single and multiple frequency BIA will be addressed, with particular attention to the latter's role in the assessment of compartmental fluid volumes. (C) 1998 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Bioimpedance: Is it a predictor of true water volume?

Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) has been reported to be insensitive to changes in water volumes in individual subjects, This study was designed to investigate the effect on the intra- and extracellular resistances (Ri and Re) of the segments of subjects for whom body water was changed without significant change to the total amount of electrolyte in the respective fluids, Twelve healthy adult subjects were recruited. Ri and Re of the leg, trunk, and arm of the subjects were determined from BIA measures prior to commencement of two separate studies that involved intervention, resulting in a loss/gain of body water effected either bt a sauna followed by water intake (study 1) or by ingestion (study 2). Ri and Re of the segments were also determined at a number of times following these interventions, The mean change in body water, expressed as a percentage of body weight, was 0.9% in study 1 and 1.25% in study 2. For each study, the results for each subject were normalized for each limb to the initial (prestudy) value and then the normalized results for each segment were pooled for all subjects, ANOVA of these pooled results failed to demonstrate any significant differences between the normalized mean values of Ri or Re of the segments measured through the course of each study, The failure to detect a change in Ri or Re is explained in terms of the basic theory of BIA.

Optimizing electrode sites for segmental bioimpedance measurements

Recent advances in the application of bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) have indicated that a more accurate approach to the estimation of total body water is to consider the impedance of the various body segments rather than simply that of the whole body. The segmental approach necessitates defining and locating the physical demarcation between both the trunk and leg and the trunk and arm. Despite the use of anatomical markers, these points of demarcation are difficult to locate with precision between subjects. There are also technical problems associated with the regional dispersion of the current distribution from one segment (cylinder) to another of different cross-sectional area. The concept of equipotentials in line with the proximal aspects of the upper land lower) limbs along the contralateral limbs was investigated and, in particular, the utility of this concept in the measurement of segmental bioimpedance. The variation of measured segmental impedance using electrode sites along these equipotentials was less than 2.0% for all of the commonly used impedance parameters. This variation is approximately equal to that expected from biological variation over the measurement time. It is recommended that the electrode sites, for the measurement of segmental bioelectrical impedance in humans, described herein are adopted in accordance with the proposals of the NM Technology Assessment Conference Statement.

Regarding "Edema and leg volume: Methods of assessment" (Letters to the Editor)

I noted with interest the article by Drs Perrin and Guex, entitled &dquo;Edema and leg volume: Methods of assessment,&dquo; published in Angiology 51:9-12, 2000. This was a timely and comprehensive review of the various methods in clinical use for the assessment of peripheral edema, notably in the leg. I would like to take this opportunity to alert readers to a further technique useful for this purpose, namely, bioelectrical impedance analysis. An early reportl described its use for the measurement of edema in the leg, but other than its successful use for the assessment of edema in the arm following masteCtoMy,2,1 the potential of the method remains to be fully realized. This is unfortunate since the method directly and quantifiably measures edema.