Nutrients, Vol. 18, Pages 767: Variability in BIA-Derived Muscle Mass Estimates: Device Choice Impacts Diagnostic Classification
Nutrients doi: 10.3390/nu18050767
Authors:
Leonie Cordelia Burgard
Siri Goldschmidt
Verena Alexia Ohse
Hans Joachim Herrmann
Dejan Reljic
Markus Friedrich Neurath
Yurdagül Zopf
Background/Objectives: Although discrepancies between bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) devices are well documented, their clinical relevance in vulnerable populations remains unclear. This study aims to assess the impact of device choice on muscle mass classification criteria in patients with cancer or obesity and to identify modifiers of device variability. Methods: BIA data from 224 adults (85 with cancer, 139 with obesity) measured with two segmental multi-frequency devices (seca mBCA 515 and InBody 970) were analyzed. Device differences were assessed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and agreement analyses. Differences in classification of body composition cut-offs cited in the GLIM criteria for malnutrition and the ESPEN and EASO criteria for sarcopenic obesity were evaluated using McNemar’s test. The impact of disease type, sex, and age on device differences was examined through multivariable models. Results: Significant device differences were found for all parameters (all p ≤ 0.0050). Discrepancies were largest for skeletal muscle mass (kg and %), with effect sizes r > 0.8 and poor agreement (Lin’s CCC < 0.90). A significant impact of device choice on muscle mass classification was observed for both cancer and obesity patients (p < 0.001), with seca classifying more patients as having low fat-free mass (50% vs. 20%) and as having a body composition consistent with sarcopenic obesity (90% vs. 50%) than InBody. Discrepancies were more pronounced in cancer patients and females. Conclusions: Muscle mass assessment by BIA is highly dependent on device choice, potentially leading to clinically relevant discrepancies in classification when rigid cut-offs are applied. An individualized interpretation of BIA data and further validation of prediction equations in disease-specific subpopulations is warranted.
Background/Objectives: Although discrepancies between bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) devices are well documented, their clinical relevance in vulnerable populations remains unclear. This study aims to assess the impact of device choice on muscle mass classification criteria in patients with cancer or obesity and to identify modifiers of device variability. Methods: BIA data from 224 adults (85 with cancer, 139 with obesity) measured with two segmental multi-frequency devices (seca mBCA 515 and InBody 970) were analyzed. Device differences were assessed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and agreement analyses. Differences in classification of body composition cut-offs cited in the GLIM criteria for malnutrition and the ESPEN and EASO criteria for sarcopenic obesity were evaluated using McNemar’s test. The impact of disease type, sex, and age on device differences was examined through multivariable models. Results: Significant device differences were found for all parameters (all p ≤ 0.0050). Discrepancies were largest for skeletal muscle mass (kg and %), with effect sizes r > 0.8 and poor agreement (Lin’s CCC < 0.90). A significant impact of device choice on muscle mass classification was observed for both cancer and obesity patients (p < 0.001), with seca classifying more patients as having low fat-free mass (50% vs. 20%) and as having a body composition consistent with sarcopenic obesity (90% vs. 50%) than InBody. Discrepancies were more pronounced in cancer patients and females. Conclusions: Muscle mass assessment by BIA is highly dependent on device choice, potentially leading to clinically relevant discrepancies in classification when rigid cut-offs are applied. An individualized interpretation of BIA data and further validation of prediction equations in disease-specific subpopulations is warranted. Read More