Background: Phase angle (PA) is interpreted as an indicator of cell membrane integrity and a prognostic indicator in some clinical situations. This study aims to evaluate PA as a prognostic marker in critically ill patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) and associate this marker with length of hospital stay, mortality, and clinical scores. Methods: A cohort study was conducted with 95 patients aged ≥18 years admitted to the ICU, who were assessed in terms of prognostic indexes (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II [APACHE II] and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment [SOFA]), clinical evolution (ICU discharge, death, and length of ICU stay), and PA. Results: Patients were predominantly male (63.1%) and had a mean age of 63.7 ± 14.6 years; length of stay of 4 days (range, 3–9 days); mortality of 15.8%; mean APACHE II and SOFA scores of 17.3 ± 8.2 and 6.1 ± 3.1 points, respectively; and mean PA of 4.91 ± 1.36°. An association was observed between females and PA <5.1° (P = .035), which was the cutoff point determined from the receiver operating characteristic curve. PA was correlated with APACHE II score (r = −0.241; P = .02). This correlation became moderate only when patients without sepsis were considered (r = −0.506; P < .001). Conclusions: PA seems to be a good prognostic marker for patients without sepsis. The weak correlation between PA and APACHE II score and the lack of association with other clinical outcomes are limitations for interpreting the prognostic value of PA in the entire study sample.
American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (A.S.P.E.N.) Board of Directors. Guidelines for the use of parenteral andenteral nutrition in adult and pediatric patients [erratum in JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2002;26:144]. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2002;26:1SA-138SA.
2.
OrtizCLEteybaCMontejoJCG. Recommendations for nutritional assessment and specialized nutritional support of critically ill patients. Nutr Hosp. 2005;20(12):1-3.
3.
PabloRMonserratJReyesE. Mortality in patients with septic shock correlates with anti-inflammatory but not proinflammatory immunomodulatory molecules. Intensive Care Med. 2011;26(2):125-132.
4.
RiversENguyenBHavstadS. Early goal-directed therapy in the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock. N Engl J Med. 2001;345(19):1368-1377.
5.
RiversEPMcIntyreLMorroDCKandisKR. Early and innovative interventions for severe sepsis and septic shock: taking advantage of a window of opportunity. CMAJ. 2005;173:1054-1065.
6.
CullenDJCivettaJMBriggsBAFerraraLC. Therapeutic intervention scoring system: a method for quantitative comparison of patient care. Crit Care Med. 1974;2(2):57-60.
7.
KnausWAZimmermanJEWagnerDPDraperEALaurenceDE. APACHE—Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation: a physiologically based classification system. Crit Care Med. 1981;9(8):591-597.
8.
Le GallJRLoriatPAlperovichA. A simplified acute physiology scores for ICU patients. Crit Care Med. 1984;12(11):975-977.
9.
TeresDLemeshowSAvruninJPastidesH. Validation of the mortality prediction model for ICU patients. Crit Care Med. 1987;15(3):208-213.
10.
MarshallJCCookDJChristouNVBernardGRSprungCLSibbaldWJ. Multiple organ dysfunction score: a reliable descriptor of a complex clinical outcome. Crit Care Med. 1995;23(10):1638-1652.
11.
Le GallJRKlarJLemeshowS. The logistic organ dysfunction system a new way to assess organ dysfunction in the intensive care unit. JAMA. 1996;276(10):802-810.
12.
VincentJLMorenoRTakalaJ, on behalf of the Working Group on Sepsis-Related Problems of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. The SOFA (Sepsis-Related Organ Failure Assessment) score to describe organ dysfunction/failure. Intensive Care Med. 1996;22(7):707-710.
13.
KnausWADraperEAWagnerDPZimmermanJE. APACHE II: a severity of disease classification system. Crit Care Med. 1985;13(10):818-829.
14.
KopteridesPLiberopoulosPIliasI. General prognostic scores in outcome prediction for cancer patients admitted to the intensive care unit. Am J Crit Care. 2011;20(1):56-66.
15.
ChenSJChaoTFChiangMC. Prediction of patient outcome from Acinetobacter baumannii bacteremia with Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II scores. Intern Med. 2011;50(8):871-877.
16.
JensenGLMirtalloJCompherC. Adult starvation and disease-related malnutrition: a proposal for etiology-based diagnosis in the clinical practice setting from the International Consensus Guideline Committee. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2010;34(2):156-159.
KyleUGGentonLPichardC. Low phase angle determined by bioelectrical impedance analysis is associated with malnutrition and nutritional risk at hospital admission. Clin Nutr. 2012;32(2):294-299.
19.
KyleUGSoundarEPGentonLPichardC. Can phase angle determined by bioelectrical impedance analysis assess nutritional risk? A comparison between healthy and hospitalized subjects. Clin Nutr. 2012;31(6):875-881.
20.
KyleUGBosaeusIDe LorenzoAD. Bioelectrical impedance analysis part I: review of principles and methods. Clin Nutr. 2004;23(5):1226-1243.
21.
NormamKStobäusNPirlichMBosy-WestphalA. Bioelectrical phase angle and impedance vector analysis: clinical relevance and applicability of impedance parameters. Clin Nutr. 2012;31(6):854-861.
22.
PaivaSIBorgesLRSilveiraDH. Standardized phase angle from bioelectrical impedance analysis as prognostic factor for survival in patients with cancer. Support Care Cancer. 2010;19(2):187-192.
23.
WirthRVolkertDRoslerASieberCCBauerJM. Bioelectric impedance phase angle is associated with hospital mortality of geriatric patients. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2010;51(3):290-294.
24.
GIBI Brazilian Group for Bioimpedance Study. Total body bioelectrical impedance measurement as a progressive outcome prediction and therapeutic index in the comparison between septic and non septic patients. A multicenter Brazilian study. Rev Metab Nutr. 1995;2:159-170.
25.
MirandaAMM. Ângulo de Fase Como Indicador de Prognóstico em Doentes Críticos com Sépsis [dissertation]. Porto: Faculdade de Ciências da Nutrição e Alimentação da Universidade do Porto, Mestrado em Nutrição Clínica; 2010. http://repositorioaberto.up.pt/handle/10216/62577. Accessed April 30, 2014.
26.
LuftVCBeghettoMGMelloE. Validação de um instrumento desenvolvido para medir a altura de pacientes adultos acamados. Revista HCPA. 2007;27(1):214.
27.
Barbosa-SilvaMCGBarrosAJDWangJHeymsfieldSBPiersonRN. Bioelectrical impedance analysis: population reference values for phase angle by age and sex. Am J Clin Nutr. 2005;82(1):49-52.
28.
OliveiraCMCKubruslyMMotaRSSilvaCABChoukrounGOliveiraVN. The phase angle and mass body cell as markers of nutritional status in hemodialysis patients. J Ren Nutr. 2010;20(5):314-320.
29.
VisserMvan VerooijLMWandersDC. The bioelectrical impedance phase angle as an indicator of undernutrition and adverse clinical outcome in cardiac surgical patient. Clin Nutr. 2012;31(6):981-986.
30.
AzevedoZMMooreDCde MatosFA. Bioelectrical impedance parameters in critically ill children: importance of reactance and resistance. Clin Nutr. 2013;32(5):824-829.
31.
MáttarJA. Application of total body bioimpedance to the critically ill patient. Brazilian Group for Bioimpedance Study. New Horiz. 1996;4(4):493-503.
32.
GuptaDLisCGDahlkLS. The relationship between bioelectrical impedance phase angle and subjective global assessment in advanced colorectal cancer. Am J Clin Nutr. 2004;80(6):1634-1638.
33.
GuptaDLammersfeldCAVashiGP. Bioelectrical impedance phase angle in clinical practice: implications for prognosis in stage IIIB and IV non-small cell lung cancer. BMC Cancer. 2009;9(37):1-6.
34.
BellizziVScalfiLTerraccianoV. Early changes in bioelectrical estimates of body composition in chronic kidney disease. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2006;17(5):1481-1487.
35.
SelbergOSelbergD. Norms and correlates of bioimpedance phase angle in healthy human subjects, hospitalized patients, and patients with liver cirrhosis. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2002;86(6):509-516.
36.
LlamesLBaldomeroVIglesiasMLRodotaLP. Values of the phase angle by bioelectrical impedance; nutritional status and prognostic value. Nutr Hosp. 2013;28(2):286-295.
