title: Comparison of bioimpedance and clinical methods for dry weight prediction in maintenance hemodialysis patients.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) is a promising technique to evaluate dry weight. We compared the dry weight calculated by the three BIA equations Carlo Basile (CB) , Yanna Dou (YD) and the body composition spectroscopy (BCS) with clinical evaluation in maintenance hemodialysis (MHD) patients.
  
  
  METHODS
  The dry weight of enrolled MHD patients (DWClin) was evaluated under strict clinical surveillance. The whole-body resistances at 50 kHz, intra- and extracellular resistances were measured to calculate the dry weight (DWCB, DWYD and DWBCS) using each of the three equations.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Neither DWCB nor DWBCS were statistically different compared to DWClin (DWCB 63.2 ± 17.2 vs. 63.1 ± 16.1 kg; DWBCS 62.8 ± 16.8 vs. 63.1 ± 16.1 kg, p > 0.05). DWYD was significantly lower than DWClin (DWYD 62.0 ± 16.1 vs. 63.1 ± 16.1 kg, p < 0.05). The bias between DWCB and DWClin was the smallest among these three methods (ΔDWCB -0.1 ± 1.4 kg; ΔDWYD 1.1 ± 2.9 kg; ΔDWBCS 0.3 ± 1.8 kg).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The CB equations have better consistency with clinical dry weight in MHD patients.
authors.affiliation: Institute of Nephrology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, PR China.
authors.forename: Yusu
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Jian
authors.forename: Xiang
authors.initials: X
authors.lastname: Li
authors.forename: Xuyang
authors.initials: X
authors.lastname: Cheng
authors.forename: Yuqing
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Chen
authors.forename: Li
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Liu
authors.forename: Zhenhui
authors.initials: Z
authors.lastname: Tao
authors.forename: Li
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Zuo
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D017097:Electric Impedance; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D006435:Renal Dialysis / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods*