ESPEN 2022 Late Breaking Abstracts

Topic: Nutritional assessment

Abstract Submission Identifier: ESPEN22-LB-2123

BIOIMPEDANCE VS DXA IN HUNTINGTON’S DISEASE (HD).

J. Rivadeneyra-Posadas*, 1, E. Cubo 2, L. Simón-Vicente 1, D. Castillo 3, J. Raya-González 4, C. Collazo 1, M. Soto 4, A. Rodríguez 5 and Domino-HD consortium

1Fundación Burgos por la Investigación de la Salud-Hospital Universitario de Burgos, 2Servicio de Neurología, Hospital Universitario de Burgos, Burgos, 3Facultad de Educación de Soria, Universidad de Valladolid, Valladolid, 4Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad Isabel I, Burgos, 5Facultad de Ciencias de la Actividad Física y del Deporte, Universidad de León, León, Spain

 

Rationale: HD is a hereditary and neurodegenerative disease characterized by movement disorders, cognitive, and neuropsychiatric symptoms; though, others symptoms as weight loss have been reported. It is a rare disease which prevalence is 10.6-13.7/100 0001. Weight and specially body composition changes, are reflected of quality life in HD patients. To measure it, the technique Dual energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) is considered gold standard2, but is expensive, need highly qualified personal, and is unavailable in clinical practice. On the other hand, technique 8-electrode multifrequency Bioimpedance Analysis (mfBIA) is low cost, portable and easy to use3. This study compares reliability of body composition estimated by mfBIA vs DXA in HD.

Methods: Cross-sectional and multicentre study (Universidad Isabel I, and Hospital Universitario de Burgos). Mild symptomatic and genetically confirmed HD adults were recruited. The DXA device was Lunar Prodigy Primo model (WI, USA), and enCORE v.17 software of GE Healthcare; and, mfBIA device was Body Composition Analyzer Seca mBCA 525 (Hamburg, Germany). Fat free mass was defined as lean mass plus the bone mineral content. Reliability was assessed by Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) estimates (95% confident intervals based on absolute-agreement, two-way random-effects model); and Bland-Altman plots to assess bias was performed.

Results: 7 men and 9 women (median age= 63 y, and 55 y respectively) were included. ICC values is showed in Table 1. Bland-Altman plots mfBIA slightly overestimate DXA in all indicators.

Table 1  ICC values (p < 0.0001).

 

Men (n=7)

Women (n=9)

Fat free mass (FFM)

0.86 (0.14; 0.97)

0.88 (0.55; 0.97)

Fat mass (FM)

0.97 (0.83; 0.99)

0.90 (0.65; 0.98)

Fat free mass index (FFMI)

0.88 (0.17; 0.98)

0.90 (0.61; 0.98)

Fat mass index (FMI)

0.97 (0.83; 0.99)

0.91 (0.68; 0.98)

Conclusion: Evaluate body composition is important for designing nutritional strategies and interventions in HD. Good to excellent reliability in FFM, FM, FFMI and FMI were shown by mfBIA when compared with DXA. Further longitudinal studies are required to confirm our finings.

References: 1. McColgan P, Tabrizi SJ. Huntington’s disease: a clinical review. Eur J Neurol. 2018 Jan;25(1):24–34.

2. Bazzocchi A, Ponti F, Albisinni U, Battista G, Guglielmi G. DXA: Technical aspects and application. Eur J Radiol. 2016 Aug;85(8):1481–92.

3. Kyle UG, Bosaeus I, De Lorenzo AD, Deurenberg P, Elia M, Manuel Gómez J, et al. Bioelectrical impedance analysis-part II: utilization in clinical practice. Clin Nutr Edinb Scotl. 2004 Dec;23(6):1430–53.

 

Disclosure of Interest: None Declared

 

Keywords: Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis, DXA Scan, Fat free mass, Fat free mass index, Fat mass, Fat mass index, Huntington’s disease