PD553 - CELLULARITY ASSESSED BY BIOELECTRICAL IMPEDANCE VECTOR ANALYSIS (BIVA) AS PREDICTOR OF CLINICAL OUTCOME IN HOSPITALIZED PATIENTS WITH EXCESS BODY WEIGHT

PD553

CELLULARITY ASSESSED BY BIOELECTRICAL IMPEDANCE VECTOR ANALYSIS (BIVA) AS PREDICTOR OF CLINICAL OUTCOME IN HOSPITALIZED PATIENTS WITH EXCESS BODY WEIGHT

G. B. D. A. E. Silva¹, V. S. Chites^2,*, O. S. Franzosi³, J. A. D. M. Costa⁴, A. K. Ramos⁵, F. M. Silva⁶, J. C. de Almeida⁷

¹Multiprofessional Residency Program in Family Health, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Araranguá, ²Medical Sciences Graduate Program in Endocrinology, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, ³Nutrition and Dietetic Division, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, ⁴Nutrition Food and Health Graduate Program, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, ⁵Multiprofessional Health Residency Program in Oncology and Palliative Care, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, ⁶Nutrition Department, Nutrition Sciences Graduate Program, Health Sciences Graduate Program, Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre, ⁷Nutrition Department, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil

Rationale: BIVA is an emerging technique for assessing cellularity, including in individuals with obesity. This study evaluates whether BIVA-derived measures of cellularity predict clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients with excess body weight.

Methods: This prospective cohort study included adults and older adults with excess body weight (body mass index [BMI] ≥25 or ≥27 kg/m²) admitted to a university hospital in Brazil. Anthropometric measurements and bioelectrical impedance analysis were conducted. BIVA assessed cellularity based on normalized resistance (R/H) and reactance (Xc/H), plotted as vectors. Patients were categorized into four quadrants: Q1 (more cellularity/more hydration), Q2 (more cellularity/less hydration), Q3 (less cellularity/less hydration), and Q4 (less cellularity/more hydration). For the analysis, quadrants were grouped into more cellularity (Q1–Q2) and less cellularity (Q3–Q4). Clinical outcomes included length of stay, readmission, and 30-day mortality. Poisson regression models were adjusted for the age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index (aCCI).

Results: The study included 224 patients (mean age 57±14 years; 50% female; mean BMI 31.4 ± 4.1 kg/m²). The majority were surgical patients (80.8%), 25% had cancer, and the median aCCI was 3 (interquartile range 1–4). Most patients were classified in Q1 (60.7%), followed by Q2 (26.3%), Q4 (8.5%), and Q3 (4.5%). Patients in Q3 and Q4 exhibited approximately a twofold higher risk of 30-day readmission than those in Q1 and Q2 (risk ratio 2.09, 95% confidence interval 1.07-4.11). No significant associations were observed with other outcomes.

Conclusion: In hospitalized patients with excess body weight, less cellularity as identified by BIVA was associated with higher 30-day readmission risk, suggesting a poorer clinical prognosis.

Disclosure of Interest: None declared