P474 - IN SEARCH OF THE OPTIMAL METHOD FOR ASSESSING NUTRITIONAL STATUS IN PATIENTS WITH CHRONIC INTESTINAL FAILURE: PHASE ANGLE, SKELETAL MUSCLE MASS, OR PROGNOSTIC NUTRITIONAL INDEX?

P474

IN SEARCH OF THE OPTIMAL METHOD FOR ASSESSING NUTRITIONAL STATUS IN PATIENTS WITH CHRONIC INTESTINAL FAILURE: PHASE ANGLE, SKELETAL MUSCLE MASS, OR PROGNOSTIC NUTRITIONAL INDEX?

K. Goral^1,2,*, P. Matras^1,3

¹Department of Clinical Nutrition, Medical University of Lublin, ²Department of Dietetics, ³Clinical Nutrition Unit, University Clinical Hospital No. 4, Lublin, Poland

Rationale: Chronic intestinal failure (CIF) is defined as a reduction of intestinal function below the minimum necessary for the absorption of macronutrients and/or water and electrolytes. A key component of nutritional therapy involves the assessment of nutritional status. The aim of this study was to evaluate the nutritional status of CIF patients using phase angle (PA), skeletal muscle mass index (SMI), and prognostic nutritional index (PNI), and to explore the applicability of these indicators in the monitoring of nutritional status in this CIF patients.

Methods: This cross-sectional study included 56 patients diagnosed with CIF. Nutritional status was assessed based on laboratory parameters, including serum albumin, total protein concentration, and total lymphocyte count. The prognostic nutritional index (PNI) was calculated accordingly. Body composition was evaluated using the Tanita MC-780 S MA body composition analyzer (Tanita, Tokyo), with focus on phase angle (PA) and skeletal muscle mass index (SMI). The results were compared across three subgroups of patients: those receiving home parenteral nutrition for less than 1 year (n = 24), for 1–3 years (n = 14), and for more than 3 years (n = 18).

Results: Normal nutritional status based on PA was observed in 17.9% of patients, based on SMI in 98.2%, and based on PNI in 71.4%. Statistically significant differences were identified in PNI values between patients on HPN for less than one year and those on HPN for more than three years (p < 0.001). No such differences were observed in PA or SMMI values across the subgroups.

Conclusion: PNI value may depend on the duration of parenteral nutrition. These findings underscore the necessity for further multicenter studies to determine the utility of PA, SMI, and PNI in evaluating the nutritional status of patients with CIF.

Disclosure of Interest: None declared