English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  Skeletal muscle atrophy commonly occurs in critically ill patients, and decreased muscle mass is associated with worse clinical outcomes. Muscle mass can be assessed using various tools, including ultrasound and bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA). However, the effectiveness of muscle mass monitoring is unclear in critically ill patients. This study was conducted to compare ultrasound and BIA for the monitoring of muscle mass in critically ill patients.    Methods  We recruited adult patients who were expected to undergo mechanical ventilation for > 48 h and to remain in the intensive care unit (ICU) for > 5 days. On days 1, 3, 5, 7, and 10, muscle mass was evaluated using an ultrasound and two BIA devices (Bioscan: Malton International, England; Physion: Nippon Shooter, Japan). The influence of fluid balance was also evaluated between each measurement day.    Results  We analyzed 93 images in 21 patients. The age of the patients was 69 (interquartile range, IQR, 59–74) years, with 16 men and 5 women. The length of ICU stay was 11 days (IQR, 9–25 days). The muscle mass, monitored by ultrasound, decreased progressively by 9.2% (95% confidence interval (CI), 5.9–12.5%), 12.7% (95% CI, 9.3–16.1%), 18.2% (95% CI, 14.7–21.6%), and 21.8% (95% CI, 17.9–25.7%) on days 3, 5, 7, and 10 ( p  <  0.01), respectively, with no influence of fluid balance ( r  = 0.04,  p  = 0.74). The muscle mass did not decrease significantly in both the BIA devices (Bioscan,  p  = 0.14; Physion,  p  = 0.60), and an influence of fluid balance was observed (Bioscan,  r  = 0.37,  p  <  0.01; Physion,  r  = 0.51,  p  <  0.01). The muscle mass assessment at one point between ultrasound and BIA was moderately correlated (Bioscan,  r  = 0.51,  p  <  0.01; Physion,  r  = 0.37,  p  <  0.01), but the change of muscle mass in the same patient did not correlate between these two devices (Bioscan,  r  = − 0.05,  p  = 0.69; Physion,  r  = 0.23,  p  = 0.07).    Conclusions  Ultrasound is suitable for sequential monitoring of muscle atrophy in critically ill patients. Monitoring by BIA should be carefully interpreted owing to the influence of fluid change.    Trial registration   UMIN000031316 . Retrospectively registered on 15 February 2018.

Monitoring of muscle mass in critically ill patients: comparison of ultrasound and two bioelectrical impedance analysis devices