SUN-PP188: How Does Multi-Frequency Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis Compare to Gold Standard Computed Tomography Assessment of Body Composition in a Cancer Population?

Nutritional assessment 1 and hospital readmission. The present study evaluates the ability of different nutrition indices to predict postoperative complications and 90 day readmission following abdominal surgery. Methods: During this prospective cohort study 3 nutritional screening tools (Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool-MUST, Nutritional risk screening-NRS 2002 and Nutrition Risk IndexNRI) were applied and calf circumference was measured, (within 72 h of patients’ admission to the ward by a trained dietician). Several nutritional variables and clinical outcomes were recorded during the hospital stay. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the independent effect of nutrition indices on postoperative complications and 90-day hospital readmission. Results: Consecutively enrolled in the study were 214 patients (93 men, 43.5%). Mean patients’ age was 62.1±13.2 y. The multiple logistic regression analysis of nutrition indices and postoperative complications after controlling for age, sex, and diagnosis revealed that NRI (OR: 1.29; 95% CI: 1.17, 1.41), NRS 2002 (OR: 1.12; 95% CI: 1.06, 1.18) and calf circumference (OR: 1.12; 95% CI: 1.06, 1.18) were independent predictors of postoperative complications. NRI (OR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.89, 0.97) but not NRS 2002, MUST or calf circumference was found to be an independent predictor of 90-d readmission. Conclusion: NRI was the best predictor of hospital 90-d readmission in comparison to the other parameters measured in our study. These results stress out the importance of combining the application of nutritional risk screening with clinical parameters in order to get an accurate prediction of postoperative complications and hospital readmission in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. Disclosure of Interest: None declared

SUN-PP188 HOW DOES MULTI-FREQUENCY BIOELECTRICAL IMPEDANCE ANALYSIS COMPARE TO GOLD STANDARD COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY ASSESSMENT OF BODY COMPOSITION IN A CANCER POPULATION? E. Ni Bhuachalla1 , S. Cushen1 , L. Daly1 , L. Power1 , F. Dwyer1 , A.M. Ryan1 . 1 Dept. Food and Nutritional Sciences, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland Rationale: Computed Tomography (CT) scans are readily available in cancer populations due to their integral role in cancer staging. Multi-frequency bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) is a cheap and portable method of BC analysis, which has not been compared to CT assessment of BC, a gold standard method of BC analysis, to date. This study aimed to compare BIA to BC by CT in a cohort of oesophageal cancer patients (pts) scheduled for surgery. Methods: All pts had a BIA measurement performed within 30 days of their CT (performed as part of routine medical care). BIA results were compared to CT assessment of BC. BC was assessed at the 3rd lumbar vertebra using OsiriX software. Cut off points for sarcopenia were set at 55.4 cm2 /m2 for men and 38.9 cm2 /m2 for women. Estimates of whole body fat free mass (FFM) were calculated using regression equations. Results: In total 44 pts scheduled for oesophagectomy (34 males, 10 females) participated. The majority (80%) had oesophageal adenocarcinoma and 73% received neo-adjuvant chemo radiotherapy. The mean weight was 84 kg, with a mean

S93 BMI of 29 kg/m2 . In total 16% had a normal BMI, 57% were overweight and 27% obese. CT assessment of BC found 50% (n = 22) of pts to be sarcopenic. When BC by BIA was compared to CT it was found that BIA significantly underestimated fat mass (FM) and FFM, see Table 1. Table 1. Comparison of BC by CT scan and BIA

Mean FM (kg) FM (%) Mean FFM (kg) FFM (%)

CT

BIA

P

28.6 34 52.6 62.8

25.1 30 47.4 57.5

0.000 0.002 0.000 0.000

Conclusion: BIA significantly underestimates FM and FFM compared to CT assessment of BC. Although CT is the gold standard, exposure to radiation means its use in BC assessment is limited to existing scans. BIA is accessible and therefore has a role in clinical practice, however these findings need to be taken into account in the application and interpretation of BIA. Disclosure of Interest: None declared

SUN-PP189 ASSOCIATION OF BLOOD ZINC LEVELS AND ZINC TRANSPORTER EXPRESSION WITH AGE AND SYSTEMIC INFLAMMATORY RESPONSE SYNDROME (SIRS) erez de la E. Planells1 , D. Florea1 , J. Molina1 , A. P´ Cruz2 , L. Herrera-Quintanar1 , B. Quintero3 , I. Lengyel4 , C. Hogstrand5 . 1 Physiology, University of Granada, Spain; 2 Unit of Nutrition, Virgen de las Nieves Hospital, 3 Physical Chemistry, University of Granada, Spain, Granada, Spain; 4 Ocular Biology, UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, 5 Diabetes & Nutritional Sciences Division, King’s College London, London, United Kingdom Rationale: Zinc levels in plasma alter with ageing and disease. We compared zinc concentrations in plasma and red blood cells from people of different age groups and in patients with SIRS. Methods: Zinc concentrations were compared to mRNA expression in blood of all human zinc transporters and on data on zinc intake and a battery of clinical variables. A group of young athletes (average 26 y), a group of middle-aged individuals (average 51 y), and a group of critically ill patients (average 56 y) were recruited. Zinc contents in plasma and blood cells were lower in the 51 y controls than in the 26 y group. Results: Plasma but not erythrocyte zinc was further reduced in SIRS patients. Transcripts for zinc transporters in blood cells were generally highest in the 51 y control group dropping precipitously in patients with SIRS. Only ZIP1 mRNA increased in SIRS patients compared to the 51 y old controls. Zinc transporters and zinc levels in blood correlated with a number of clinical variables Conclusion: It is recommended that monitoring the status of zinc from erythrocyte levels, where zinc is stored and is more stable and representative, taking into account that plasma fluctuate more easily and even when the critical ill patients has a critical situation were zinc it is highly correlated. Disclosure of Interest: None declared