Generalized bioelectric impedance‐based equations underestimate body fluids in athletes

• Published in: Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports Vol. 31; no. 11; pp. 2123 - 2132
• Main Authors: Coratella, Giuseppe, Campa, Francesco, Matias, Catarina N., Toselli, Stefania, Koury, Josely C., Andreoli, Angela, Sardinha, Lui­s B., Silva, Analiza M.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Oxford Blackwell Publishing Ltd 01.11.2021; John Wiley and Sons Inc
• Subjects: Athletes; BIA; body composition; extracellular water; Original; predictive equations; resistance training; total body water; Women
• ISSN: 0905-7188; 1600-0838
• DOI: 10.1111/sms.14033

The current study aimed: (i) to external validate total body water (TBW) and extracellular water (ECW) derived from athlete and non‐athlete predictive equations using radioisotope dilution techniques as a reference criterion in male and female athletes; (ii) in a larger sample, to determine the agreement between specific and generalized equations when estimating body fluids in male and female athletes practicing different sports. A total of 1371 athletes (men: n = 921, age 23.9 ± 1.4 y; women: n = 450, age 27.3 ± 6.8 y) participated in this study. All athletes underwent bioelectrical impedance analyses, while TBW and ECW were assessed with dilution techniques in a subgroup of 185 participants (men: n = 132, age 21.7 ± 5.1 y; women: n = 53, age 20.3 ± 4.5 y). Two specific and eight generalized predictive equations were tested. Compared to the criterion methods, no mean bias was observed using the athlete‐specific equations for TBW and ECW (−0.32 to 0.05, p > 0.05) and the coefficient of determination ranged from R2 = 0.83 to 0.94. The majority of the generalized predictive equations underestimated TBW and ECW (p < 0.05); R2 ranged from 0.66 to 0.89. In the larger sample, all the generalized equations showed lower TBW and ECW values (ranging from −6.58 to −0.19, p < 0.05) than specific predictive equations; except for TBW in female power/velocity (one equation) athletes and team sport (two equations). The use of generalized BIA‐based equations leads to an underestimation of TBW, and ECW compared to athlete‐specific predictive equations. Additionally, the larger sample indicates that generalized equations overall provided lower TBW and ECW compared to the athlete‐specific equations.