
pmid: 32069138
Background: Bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) measurements of breast lymphedema poses practical and technical challenges, in particular the determination of the resistance at zero frequency (R0), the index of change in breast lymph content. Conventionally, R0 is calculated from data analysis by using a procedure eponymously known as Cole modeling, a method that is error-prone in the breast. The aim of this study was to evaluate polynomial curve fitting as an alternative analytic procedure. Methods and Results: A sub-set of breast BIS measurements from 41 women with self-ascribed breast lymphedema obtained as part of the Breast Edema Exercise Trial (BEET) were analyzed by both the Cole and polynomial methods. BIS files for all subjects were able to be analyzed by using the polynomial method but only 73% and 88% of data files were analyzed for the affected and unaffected breasts, respectively, by using the Cole method. For those files that were capable of being analyzed by both methods, R0 values were highly correlated (r = 0.99) but with a small (1.6%) although statistically significant difference (paired t test, p < 0.001) between methods. Conclusions: Analysis of BIS data using polynomial curve fitting is an acceptable and robust alternative to Cole modeling, particularly where impedance measurements are susceptible to technical sources of error of measurement. The small magnitude of difference observed between methods is unlikely to lead to misclassification of patients with lymphedema based on BIS assessment.
Water, Breast Neoplasms, Early-Diagnosis, Frequency, 310, 2705 Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine, Dielectric Spectroscopy, Symptoms, Electric Impedance, Humans, Female, Lymphedema, Total-Body
Water, Breast Neoplasms, Early-Diagnosis, Frequency, 310, 2705 Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine, Dielectric Spectroscopy, Symptoms, Electric Impedance, Humans, Female, Lymphedema, Total-Body
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 6 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
