Table 3 |
|||||||||||||
|
Results of anthropometric parameters of the nutritional evaluation in the four groups by univariate analysis. |
|||||||||||||
|
PARAMETERS |
ALCOHOL |
ALCOHOL+HCV |
HCV |
CONTROL |
P |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
N |
M |
DP |
N |
M |
DP |
N |
M |
DP |
N |
M |
DP |
||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
% IBM |
33 |
112.19 |
19.78 |
20 |
107.08 |
18.00 |
24 |
118.45 |
14.92 |
32 |
107.08 |
19.93 |
0.103 |
|
BMI (Kg/m2) |
33 |
25.75 |
4.30 |
20 |
24.70 |
3.98 |
24 |
26.49 |
3.28 |
32 |
24.00 |
4.33 |
0.112 |
|
TSF |
33 |
9.36 |
5.42 |
20 |
9.25 |
3.27 |
24 |
11.79 |
3.12 |
32 |
12.88 |
5.92 |
0.004 |
|
% TSF deplet. |
33 |
71.15 |
39.46 |
20 |
71.67 |
24.87 |
24 |
76.13 |
18.78 |
32 |
83.35 |
32.75 |
0.406 |
|
AMC |
33 |
26.36 |
2.76 |
20 |
26.22 |
2.64 |
24 |
26.07 |
3.17 |
32 |
24.93 |
2.93 |
0.195 |
|
% AMC deplet. |
33 |
-4.44 |
12.51 |
20 |
-3.28 |
12.91 |
24 |
-10.19 |
14.20 |
32 |
-4.33 |
10.79 |
0.217 |
|
AMA (mm2) |
33 |
6.458.89 |
3.105.85 |
20 |
6.235.15 |
2.933.54 |
24 |
7.254.22 |
3.372.00 |
32 |
5.794.70 |
2.536.05 |
0.343 |
|
AFA (mm2) |
33 |
-869.33 |
2.013.75 |
20 |
-712.69 |
1.857.64 |
24 |
-1.768.83 |
2.155.96 |
32 |
-784.14 |
1.442.71 |
0.170 |
|
CHI |
31 |
61.59 |
21.00 |
20 |
55.50 |
25.57 |
23 |
80.44 |
45.90 |
29 |
103.27 |
44.97 |
0.001 |
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
Where: % IBW = percentage of ideal body weight; BMI = body mass index; AMC = arm muscle circunference; % AMC deplet. = percentage of AMC depletion; TSF = triceps skinfold; % TSF deplet. = percentage of TSF depletion; AMA = arm muscle area; AFA = arm fat area; CHI = creatinine height index. Note: The ALC+HCV group presented the lowest TSF mean values, while the HCV group showed the highest values for CHI. In the multivariate analysis, only HCV group was nutritionally distinct from other cirrhotic group. |
|||||||||||||
|
Caly et al. Nutrition Journal 2003 2:10 doi:10.1186/1475-2891-2-10 |
|||||||||||||
