Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition · 2016 · 20 citations · 20 references
MedicineAnesthesiologyPhysiologyExercise TestingHemodynamic ManagementPulmonary Function TestingCalorimetryEnergy ExpenditureEnergy Expenditure EstimationEnergy RequirementsMechanical VentilationRespiratory Monitoring InstrumentsBasal Energy ExpenditureClinical Data ValidationDirect CalorimetryDirect Oxygen Consumption MeasurementEnergy Expenditure After SurgeryEnergy Expenditure AnalysisEnergy Requirements In SurgeryVentilated Patient Calorimetry
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The 2 currently available indirect calorimeters, CCM Express Indirect Calorimeter (MedGraphics, St Paul, MN) and Quark RMR ICU Indirect Calorimeter (COSMED, Rome, Italy), have not been validated against a gold standard in mechanically ventilated patients. Our aim was to do so using a gold-standard, modified Tissot bell-spirometer method in mechanically ventilated patients who were hemodynamically, respiratory, and metabolically stable. METHODS: ) and resting energy expenditure (REE) in a randomized, sequential, crossover design with double determination of each device. RESULTS: Compared with the modified Tissot bell-spirometer, the CCM Express Indirect Calorimeter demonstrated a mean Δ-REE of +361 kcal/d, corresponding to a 31% overestimation of energy requirements. Bland-Altman analysis for REE showed a mean (SD) bias of 384 (124) with limits of agreement 142-627 kcal/d. QUARK RMR ICU demonstrated a mean Δ-REE of 81 kcal/d, corresponding to a 7% overestimation of energy requirements. Bland-Altman plot analysis showed a mean (SD) bias of 77 (167) with limits of agreement -249 to 404 kcal/d. CONCLUSIONS: and REE than did the CCM Express Indirect Calorimeter in mechanically ventilated patients who were circulatory and respiratory stable. Both indirect calorimeters had low precision.
20
Pierre Singer, Ronit Anbar, Jonathan Cohen et al. · Intensive Care Medicine · 2011 · 566 citations · Full text