TY - JOUR
T1 - Indirect Calorimetry in Mechanically Ventilated Patients
T2 - A Prospective, Randomized, Clinical Validation of 2 Devices Against a Gold Standard
AU - Allingstrup, Matilde Jo
AU - Kondrup, Jens
AU - Perner, Anders
AU - Christensen, Poul Lunau
AU - Jensen, Tom Hartvig
AU - Henneberg, Steen Winther
N1 - © 2016 American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition.
PY - 2017
Y1 - 2017
N2 - 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: We studied 30 patients undergoing general anesthesia and major gynecological surgery. We measured oxygen consumption ([Formula: see text]O2) 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: The QUARK RMR ICU Indirect Calorimeter compared better with the gold standard for values of [Formula: see text]O2 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.
AB - 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: We studied 30 patients undergoing general anesthesia and major gynecological surgery. We measured oxygen consumption ([Formula: see text]O2) 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: The QUARK RMR ICU Indirect Calorimeter compared better with the gold standard for values of [Formula: see text]O2 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.
U2 - 10.1177/0148607116662000
DO - 10.1177/0148607116662000
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 27488830
SN - 0148-6071
VL - 41
SP - 1272
EP - 1277
JO - Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition
JF - Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition
IS - 8
ER -