Suppr超能文献

持续非卧床腹膜透析终末期肾病患者间接测热法与静息能量消耗预测方程之间的一致性

Agreements between indirect calorimetry and prediction equations of resting energy expenditure in end-stage renal disease patients on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis.

作者信息

Lee Seoung Woo, Kim Hyo Jung, Kwon Hei Kyung, Son Sook Mee, Song Joon Ho, Kim Moon-Jae

机构信息

Division of Nephrology and Hyperfension, Department of Internal Medicine, Kidney Desease Research Group, Inha University College of Medicine, 7-206 3-ga, Sinhung-dong, Jung-gu, Incheon 400-711, Korea.

出版信息

Yonsei Med J. 2008 Apr 30;49(2):255-64. doi: 10.3349/ymj.2008.49.2.255.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Equations are frequently used to estimate resting energy expenditure (REE) in a clinical setting. However, few studies have examined their accuracy in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

To investigate agreement between indirect calorimetry and several REE estimating equations in 38 ESRD patients on peritoneal dialysis, we performed indirect calorimetry and compared the results with REEs estimated using 5 equations [Harris-Benedict (HBE), Mifflin, WHO, Schofield, and Cunningham].

RESULTS

Measured REE was 1393.2+/-238.7 kcal/day. There were no significant differences between measured and estimated REEs except Mifflin (1264.9+/-224.8 kcal/day). Root mean square errors were smallest for HBE, followed by Schofield, Cunningham, and WHO, and largest for Mifflin (171.3, 171.9, 174.6, 175.3, and 224.6, respectively). In Bland-Altman plot, correlation coefficients between mean values and differences were significant for HBE (r=0.412, p=0.012) and tended to be significant for Cunningham (r=0.283, p=0.086). In DM patients and patients with overhydration, HBE showed significant underestimation when REE increased.

CONCLUSION

In ESRD patients on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD), REE-estimating equations have no significant differences from indirect calorimetry, except Mifflin. However, HBE showed greater bias than others when REE was high.

摘要

目的

在临床环境中,方程经常被用于估计静息能量消耗(REE)。然而,很少有研究检验它们在终末期肾病(ESRD)患者中的准确性。

患者与方法

为了研究38例接受腹膜透析的ESRD患者间接测热法与几种REE估计方程之间的一致性,我们进行了间接测热法,并将结果与使用5种方程[哈里斯-本尼迪克特(HBE)、米夫林、世界卫生组织(WHO)、斯科菲尔德和坎宁安]估计的REE进行比较。

结果

测得的REE为1393.2±238.7千卡/天。除米夫林方程(1264.9±224.8千卡/天)外,测得的REE与估计的REE之间无显著差异。HBE方程的均方根误差最小,其次是斯科菲尔德、坎宁安和WHO方程,米夫林方程的均方根误差最大(分别为171.3、171.9、174.6、175.3和224.6)。在布兰德-奥特曼图中,HBE方程平均值与差值之间的相关系数显著(r = 0.412,p = 0.012),坎宁安方程的相关系数趋于显著(r = 0.283,p = 0.086)。在糖尿病患者和水钠潴留患者中,当REE增加时,HBE方程显示出显著低估。

结论

在接受持续性非卧床腹膜透析(CAPD)的ESRD患者中,除米夫林方程外,REE估计方程与间接测热法无显著差异。然而,当REE较高时,HBE方程比其他方程表现出更大的偏差。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5547/2615311/5ac4b0dc6f16/ymj-49-255-g001.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验