Cunningham J J
Surgical Service, Shriners Burns Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 1990 Nov-Dec;14(6):649-56. doi: 10.1177/0148607190014006649.
In summary, a remarkably close agreement exists for the mean MEE measured in 28 studies of severe burn trauma. This is especially surprising given the variability in sample sizes, measurement techniques, study designs, and DPBs studied. The mean MEE calculated from the data published in these reports is listed in the final column of Table I. For more than 450 cases, an unweighted MEE is 2750 +/- 85 kcal/day. For those studies prior to 1980, the mean MEE exceeds 3000 kcal/day in eight of 14 reports vs only two of 14 published after 1980. Even so, the mean MEE for the pre-1980 reports differs by only 200 kcal/day (2960 +/- 120, n = 14). The accepted notion that the degree of elevation in MEE is in proportion to the % BSAB up to about 60% BSAB is useful in a general sense but must be applied with caution. The recent studies, which include proportionately more burns exceeding 80% BSAB, suggest an elevation in MEE in these cases. Nevertheless, a physiologic plateau apparently exists at or slightly below 2 x normal RMR at the peak of MEE. The magnitude of the MEE response results from an undefined interaction among several factors of which some have been examined while others such as inflammatory mediators are only beginning to receive study. The contributions to reduction in MEE from interventions to control cardiac output and peripheral cooling, core temperature, evaporative water (heat) loss, and substrate cycling have been reviewed. The importance of indirect calorimetry in patient care is highlighted by the large variability in similarly injured individuals and in the unexplained component of regression analyses.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
总之,在28项严重烧伤创伤研究中测得的平均静息能量消耗(MEE)存在非常紧密的一致性。考虑到样本量、测量技术、研究设计以及所研究的烧伤百分比(DPBs)的可变性,这尤其令人惊讶。根据这些报告中公布的数据计算出的平均MEE列于表I的最后一列。对于450多例病例,未加权的MEE为2750±85千卡/天。对于1980年之前的那些研究,14份报告中有8份的平均MEE超过3000千卡/天,而1980年之后发表的14份报告中只有2份如此。即便如此,1980年之前报告的平均MEE仅相差200千卡/天(2960±120,n = 14)。MEE升高程度与高达约60%体表面积烧伤(BSAB)百分比成正比这一公认概念在一般意义上是有用的,但必须谨慎应用。最近的研究包括比例上更多超过80%BSAB的烧伤病例,表明这些病例中MEE有所升高。然而,在MEE峰值时,生理平台显然存在于正常静息代谢率(RMR)的2倍或略低于该值时。MEE反应的幅度源于几个因素之间未明确的相互作用,其中一些因素已得到研究,而其他因素如炎症介质才刚刚开始受到研究。已经综述了控制心输出量、外周冷却、核心温度、蒸发水(热)损失和底物循环等干预措施对MEE降低的贡献。间接测热法在患者护理中的重要性因相似受伤个体的巨大变异性以及回归分析中无法解释的成分而凸显。(摘要截断于250字)