Lee Hak-Jae, Ahn Sung-Bak, Lee Jung Hyun, Kim Ji-Yeon, Yoo Sungyeon, Hong Suk-Kyung
Division of Acute Care Surgery, Department of Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
J Trauma Inj. 2023 Dec;36(4):337-342. doi: 10.20408/jti.2023.0051. Epub 2023 Nov 3.
This study aimed to compare the resting energy expenditure (REE) measured using indirect calorimetry with that estimated using predictive equations in severe trauma patients to determine the appropriate caloric requirements.
Patients admitted to the surgical intensive care unit between January 2020 and March 2023 were included in this study. Indirect calorimetry was used to measure the patients' REE values. These values were subsequently compared with those estimated using predictive equations: the weight-based equation (rule of thumb, 25 kcal/kg/day), Harris-Benedict, Ireton-Jones, and the Penn State 2003 equations.
A total of 27 severe trauma patients were included in this study, and 47 indirect calorimetric measurements were conducted. The weight-based equation (mean difference [MD], -28.96±303.58 kcal) and the Penn State 2003 equation (MD, -3.56±270.39 kcal) showed the closest results to REE measured by indirect calorimetry. However, the REE values estimated using the Harris-Benedict equation (MD, 156.64±276.54 kcal) and Ireton-Jones equation (MD, 250.87±332.54 kcal) displayed significant differences from those measured using indirect calorimetry. The concordance rate, which the predictive REE differs from the measured REE value within 10%, was up to 36.2%.
The REE values estimated using predictive equations exhibited substantial differences from those measured via indirect calorimetry. Therefore, it is necessary to measure the REE value through indirect calorimetry in severe trauma patients.
本研究旨在比较间接测热法测量的严重创伤患者静息能量消耗(REE)与预测方程估算的REE,以确定合适的热量需求。
纳入2020年1月至2023年3月入住外科重症监护病房的患者。采用间接测热法测量患者的REE值。随后将这些值与使用预测方程估算的值进行比较:基于体重的方程(经验法则,25千卡/千克/天)、哈里斯-本尼迪克特方程、艾尔顿-琼斯方程和宾夕法尼亚州立大学2003方程。
本研究共纳入27例严重创伤患者,进行了47次间接测热测量。基于体重的方程(平均差值[MD],-28.96±303.58千卡)和宾夕法尼亚州立大学2003方程(MD,-3.56±270.39千卡)显示的结果与间接测热法测量的REE最接近。然而,使用哈里斯-本尼迪克特方程(MD,156.64±276.54千卡)和艾尔顿-琼斯方程(MD,250.87±332.54千卡)估算的REE值与间接测热法测量的值存在显著差异。预测REE与测量REE值相差在10%以内的一致性率高达36.2%。
使用预测方程估算的REE值与通过间接测热法测量的值存在显著差异。因此,有必要对严重创伤患者通过间接测热法测量REE值。