de Heer Geraldine, Burdelski Christoph, Ammon Constantin, Doliwa Anna Leonie, Hilbert Pascal, Kluge Stefan, Grensemann Jörn
Department of Intensive Care Medicine, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246 Hamburg, Germany.
Nutrients. 2025 Jun 20;17(13):2060. doi: 10.3390/nu17132060.
In critically ill obese patients, both overfeeding and underfeeding have been associated with worsened outcomes, especially in mechanically ventilated patients. While indirect calorimetry (IC) is recommended to measure energy expenditure (EE), it is not widely available, and predictive formulas often lack accuracy. This study aimed to assess EE in critically ill obese patients and compare it with septic, non-obese patients as controls using IC. This prospective observational study was conducted at the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany, with 116 intensive care beds. EE was measured using IC at three timepoints: day 2-3 (acute phase), day 5-7 (end of acute phase), and day 10-15 (post-acute phase). Different reference weights were used to calculate EE, including ideal body weight (IBW), adjusted body weight (ABW), and total body weight (TBW). Nitrogen balance was also assessed to evaluate protein requirements. We included 50 patients (28 obese and 22 controls). Equivalence between groups was found when ABW was calculated using 18% of excess body weight (EBW) at a mean of 24.4 kcal/kg/d for both groups. EE at the respective timepoints was 24.0 (95% confidence intervals: 22.1; 25.9), 24.2 (22.0; 26.5), 25.1 (21.4; 28.8) in obese and 24.9 (22.7; 27.0), 23.2 (20.7; 25.6), and 25.3 (21.8; 28.7) kcal/kg/d in control patients. Both groups exhibited a negative nitrogen balance, with the control group achieving nitrogen equilibrium by the post-acute phase. This study supports the ESPEN recommendation to base nutrition on ABW with 20% of EBW in obese critically ill patients when IC is unavailable. Further research is needed to determine optimal protein supplementation strategies and their timing to improve outcomes in this patient population.
在危重症肥胖患者中,过度喂养和喂养不足均与预后恶化相关,尤其是在机械通气患者中。虽然推荐使用间接测热法(IC)来测量能量消耗(EE),但其应用并不广泛,且预测公式往往缺乏准确性。本研究旨在评估危重症肥胖患者的能量消耗,并将其与作为对照的脓毒症非肥胖患者进行比较,采用间接测热法进行测量。这项前瞻性观察性研究在德国汉堡-埃彭多夫大学医学中心进行,该中心有116张重症监护病床。在三个时间点使用间接测热法测量能量消耗:第2 - 3天(急性期)、第5 - 7天(急性期结束)和第10 - 15天(急性期后)。使用不同的参考体重来计算能量消耗,包括理想体重(IBW)、调整体重(ABW)和总体重(TBW)。还评估了氮平衡以评估蛋白质需求。我们纳入了50例患者(28例肥胖患者和22例对照患者)。当两组均以平均24.4千卡/千克/天计算能量消耗时,发现使用18%的超重体重(EBW)来计算调整体重(ABW)时两组具有等效性。肥胖患者在各个时间点的能量消耗分别为24.0(95%置信区间:22.1;25.9)、24.2(22.0;26.5)、25.1(21.4;28.8)千卡/千克/天,对照患者分别为24.9(22.7;27.0)、23.2(20.7;25.6)和25.3(21.8;28.7)千卡/千克/天。两组均呈现负氮平衡,对照组在急性期后实现氮平衡。本研究支持欧洲临床营养和代谢学会(ESPEN)的建议,即在无法使用间接测热法时,肥胖危重症患者的营养应以含20%超重体重的调整体重为基础。需要进一步研究以确定最佳蛋白质补充策略及其时机,以改善该患者群体的预后。