Literature DB >> 34823549

Indirect calorimetry is the gold standard to assess REE in ICU patients: some limitations to consider.

Patrick M Honore1, Sebastien Redant2, Thierry Preseau3, Keitiane Kaefer2, Leonel Barreto Gutierrez2, Sami Anane2, Rachid Attou2, Andrea Gallerani2, David De Bels2.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Keywords:  CRRT; ECMO; Indirect calorimetry; REE

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34823549      PMCID: PMC8613971          DOI: 10.1186/s13054-021-03817-w

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Crit Care        ISSN: 1364-8535            Impact factor:   9.097


× No keyword cloud information.
In their metanalysis, Duan et al. address the role of indirect calorimetry (IC) in nutritional therapy in critically ill patients [1].Their findings support using IC rather than predictive equations as the gold standard to assess resting energy expenditure (REE) [1]. Previous studies have demonstrated the low accuracy of various REE predictive equations based on weight, height, age, gender, etc. [1]. Despite adjustments according to patient population and other modifying factors, REE discrepancies remain, (with variations up to 60%) [1]. IC allows for the measurement of VO2 and VCO2 through the ventilator and is the gold standard method for measuring REE in ICU, when ideal test conditions are implemented [1]. Both the European (ESPEN) and American (ASPEN) clinical practice guidelines recommend the use of IC to measure REE [2]. While supporting the use of IC in some settings, we wish to point out a number of limitations, particularly when patients are undergoing continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) [3] and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) [4, 5]. Estimating REE using IC in CRRT patients is less reliable for several reasons [3]. First, CO2 from bicarbonate-based dialysate can pass the filter and circulate in the form of dissolved CO2, bicarbonate, or carbamino compounds in red blood cells or plasma [3]. Though a quantity of CO2 may be removed in the effluent [3], a recent study showed that CO2 removal by CRRT led to a minimal change of 3% of measured EE [3] Second, patients may experience heat loss up to 1000 kcal during CRRT, resulting in increased metabolism and REE [3]. Third, dialysate compositions and citrate also contribute to caloric uptake [3]. For all these reasons, IC remains less reliable during CRRT and more research should shed light [3]. This is also true for IC performed in patients on ECMO, unless a mathematical correction is applied [3]. It is important that clinicians are aware not only of the indications for IC, but also its limitations. [3]. Other technical limitations of IC in ICU are discussed in a comprehensive review to which readers should refer [5]. We thank Professor Honore et al. for their interest in our meta-analysis [1]. Our study identified 8 RCTs and demonstrated that compared with predictive equations, indirect calorimetry (IC) guided energy delivery can significantly reduce short-term mortality in critically ill patients without affecting other important clinical outcomes such as hospital stay and mechanical ventilation. We fully agree with what Professor Honore and colleagues pointed out that clinicians need to understand not only indications of IC but its limitations [6]. Especially, Professor Honore highlighted that the use of IC might be unreliable in patients undergoing continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Indeed, although all included RCTs in our meta-analysis provided detailed IC indications, only two trials had excluded patients receiving CRRT, and no trials reported having excluded patients with ECMO [1]. Cardiopulmonary bypass can remove part of VCO2, which is considered the most important technical factor affecting the reliability of IC measurement [6]. However, this does not mean that patients who receive CRRT or ECMO are bystanders of the IC technique. In a monocentric, controlled, prospective, observational pilot study, Wollersheim, and colleagues proposed measuring the reliability of energy expenditure (EE) in extracorporeal lung support patients by calculating the O2 uptake and the CO2 elimination by the ECLS membrane, then using sum O2 uptake and CO2 elimination in the equation of Weir to calculate EE [7]. Although CRRT may be more complicated due to factors such as replacement fluid, Jonckheer et al. proposed a simple blood gas analysis based on the circuit to quantify CO2 that was removal during continuous venovenous hemofiltration. In their study, the CO2 content in ultrafiltration is available by blood gas analysis, and the CO2 content is converted from mmoL to mL with the help of the ideal gas law (pV = nRT). The authors performed IC in 4 different states (baseline, high dose, baseline with NaCl predilution and without CVVH) and found that CO2 removal by CVVH led to a change in REE of only 3%, which makes a correction factor unnecessary in this setting [8]. Although the authors believed that citrate might be the only factor that significantly changes metabolism out of all the potential metabolic influences during CVVH, they also admitted that this required further research [8].
  8 in total

1.  Measuring Energy Expenditure in extracorporeal lung support Patients (MEEP) - Protocol, feasibility and pilot trial.

Authors:  T Wollersheim; S Frank; M C Müller; V Skrypnikov; N M Carbon; P A Pickerodt; C Spies; K Mai; J Spranger; S Weber-Carstens
Journal:  Clin Nutr       Date:  2017-01-16       Impact factor: 7.324

2.  Energy expenditure of patients on ECMO: A prospective pilot study.

Authors:  Elisabeth De Waele; Joop Jonckheer; Joeri J Pen; Joy Demol; Kurt Staessens; Luc Puis; Mark La Meir; Patrick M Honoré; Manu L N G Malbrain; Herbert D Spapen
Journal:  Acta Anaesthesiol Scand       Date:  2018-11-06       Impact factor: 2.105

Review 3.  Best practices for determining resting energy expenditure in critically ill adults.

Authors:  Kirsten Martine Schlein; Sarah Peskoe Coulter
Journal:  Nutr Clin Pract       Date:  2013-12-12       Impact factor: 3.080

4.  ESPEN guideline on clinical nutrition in the intensive care unit.

Authors:  Pierre Singer; Annika Reintam Blaser; Mette M Berger; Waleed Alhazzani; Philip C Calder; Michael P Casaer; Michael Hiesmayr; Konstantin Mayer; Juan Carlos Montejo; Claude Pichard; Jean-Charles Preiser; Arthur R H van Zanten; Simon Oczkowski; Wojciech Szczeklik; Stephan C Bischoff
Journal:  Clin Nutr       Date:  2018-09-29       Impact factor: 7.324

5.  MECCIAS trial: Metabolic consequences of continuous veno-venous hemofiltration on indirect calorimetry.

Authors:  J Jonckheer; J Demol; K Lanckmans; M L N G Malbrain; H Spapen; E De Waele
Journal:  Clin Nutr       Date:  2020-04-21       Impact factor: 7.324

Review 6.  Nutritional assessment and support during continuous renal replacement therapy.

Authors:  Marlies Ostermann; Nuttha Lumlertgul; Ravindra Mehta
Journal:  Semin Dial       Date:  2021-04-28       Impact factor: 3.455

7.  Using indirect calorimetry in place of fixed energy prescription was feasible and energy targets were more closely met: do not forget an important limitation.

Authors:  Patrick M Honore; Leonel Barreto Gutierrez; Luc Kugener; Sebastien Redant; Rachid Attou; Andrea Gallerani; David De Bels
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2020-06-19       Impact factor: 9.097

8.  Energy delivery guided by indirect calorimetry in critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jing-Yi Duan; Wen-He Zheng; Hua Zhou; Yuan Xu; Hui-Bin Huang
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2021-02-27       Impact factor: 9.097

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.