不同方法检测有创机械通气患者静息能量消耗及其意义  

The significance of different predictive equations for resting energy expenditure in patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation

作　　者：贾星宇 华晨[1] 刘励军[1] 朱建军[1] Jia Xingyu;Hua Chen;Liu Lijun;Zhu Jianjun(Department of Intensive Care Unit,the Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University,Suzhou 215004,China)

机构地区：[1]苏州大学附属第二医院重症医学科,215004

出　　处：《中华内科杂志》2018年第8期596-598,共3页Chinese Journal of Internal Medicine

摘　　要：探讨不同方法检测有创机械通气患者静息能量消耗及其意义。入选ICU行有创机械通气患者60例，采用间接测热法（IC）、Harris-Benedict公式、Penn State公式、Swinamer公式计算患者1周内每日静息能量消耗。结果显示，机械通气7 d内，每日IC所测静息能量消耗间差异均无统计学意义（P值均〉0.05）；IC所测的静息能量消耗高于Harris-Benedict公式计算值（P值均〈0.01）；IC所测的静息能量消耗与Penn State公式计算值比较，第1、2、5天差异无统计学意义（P值均〉0.05），两者一致性差；IC所测的静息能量消耗与Swinamer公式计算值比较差异均无统计学意义（P值均〉0.05），两者一致性较高。有创机械通气患者的静息能量消耗在1周内变化并不显著，Swinamer公式准确性较其他公式高。To calculate resting energy expenditure （REE） in patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation and compare different predictive equations with indirect calorimetry（IC）.A total of 60 patients in intensive care unit（ICU） were enrolled. Measure calculating daily REE in the first week included IC, Harris-Benedict formula, Penn State formula and Swinamer formula. Daily REE did not exhibit significant difference in the first week of mechanical ventilation by IC （all P〉0.05）.All patients＇ REE values by IC were higher than those by Harris-Benedict formula （all P〈0.01）. By Penn State formula, REE in day l, 2, and 5 were comparable （all P〉0.05） with those by IC, whereas the consistency between the two methods was poor. Similarly, daily REE by Swinamer formula calculation in the first week did not show significant difference （all P〉0.05）, with acceptable consistency as IC. Resting energy expenditure in patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation dose not significantly change during the first week. Swinamer formula is more accurate than other equations when IC is considered as the standard method.

关 键 词：能量代谢 间接测热法 通气机 机械 

分 类 号：R459.3[医药卫生—治疗学]