• Samuel N Cheuvront, Robert W Kenefick, Nisha Charkoudian, Katherine M Mitchell, Adam J Luippold, Karleigh E Bradbury, and Sadasivan Vidyasagar.
• U.S. Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine, Natick, MA, USA.
• JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2018 Sep 1; 42 (7): 1185-1193.

BackgroundThe efficacy of different commercial beverage compositions for meeting oral rehydration therapy (ORT) goals in the treatment of acute dehydration in healthy humans has not been systematically tested. The objective of the study was to compare fluid retention, plasma volume (PV), and interstitial fluid (ISF) volume restoration when using 1 popular glucose-based and 1 novel amino acid-based (AA) commercial ORT beverage following experimental hypertonic or isotonic dehydration.MethodsTwenty-six healthy adults (21 males, 5 females) underwent either a controlled bout of hypertonic (n = 13) or isotonic (n = 13) dehydration (3%-4% body mass) via eccrine or renal body water and electrolyte losses induced using exercise-heat stress (EHS) or Lasix administration (LAS), respectively. Rehydration was achieved over 90 minutes by matching fluid intake to water losses (1:1) using a sports drink (SP) or AA commercial ORT beverage. Fluid retention (water and electrolytes), PV, and ISF volume changes were tracked for 180 minutes.ResultsAA produced significantly (P <0.05) greater fluid retention (75% vs 57%), ISF volume restoration, and tended (P = 0.06) to produce greater PV restoration in trial EHS. In trial LAS, neither beverage exceeded 65% retention, but AA replaced electrolytes and preserved ISF volume better than SP (P <0.05).ConclusionThe results of this study demonstrate superior rehydration when using AA compared with SP for both hypertonic and isotonic dehydration.© 2018 American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition.

41 keywords...

hide…