• Roland N Dickerson, Kathryn J Boschert, Kenneth A Kudsk, and Rex O Brown.
• Department of Clinical Pharmacy, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, Tennessee 38163, USA. rdickerson@utmem.edu
• Nutrition. 2002 Mar 1; 18 (3): 241-6.

ObjectiveWe respectively compared the nutritional and clinical efficacies of eucaloric and hypocaloric enteral feedings in 40 critically ill, obese patients admitted to the trauma or surgical intensive care unit.MethodsAdult patients, 18 to 69 years old, with weights greater than 125% of ideal body weight, normal renal and hepatic functions, and who received at least 7 d of enteral tube feeding were studied. Patients were stratified according to feeding group: eucaloric feeding (>or=20 kcal/kg of adjusted weight per day; n = 12) or hypocaloric feeding (<20 kcal/kg of adjusted weight per day; n = 28). The goal protein intake for both groups was approximately 2 g/kg of ideal body weight per day. Clinical events and nutrition data were recorded for 4 wk.ResultsPatients were similar according to sex, age, weight, body mass index, Second Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation score, Trauma score, and Injury Severity Score. The hypocaloric feeding group received significantly fewer calories than the eucaloric group (PConclusionThese data suggest that hypocaloric enteral nutrition support is as least as effective as eucaloric feeding in critically ill, obese patients.

28 keywords...

hide…