Loading

Acute Kidney Injury does not Alter Energy Metabolism of Septic Patients in Intensive Care Unit

Short Communication | Open Access | Volume 1 | Issue 2

  • 1. University São Paulo State-UNESP, Distrito de Rubiao Junior, Brazil
+ Show More - Show Less
Corresponding Authors
Ana Cláudia Soncini Sanches, Distrito de Rubiao Junior, University São Paulo State-UNESP, without number Botucatu, São Paulo, Brazil,
Abstract

Background: The determination of resting energy expenditure (REE) in critically ill patients is essential to prevent complications such as hypo and hyper alimentation.

Objectives: This study aims to describe the REE in septic patients with and without acute kidney injury (AKI) and compare the REE estimated by the Harris-Benedict equation (HB) with the REE measured by indirect calorimetry (IC).

Methods: Prospective and observational study was performed. Septic patients older than 18 years, undergoing mechanical ventilation, with or without AKI defined by KDIGO criteria, and admitted to the Intensive Care Unit of University Hospital from Brazil were included. The REE was estimated by HB equation and measured by the IC within 72 hours after the diagnosis of sepsis and seven days after the initial measure.

Results: Sixty-eight patients were evaluated, age was 62.49 ± 16.6 years, 64.7% were male, 63.2% had AKI, and SOFA was 9.81 ± 2.35. The measured REE was 1857.53 ± 685.32 kcal, while the estimated REE was 1514.87 ± 356.72 kcal, with adequacy of 123.49 ± 43%. Septic patients without AKI (n = 25) and with AKI (n = 43) had measured REE statistically higher than the estimated one (1855.0 kcal (1631.75-2052.75) vs. 1551.0 (1349.0 -1719.25), p=0.007 and 1868.0 kcal (1219.5-2364.75) vs. 1388.0 kcal (1254.0-1665.5), p=0.026, respectively). There was no significant difference between the two groups (with and without AKI) in measured and estimated REE (p = 0.63 and 0.64, respectively). There was no significant difference in evolutional REE (1845.95 ± 658.27 kcal vs. 1809.54 ± 755.08 kcal, p = 0.86).

Conclusion: The REE measured by IC was significantly higher than that estimated by the equation HB in both septic with and without AKI. There was no significant difference between the septic patients with and without AKI in REE, suggesting that AKI does not influence the energy metabolism of septic patients.

Citation

Soncini Sanches AC, de Góes CR, Berbel Bufarah MN, Balbi AL, Ponce D (2016) Acute Kidney Injury does not Alter Energy Metabolism of Septic Patients in Intensive Care Unit. Arch Emerg Med Crit Care 1(2): 1006.

Keywords

Energy expenditure, Acute kidney injury, Sepsis

INTRODUCTION

Sepsis, defined as systemic inflammatory response syndrome associated with infection, is an important cause of morbidity and mortality in patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU) [1,2].

It is the most frequent cause of acute kidney injury (AKI) in critically ill patients, occurring in approximately 19% of patients with sepsis, 23% of patients with severe sepsis and in 51% of patients with septic shock and positive culturesand septic patients developing severe renal failure suffer, despite advanced vital organ support, a high risk of dying [3,4].

It is well know that sepsis and AKI can affect the energy metabolism and treatments based on a better understanding of these alterations may help to prevent weight loss and muscle wasting [5]. Accurate determination of energy needs is obviously important in critically ill patients because both over and underfeeding may be associated with complications and undesired consequences [6].

Few authors studied the energy metabolism in patients with renal failure, with conflicting results [7-14]. Studies have suggested that chronic kidney disease (CKD) is associated with hypometabolic state due to abnormalities in cell metabolism [10,11]. In contrast, a hypermetabolic state was frequently observed in AKI patients and associated with its cause and severity [15]. The hypermetabolism may be present in AKI patients since AKI is a part of a more complex illness such as sepsis and not necessarily the direct consequence of renal failure per se [15-21]. Thus, it is unknown whether possible changes in energy metabolism observed in septic AKI patients are directly related to AKI itself.

Given the lack of studies on energy metabolism in AKI patients, we decided to measure and compare the resting energy expenditure (REE) in septic patients with and without AKI using indirect calorimetry (IC). This study also aims to compare the REE estimated by the Harris-Benedict equation (HB) with that measured by IC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A prospective and observational study was conducted from November 2013 to May 2015 in patients admitted to ICUs from Botucatu Medical School that is a teaching hospital in the city of Botucatu, São Paulo State, southeastern Brazil. It is reference for population for an area comprising 500,000 inhabitants. We included patients 18 years of age or older who had sepsis according to “Survival Sepsis Campaign 2012 [22], andmechanically ventilated using of inspired oxygen (FiO2 ) < 0.60. Exclusion criteria were patients with CKD stage 4 and 5 (creatinine clearance lower than 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 , estimated by the modification of diet in renal disease (MDRD) equation) [23].

Septic patients were divided into two groups according to presence or not of AKI associated with sepsis. AKI was defined using KDIGO 2012 criteria [24].

Variables previously reported to be associated with AKI, sepsis or energy metabolism were collected prospectively on each patient by review of the medical record: sex, age, the presence of comorbidities (diabetes, CKD, and hypertension), primary diagnosis, the a etiology of sepsis, prognostic score specific for AKI (ATN-ISS) [25], Sequential Organ Failure Assessment SOFA [26] use of vasoactive drug and neuromuscular blockers, creatinine and urea levels, C reactive protein (CRP) and leukocytes.

The REE was estimated by HB equation [27] and measured by the IC within 72 hours after the diagnosis of sepsis and seven days after the initial measure. IC was performed using QUARK RMR (Cosmed, Rome, Italy). The calorimeter was calibrated before each use. The protocol required that patients be inactive and undisturbed for 30 minutes prior to testing and for 30-minute duration of the data collection. It is recommended that patients achieve steady state during testing. Steady state was defined as a variability of <10% in the measurements of oxygen consumption and carbon dioxide production, and< 5% in the respiratory quotient from minute to minute. The REE was also estimated using HB formula and injury factor for sepsis as suggested by Long et al [28].

Patient height was measured when possible, or it was considered the value documented in the medical record at the time. Weight was measured using calibrated hospital scales in most patients or estimated using Chumlea formula [29]

The Ethics Committee of the Botucatu School of Medicine – UNESP approved this study (approved protocol number 322,535) with a waiver of informed consent given its observational nature.

Statistical analysis

The sample size calculated was 61 patients considering standard deviation 200 kcal, estimated maximum error de 50 kcal in critically ill patients and p value =0.05.

Data analysis was performed using SAS for Windows (version 9.2: SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA, 2012). Results were expressed as mean and standard deviation or median and interquartile range. The chi-square test was used to compare categorical variables. We used ANOVA to compare parametric variables of clinical, laboratory and nutritional data. For non-parametric variables, the Mann-Whitney test was used, p<0.05. Variables with significant univariate associations (p<0.10) were candidates for multivariable analysis, which was performed using stepwise variable selection. Repeated measures analysis using the mixed procedure was used for the evolutional REE.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight septic patients admitted to ICU were evaluated. Age was 62.49 ± 16.6 years, 64.7% were male, 64.71% were Caucasian, SOFA was 9.81 ± 2.35, shock septic was the classification of sepsis more frequent (64.71%), lung was the main site of infection (70.6%) and comorbidities were present in 82.85% of patients. The measured REE was 1857 (1308-2261.5) kcal, while the estimated REE was 1449 (1255.5-1677.5) kcal. AKI were present in the most of patients (63.2%) and mortality was high (77.94%). A comparison of baseline characteristics between those who did and did not develop AKI is shown in (Table 1).

Table 1: Patients demographics and clinical characteristics (n=68) according to presence of AKI.

Variables Septic patients (n=68) AKI septic patients
(N=43)
Non-AKI
septic patients
 (N=25)
P
Age (years) 62.49 ± 16.60 65.28 ± 14.50 57.68 ± 19.05 0.068
Male sex (%) 44 (64.71) 27 (62.79) 17 (68.0) 0.66
Race (%) Caucasian 60 (88.24) 38 (88.37) 22 (88.0) 0.91
Sepsis classification (%)
shock septic
 Severe sepsis
 Sepsis
44 (64.71)
14 (20.59)
10 (14.70)
26 (60.47)
11 (25.58)
6 (13.95)
18 (72.0)
3 (12.0)
4 (16.0)
0.40
Site ofinfection (%)        
Pulmonary 48 (70.59) 26 (60.47) 22 (88.0) 0.085
Abdominal 14 (20.59) 11 (25.58) 3 (12.0) 0.07
Others 6 (8.82) 6 (13.95) - 0.13
SOFA score* 9.81 ± 2.35 11.0 ± 1.73 7.76 ± 1.79 <0.001
Presence Comorbidities (%)
Hipertension
 Diabetes Mellitus
Dislypidemia
Obesity
56 (82.85)
42 (61.76) 
18 (26.47)
13 (19.11)
8 (11.76)
39 (90.7)
31 (72.09)
15 (34.88)
10 (23.25)
6 (13.95)
17 (68.0)
11 (44.0)
3 (12.0)
3 (12.0)
2 (8.0)
0.01
0.02
0.09
0.15
Ventilationmode (%)
Controled
Espontaneous
54 (79.41)
14 (20.59)
36 (83.72)
7 (16.28)
18 (72.0)
7 (28.0)
0.24
FiO2 35.97 ± 9.49 35.84 ± 9.59 36.20 ± 9.50 0.88
Use ofvasoactivedrugs (%) 50 (73.53) 34 (79.07) 16 (64.0) 0.17
Use ofsedatives (%) 34 (50.0) 21 (48.84) 13 (52.0) 0.50
Use ofantibiotics (%) 65 (95.59) 41 (95.35) 24 (96.0) 0.69
Presenceoffever (%) 46 (67.64) 29 (67.44) 17 (68.0) 0.59
Urea (mg/dl) 118.82 ± 65.46 150.28 ± 58.32 64.72 ± 34.50 <0.001
Creatinine (mg/dl) 2.35 ± 1.68 3.22 ± 1.51 0.84 ± 0.32 <0.001
CRP (mg/dl)** 29.27 ± 15.72 32.94 ± 14.63 22.98 ± 15.82 0.01
Leukocytes (mm3 ) 16392.81± 8761.79 17226.63± 9240.82 14992 ± 7872.42 0.31
Outcomes (%)
Death
53 (77.94) 38 (88.37) 15 (60.0) 0.04
*Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score; **Acute Kidney Injury; *** C Reactive Protein reactive

AKI group had higher SOFA (11.0±1.73 vs. 7.76±1.79, p<0.0001), CRP (p=0.01), comorbidities (p=0.01) and mortality (p=0.046). The groups were similar in gender, age, site of infection. In multivariable regression analysis, comorbidities (OR: 0.07; CI95%: 1.0-1.8) and SOFA (OR: 0.32; CI95%: 0.1-0.5) were identified as predictors of AKI (Table 2).

Table 2: Multivariable analysis for AKI risk (n=68).

Factors OR CI 95% P
Site of infection 0.4 0.09 – 1.7 0.22
Presence of comorbidities 0.07 1.0 – 1.8 0.03
CRP* 0.94 0.88 – 1.0 0.06
SOFA score ** 0.32 0.1 – 0.5 0.0002
Note: OR: Odds Ratio; CI95%: confidence interval of 95%; p: statistical significance
* C Reactive Protein reactive; **Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score

The (Table 3) shows the comparison between estimated and measured REE in both groups of patients. Septic patients without AKI (n =25) and with AKI (n = 43) had measured REE statistically higher than the estimated one (1855.0 kcal (1636.75- 2052.75) vs. 1551.0 (1349.0 -1719.25), p = 0.007 and 1868.0 kcal (1219.5-2364.75) vs. 1388.0 kcal (1254.0-1665.5), p = 0.026, respectively). The equation HB without using injury factor underestimated the REE in 16.4% in septic patients without AKI and in 25.7% in septic patients with AKI.

Table 3: Anthropometric characteristics and energetic metabolism of septic patients admitted to intensive care unit according to presence of AKI.

Variables Septic patients
(n=68)
AKI septic
patients (n=43)
Non-AKI
septic patients
(n=25)
P
Weight (Kg) 76.74 ± 25.40 77.23 ± 26.35 75.88 ± 24.17 0.83
Height (cm) 157.82 ± 35.23 160.87 ± 27.05 152.58 ± 46,25 0.35
BMI (Kg/m2 )* 27.83 ± 8.59 28.04 ± 7.97 27.48 ± 9.55 0.72
Measured REE (kcal)** 1857(1308-2261.5)a 1868 (1219.5-2364 75)b 1855 (1636.75-2052.75) c 0.62
Estimated REE (kcal) 1449 (1255.5-1677.5) 1388 (1254.0-1665.5) 1551 (1349.0 -1719.25) 0.63
Estimated REE using FI 
(kcal)
2283.2(1308-2261.5) 2370.63(1456-2451) 2467.2(1322-2213.8) 0.59
*Body Mass Index; ** Resting Energy Expenditure
a
Different from estimated REE using HB formula without and with injury factor, p<0.001
b
Different from estimated REE using HB formula without and with injury factor, p=0.007 and < 0.001 respectively
c
Different from estimated REE using HB formula without and with injury factor, p=0.026 and < 0.001 respectively

Table 4: Evolutional resting energy expendure (day 1 vs day 7) in septic patients according to presence of AKI.

  After seven days  
  measured REE D1 (kcal) measured REE 
D7 (kcal)
P
Septic patients (n=22) 1845.95 ± 658.27 1809.54 ± 755.08 0.86
AKI* septic patients (n=16) 1873.5 ± 718.43 1610.5 ± 629.98 0.70
Non-AKI septic patients (n=6) 1795.83 ± 557.73 1915 ± 756.21 0.76
*Acute Kidney Injury, *REE: Rest Energy Expenditure

When injury factor was used, the measured REE was statistically lower than the estimated one in both groups. Measured and estimated REE were 2467.2(1322-2213.8) vs.1855 (1636.75 – 2052.75), p<0.001 in non-AKI group and 2370.63(1456-2451) vs. 1868.0 (1219.5 – 2364.75), p<0.001 in AKI group. Thus, the equation HB using injury factor was not precise and overestimated the REE in 33% in septic patients without AKI and in 26.9% in septic patients with AKI.

There was no significant difference between the two groups (with and without AKI) in measured and estimated REE (p = 0.638 and 0.64, respectively). There was no significant difference in evolutional REE (day 1 vs. day 7) in general septic population (1845.95 ± 658.27 kcal vs. 1809.54 ± 755.08 kcal, p = 0.86) and after patients have been divided into AKI (1873.5±718.43 vs.1610.5 ± 629.98, p=0.70) and non-AKI groups (1795.83 ± 557.73 vs. 1915 ± 756.21, p=0.76).

DISCUSSION

This study described and compared the REE estimated by the HB equation and measured by IC in septic patients who developed and did not develop AKI during ICU stay. Its results indicate that HB equation does not agree well with energy expenditure measured by IC in critically ill patients and that AKI itself apparently has no direct effect on energy metabolism of septic patients.

The measured REE was higher than the estimated one in general septic population and in groups that developed and did not developed AKI. The equation HB without using injury factor was not precise and underestimated the REE in 16.4% (-304 kcal) in septic patients without AKI and in 25.7% (-480 kcal) in septic group with AKI.

Due to theinaccuracyof this equation,the correction factor was applied. The calculated HB equation was multiplied by injury factor (1.6). However, when injury factor was used, the measured REE was statistically lower than the estimated one in all groups. Thus, the equation HB using injury factor was not precise and overestimated the REE in 33% (+612.2 kcal) in septic patients who did not develop AKI and in 26.9% (+502.6 kcal) in septic patients who developed AKI.

Similar results were observed in previous studies [30-33]. Coletto et al [30] reported in septic patients that HB equation underestimated the REE in 7.6% and when the injury factor as used, the REE was overestimated in more than 50%. In a systematic review, Frankenfield e cols [31] reported the results of an evidence analysis of the accuracy of metabolic rate calculation methods. HB equation had mean differences between measured resting metabolic rate and predicted values ranged from 250 to 900 kcal/ day (meaning that some individual differences can be much higher). Other reviewstudy have suggested not to use the HB equation, with or without correction factors, in critically AKI patients because it underestimated and/or overestimated REE and was inaccurate and unreliable for ICU patient [32].

It may be argued that inaccurate predictions are expected because HB equation was developed long ago and based on data from healthy volunteers. Others equationsasthe Ireton-Jones, Penn state and Faisy were developed from REE measurements of hospitalized and critically ill patients, and dynamic variables as body temperature andminute ventilation that reflect the metabolicstate of the patient were added. Although they areintendedto criticalpatients, several studies showed theseformulashad poor agreement with measured REE by IC [33,34].

Boulattaet al33 evaluated the energy expenditure equations in a total of 365 patients. They found there were poor accuracy between REE measured by IC and REE predicted by the HB, Mifflin, Penn State and the Ireton-Jones equations. In all cases, the predictive equations underestimated measured REE. In another study, Krooset al [34] evaluated The REE in 927 patients, including 401 obese patients. They also found there were poor agreement between REE measured by IC and REE predicted by the HB, American College of Chest Physicians, Mifflin, and the Ireton-Jones equations. In all cases, except using Ireton-Jones, the predictive equations underestimated measured REE.

Our study agrees with review studies that also suggest that none of these equations has sufficient accuracy and agreement with measured REE in critically ill patients and should not replace the use of IC [33]. Using universal prediction equations to critical ill AKI patients, errors of prediction can occur and lead to overfeeding or underfeeding if they are used to guide the feeding regimen of these patient [35].

Using this data set, we also have demonstrated that there was no significant difference between the groups of septic patients 

who developed and did not developed AKI. This suggests that AKI does not affect the energy metabolism of septic patients. Similar results were observed by Schneeweiss e cols [35]. It was the only study that evaluated the REE also in AKI patients. In that study, energy metabolism was measured by IC in 86 patients with AKI and chronic kidney disease (CKD) and in 24 control subjects. In AKI patients with sepsis, the REE was increased (p < 0.05). In other groups with renal failure (AKI without sepsis, CKD with conservative treatment or hemodialysis, and severe untreated azotemia) the REE was not different from those of control subjects. The authors concluded that renal failure has no influence on energy expenditure as long as septicemia is absent.

Others studies agree with our results that suggest the hypermetabolism may be present in AKI patients since AKI is a part of a more complex illness such as sepsis and not necessarily the direct consequence of renal failure per se. suggesting that AKI does not influence the energy metabolism of septic patients 15-21

There was no significant difference in evolutional REE (day 1 vs. day 7) in general septic population and after patients have been divided into AKI and non-AKI groups. Different results were observed by Vermeij et al [36] who investigated if only a daily measure of REE could be extrapolated for the whole length of stay in the ICU. The authors noted that there were variations higher than 31% for the same patient, although the daily average is close to the average seven-day study.

Some limitations should be recognized. First, we did not examine others predictive equations currently used in practice such as Mifflin, Penn State and the Ireton-Jones equations. However, the HB equation that we evaluated contain clinical information readily available to practitioners, making it clinically useful equation. Second, we did not have information about treatments that might influence energy expenditure and carbon dioxide production, including type of nutrition and energy intake, catecholamine, neuromuscular blocking agents, and opioids. Finally, we studied a select population of patients, our findings may not be generalizable to all AKI, or critically ill patients.

Despite limitations, this is the largest study to reports that predictive HB equation does not accurately estimate REE in critically ill septic patients and that possible changes in energy metabolism observed in septic AKI patients are not directly related to AKI itself. Our findings suggest that the REE measured by IC was significantly higher than that estimated by the equation HB in both septic with and without AKI and that the equation HB using injury factor also was not precise and overestimated the REE. The lack of difference in REE between the septic patients with and without AKI, suggesting that AKI does not influence the energy metabolism of septic patients and that possible changes in energy metabolism observed in septic AKI patients are not directly related to AKI itself.

REFERENCES

1. Padilha KG, Sousa RMC, Silva MCM, Rodrigues AS. Patient’s organ dysfunction in the Intensive Care Unit according to the Logistic Organ Dysfunction System. Rev Esc Enferm USP. 2009; 43:1205-1215.

2. Vincent J, Bihari DJ, SuterPM, Bruining MD, White J, Nicolas-Chanoin MH, et al. The prevalence of nosocomial infection in intensive care units in Europe.Results of the European Prevalence of Infection in Intensive Care (EPIC) Study. EPIC International Advisory Committee. JAMA. 1995; 274:639-644.

3. Rangel Frausto MS, Pittet D, Costigan M, Hwang T, Davis CS, Wenzel RP, et al. The natural history of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS). A prospective study. JAMA, 1995; 273: 117-123.

4. Ostermann M, Chang RW. Acute kidney injury in the intensive care unit according to RIFLE. Crit Care Med. 2007; 35: 1837-1843.

5. Fontoura CS, Cruz DO, Londero LG, Vieira RM. Nutritional assessment of the critical ill patient. Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2006; 18: 298-306.

6. Flancbaum L, Choban PS, Sambucco S, Verducci J, Burge JC. Comparison of indirect calorimetry, the Fick method, and prediction equations in estimating the energy requirements of critically ill patients. Am J Clin Nutr 1999; 69: 461–466.

7. Schneeweiss B, Graninger W, Stockenhuber F, Druml W, Ferenci P, Eichinger S, et al. Energy metabolism in acute and chronic renal failure. Am J Clin Nutr. 1990; 52: 596-601.

8. Monteon FJ, Laidlaw SA, Shaib JK, Kopple JD. Energy expenditure in patients with chronic renal failure. Kidney Int. 1986; 30: 741-747.

9. Ikiler TA, Wingard RL, Sun M, Harvell J, Parker RA, Hakim RM. Increased energy expenditure in hemodialysis patients. J Am Soc Nephrol. 1996; 7: 2646-2653.

10. Avesani CM, Draibe SA, Kamimura MA, Dalboni MA, Colugnati FA, Cuppari L. Decreased resting energy expenditure in non-dialysed chronic kidney disease patients. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2004; 19: 3091-3097.

11. O Sullivan AJ, Lawson JA, Chan M, Kelly JJ. Body composition and energy metabolism in chronic renal insufficiency. Am J Kidney Dis. 2002; 39: 369-375.

12. Bazanelli AP, Kamimura MA, da Silva CB, Avesani CM, Lopes MG, Manfredi SR, et al. Resting energy expenditure in peritoneal dialysis patients. Perit Dial Int. 2006; 26: 697-704.

13. Avesani CM, Draibe SA, Kamimura MA, Coluhnati FAB, Cuppari L. Resting Energy Expenditure of Chronic Kidney Disease Patients: Influence of Renal Function and Subclinical Inflammation. Am J Kidney Dis 2004; 44: 1008-1016.

14. Avesani CM, Cuppari L, Silva AC, Sigulem DM, Cendoroglo M, Sesso R, et al. Resting energy expenditure in pre-dialysis diabetic patients. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2001; 16: 556-565.

15. Lopez Martinez J, Sanchez-Izquierdo Riera JA, Jimenez FJ. Guidelines for specialized nutritional and metabolic support in the critically-ill patient. Update. Consensus SEMICYUC-SENPE: Acute renal failure. Nutr Hosp. 2011; 26: 21-26.

16. Monson P, Mehta RL. Nutritional considerations in continuous renal replacement therapies. Semin Dialysis. 1996; 9: 152–160. Marin A, Hardy G. Practical implications of nutritional support during continuous renal replacement therapy. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2001;4:219–225.

17. BozfakiAYlu S. Nutrition in patients with acute renal failure. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2001; 16 Suppl 6: 21-22.

18. Kapadia FN, Bhojani K, Shah B. Special issues in the patient with renal failure. Crit Care Clin. 2003; 19: 233-251.

19. Druml W. Nutritional management of acute renal failure. Am J Kidney Dis. 2001; 37: S89–S94.

20. Bellomo R. Nutritional management of patients treated with continuous renal replacement therapy. In: Kopple JD, Massry SG, eds. Kopple and Massry’s Nutritional Management of Renal Disease. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2004: 573–580.

21. Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Rhodes A, Annane D, Gerlach H, Opal S, et al. Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2012. Crit Care Med. 2013; 41; 2: 580-637.

22. Levey AS, Bosch JP, Lewis JB, Greene T, Rogers N, Roth D. A More Accurate Method To Estimate Glomerular Filtration Rate from Serum Creatinine: A New Prediction Equation. Ann Intern Med 1999; 130: 6: 461-470.

23. Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Acute Kidney Injury Work Group. KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline for Acute Kidney Injury. Kidney Int Suppl. 2012; 2: 1–138.

24. Liãno F, Gallego A, Pascual J, Garcia-Martin F, Teruel JL, Marcen R, et al. Prognosis of acute tubular necrosis: an extended prospectively contrasted study. Nephron 1993; 63: 21-23.

25. Moreno R,Vincent JL, Matos R, Mendonça A, Cantraine F, Thijs L, et al. The use of maximum SOFA scores to quantify organ dysfunction/ failure in intensive care. Results of a prospective, multicentre study. Working Group on Sepsis related Problems of the ESICM. Intensive Care Med.1996; 22:707-710.

26. Harris JA, Benedict FG. A Biometric Study of Human Basal Metabolism. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1918; 4: 370-373.

27. Long CL, Schaffel BS, Geiger BA, Schiller WR, Blakemore WS. Metabolic response to injury and illness: estimation of energy and protein needs from indirect calorimetry and nitrogen balance. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 1979; 3: 452-456.

28. Chumlea WC, Guo S, Rohe AF, Steinbaugh ML. Prediction of body weight for the nonambulatory elderly from anthropometry. J Am Diet Assoc. 1988; 88: 564-568.

29. Coletto FA, Marson F, Campos AD, Marchini JS, Basile-Filho A. Análise comparativa do gasto energético entre as equações de Harris-Benedict e de Long e a calorimetria indireta em pacientes sépticos. RevBras Ter Intens. 2003; 15:93-100.

30. Frankenfield D, Hise M, Malone A, Russell M, Gradwell E, Compher C, et al. Prediction of resting metabolic rate in critically ill adult patients: results of a systematic review of the evidence. J Am Diet Assoc. 2007; 107: 1552–1561.

31. Walker RN, Heuberger RA. Predictive equations for energy needs for the critically ill. Respir Care. 2009; 54: 509-521.

32. Boullata J, Williams J, Cottrell F, Hudson L, Compher C. Accurate determination of energy needs in hospitalized patients. J Am Diet Assoc. 2007; 107: 393-401.

33. Kross EK, Sena M, Schmidt K, Stapleton RD. A comparison of predictive equations of energy expenditure and measured energy expenditure in critically ill patients. J Crit Care. 2012; 27: 321.

34. Schneeweiss B, Graninger W, Stockenhuber F, Druml W, Ferenci P, Eichinger S, et al. Energy metabolism in acute and chronic renal failure. Am J Clin Nutr. 1990; 52: 596-601.

35. Vermeij CG, Feenstra BW, van Lanschot JJ, Bruining HA. Day-to-day variability of energy expenditure in critically ill surgical patients. Crit Care Med. 1989; 17: 623-626.

Soncini Sanches AC, de Góes CR, Berbel Bufarah MN, Balbi AL, Ponce D (2016) Acute Kidney Injury does not Alter Energy Metabolism of Septic Patients in Intensive Care Unit. Arch Emerg Med Crit Care 1(2): 1006.

Received : 30 May 2016
Accepted : 30 Jun 2016
Published : 02 Jul 2016
Journals
Annals of Otolaryngology and Rhinology
ISSN : 2379-948X
Launched : 2014
JSM Schizophrenia
Launched : 2016
Journal of Nausea
Launched : 2020
JSM Internal Medicine
Launched : 2016
JSM Hepatitis
Launched : 2016
JSM Oro Facial Surgeries
ISSN : 2578-3211
Launched : 2016
Journal of Human Nutrition and Food Science
ISSN : 2333-6706
Launched : 2013
JSM Regenerative Medicine and Bioengineering
ISSN : 2379-0490
Launched : 2013
JSM Spine
ISSN : 2578-3181
Launched : 2016
Archives of Palliative Care
ISSN : 2573-1165
Launched : 2016
JSM Nutritional Disorders
ISSN : 2578-3203
Launched : 2017
Annals of Neurodegenerative Disorders
ISSN : 2476-2032
Launched : 2016
Journal of Fever
ISSN : 2641-7782
Launched : 2017
JSM Bone Marrow Research
ISSN : 2578-3351
Launched : 2016
JSM Mathematics and Statistics
ISSN : 2578-3173
Launched : 2014
Journal of Autoimmunity and Research
ISSN : 2573-1173
Launched : 2014
JSM Arthritis
ISSN : 2475-9155
Launched : 2016
JSM Head and Neck Cancer-Cases and Reviews
ISSN : 2573-1610
Launched : 2016
JSM General Surgery Cases and Images
ISSN : 2573-1564
Launched : 2016
JSM Anatomy and Physiology
ISSN : 2573-1262
Launched : 2016
JSM Dental Surgery
ISSN : 2573-1548
Launched : 2016
Annals of Emergency Surgery
ISSN : 2573-1017
Launched : 2016
Annals of Mens Health and Wellness
ISSN : 2641-7707
Launched : 2017
Journal of Preventive Medicine and Health Care
ISSN : 2576-0084
Launched : 2018
Journal of Chronic Diseases and Management
ISSN : 2573-1300
Launched : 2016
Annals of Vaccines and Immunization
ISSN : 2378-9379
Launched : 2014
JSM Heart Surgery Cases and Images
ISSN : 2578-3157
Launched : 2016
Annals of Reproductive Medicine and Treatment
ISSN : 2573-1092
Launched : 2016
JSM Brain Science
ISSN : 2573-1289
Launched : 2016
JSM Biomarkers
ISSN : 2578-3815
Launched : 2014
JSM Biology
ISSN : 2475-9392
Launched : 2016
Archives of Stem Cell and Research
ISSN : 2578-3580
Launched : 2014
Annals of Clinical and Medical Microbiology
ISSN : 2578-3629
Launched : 2014
JSM Pediatric Surgery
ISSN : 2578-3149
Launched : 2017
Journal of Memory Disorder and Rehabilitation
ISSN : 2578-319X
Launched : 2016
JSM Tropical Medicine and Research
ISSN : 2578-3165
Launched : 2016
JSM Head and Face Medicine
ISSN : 2578-3793
Launched : 2016
JSM Cardiothoracic Surgery
ISSN : 2573-1297
Launched : 2016
JSM Bone and Joint Diseases
ISSN : 2578-3351
Launched : 2017
JSM Bioavailability and Bioequivalence
ISSN : 2641-7812
Launched : 2017
JSM Atherosclerosis
ISSN : 2573-1270
Launched : 2016
Journal of Genitourinary Disorders
ISSN : 2641-7790
Launched : 2017
Journal of Fractures and Sprains
ISSN : 2578-3831
Launched : 2016
Journal of Autism and Epilepsy
ISSN : 2641-7774
Launched : 2016
Annals of Marine Biology and Research
ISSN : 2573-105X
Launched : 2014
JSM Health Education & Primary Health Care
ISSN : 2578-3777
Launched : 2016
JSM Communication Disorders
ISSN : 2578-3807
Launched : 2016
Annals of Musculoskeletal Disorders
ISSN : 2578-3599
Launched : 2016
Annals of Virology and Research
ISSN : 2573-1122
Launched : 2014
JSM Renal Medicine
ISSN : 2573-1637
Launched : 2016
Journal of Muscle Health
ISSN : 2578-3823
Launched : 2016
JSM Genetics and Genomics
ISSN : 2334-1823
Launched : 2013
JSM Anxiety and Depression
ISSN : 2475-9139
Launched : 2016
Clinical Journal of Heart Diseases
ISSN : 2641-7766
Launched : 2016
Annals of Medicinal Chemistry and Research
ISSN : 2378-9336
Launched : 2014
JSM Pain and Management
ISSN : 2578-3378
Launched : 2016
JSM Women's Health
ISSN : 2578-3696
Launched : 2016
Clinical Research in HIV or AIDS
ISSN : 2374-0094
Launched : 2013
Journal of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Obesity
ISSN : 2333-6692
Launched : 2013
Journal of Substance Abuse and Alcoholism
ISSN : 2373-9363
Launched : 2013
JSM Neurosurgery and Spine
ISSN : 2373-9479
Launched : 2013
Journal of Liver and Clinical Research
ISSN : 2379-0830
Launched : 2014
Journal of Drug Design and Research
ISSN : 2379-089X
Launched : 2014
JSM Clinical Oncology and Research
ISSN : 2373-938X
Launched : 2013
JSM Bioinformatics, Genomics and Proteomics
ISSN : 2576-1102
Launched : 2014
JSM Chemistry
ISSN : 2334-1831
Launched : 2013
Journal of Trauma and Care
ISSN : 2573-1246
Launched : 2014
JSM Surgical Oncology and Research
ISSN : 2578-3688
Launched : 2016
Annals of Food Processing and Preservation
ISSN : 2573-1033
Launched : 2016
Journal of Radiology and Radiation Therapy
ISSN : 2333-7095
Launched : 2013
JSM Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
ISSN : 2578-3572
Launched : 2016
Annals of Clinical Pathology
ISSN : 2373-9282
Launched : 2013
Annals of Cardiovascular Diseases
ISSN : 2641-7731
Launched : 2016
Journal of Behavior
ISSN : 2576-0076
Launched : 2016
Annals of Clinical and Experimental Metabolism
ISSN : 2572-2492
Launched : 2016
Clinical Research in Infectious Diseases
ISSN : 2379-0636
Launched : 2013
JSM Microbiology
ISSN : 2333-6455
Launched : 2013
Journal of Urology and Research
ISSN : 2379-951X
Launched : 2014
Journal of Family Medicine and Community Health
ISSN : 2379-0547
Launched : 2013
Annals of Pregnancy and Care
ISSN : 2578-336X
Launched : 2017
JSM Cell and Developmental Biology
ISSN : 2379-061X
Launched : 2013
Annals of Aquaculture and Research
ISSN : 2379-0881
Launched : 2014
Clinical Research in Pulmonology
ISSN : 2333-6625
Launched : 2013
Journal of Immunology and Clinical Research
ISSN : 2333-6714
Launched : 2013
Annals of Forensic Research and Analysis
ISSN : 2378-9476
Launched : 2014
JSM Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
ISSN : 2333-7109
Launched : 2013
Annals of Breast Cancer Research
ISSN : 2641-7685
Launched : 2016
Annals of Gerontology and Geriatric Research
ISSN : 2378-9409
Launched : 2014
Journal of Sleep Medicine and Disorders
ISSN : 2379-0822
Launched : 2014
JSM Burns and Trauma
ISSN : 2475-9406
Launched : 2016
Chemical Engineering and Process Techniques
ISSN : 2333-6633
Launched : 2013
Annals of Clinical Cytology and Pathology
ISSN : 2475-9430
Launched : 2014
JSM Allergy and Asthma
ISSN : 2573-1254
Launched : 2016
Journal of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
ISSN : 2334-2307
Launched : 2013
Annals of Sports Medicine and Research
ISSN : 2379-0571
Launched : 2014
JSM Sexual Medicine
ISSN : 2578-3718
Launched : 2016
Annals of Vascular Medicine and Research
ISSN : 2378-9344
Launched : 2014
JSM Biotechnology and Biomedical Engineering
ISSN : 2333-7117
Launched : 2013
Journal of Hematology and Transfusion
ISSN : 2333-6684
Launched : 2013
JSM Environmental Science and Ecology
ISSN : 2333-7141
Launched : 2013
Journal of Cardiology and Clinical Research
ISSN : 2333-6676
Launched : 2013
JSM Nanotechnology and Nanomedicine
ISSN : 2334-1815
Launched : 2013
Journal of Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders
ISSN : 2475-9473
Launched : 2016
JSM Ophthalmology
ISSN : 2333-6447
Launched : 2013
Journal of Pharmacology and Clinical Toxicology
ISSN : 2333-7079
Launched : 2013
Annals of Psychiatry and Mental Health
ISSN : 2374-0124
Launched : 2013
Medical Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
ISSN : 2333-6439
Launched : 2013
Annals of Pediatrics and Child Health
ISSN : 2373-9312
Launched : 2013
JSM Clinical Pharmaceutics
ISSN : 2379-9498
Launched : 2014
JSM Foot and Ankle
ISSN : 2475-9112
Launched : 2016
JSM Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementia
ISSN : 2378-9565
Launched : 2014
Journal of Addiction Medicine and Therapy
ISSN : 2333-665X
Launched : 2013
Journal of Veterinary Medicine and Research
ISSN : 2378-931X
Launched : 2013
Annals of Public Health and Research
ISSN : 2378-9328
Launched : 2014
Annals of Orthopedics and Rheumatology
ISSN : 2373-9290
Launched : 2013
Journal of Clinical Nephrology and Research
ISSN : 2379-0652
Launched : 2014
Annals of Community Medicine and Practice
ISSN : 2475-9465
Launched : 2014
Annals of Biometrics and Biostatistics
ISSN : 2374-0116
Launched : 2013
JSM Clinical Case Reports
ISSN : 2373-9819
Launched : 2013
Journal of Cancer Biology and Research
ISSN : 2373-9436
Launched : 2013
Journal of Surgery and Transplantation Science
ISSN : 2379-0911
Launched : 2013
Journal of Dermatology and Clinical Research
ISSN : 2373-9371
Launched : 2013
JSM Gastroenterology and Hepatology
ISSN : 2373-9487
Launched : 2013
Annals of Nursing and Practice
ISSN : 2379-9501
Launched : 2014
JSM Dentistry
ISSN : 2333-7133
Launched : 2013
Author Information X