AJCN Tufts Nutrition Symposium, Boston Sept 24-26
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vernet, O.
Right arrow Articles by Jequier, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Vernet, O.
Right arrow Articles by Jequier, E.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Vernet, O.
Right arrow Articles by Jequier, E.

American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol 43, 194-209, Copyright © 1986 by The American Society for Clinical Nutrition, Inc


ORIGINAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS

Enteral versus parenteral nutrition: comparison of energy metabolism in lean and moderately obese women

O Vernet, L Christin, Y Schutz, E Danforth Jr and E Jequier

Continuous respiratory-exchange measurements were performed on ten moderately obese and ten lean young women for 1 h before, 3 h during, and 3 h after either parenteral (IV) or intragastric (IG) administration of a nutrient mixture infused at twice the postabsorptive, resting energy expenditure (REE). REE rose significantly from 0.98 +/- 0.02 to 1.13 +/- 0.03 kcal/min (IV) and from 0.99 +/- 0.02 to 1.13 +/- 0.02 kcal/min (IG) in the lean group; from 1.10 +/- 0.02 to 1.27 +/- 0.03 kcal/min (IV) and from 1.11 +/- 0.02 to 1.29 +/- 0.03 (IG) in the obese group. These increases resulted in similar nutrient-induced thermogenesis of 10.0 +/- 0.7% (IV) and 9.3 +/- 0.9% (IG) in the lean group; of 9.2 +/- 0.7% (IV) and 10.1 +/- 0.8% (IG) in the obese. Nutrient utilization was comparable in both groups and in both routes of administration, although the response time to IG feeding was delayed. These results showed no significant difference in both the thermogenic response and nutrient utilization between moderately obese and control groups using acute IV or IG feeding.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Nutr.Home page
R. C. Hill
Challenges in Measuring Energy Expenditure in Companion Animals: A Clinician's Perspective
J. Nutr., July 1, 2006; 136(7): 1967S - 1972S.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1986 by The American Society for Nutrition