AJCN Cancer Health Disparities Conference
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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jones, P. J.
Right arrow Articles by Heim, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Jones, P. J.
Right arrow Articles by Heim, T.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Jones, P. J.
Right arrow Articles by Heim, T.

American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol 47, 799-804, Copyright © 1988 by The American Society for Clinical Nutrition, Inc


ORIGINAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS

Evaluation of doubly labeled water for measuring energy expenditure during changing nutrition

PJ Jones, AL Winthrop, DA Schoeller, RM Filler, PR Swyer, J Smith and T Heim
Department of Medicine, University of Chicago Medical Center, IL 60637.

Change in abundance of 2H and 18O in dietary water during a doubly labeled water energy period may introduce error into the calculated carbon dioxide production rate (RCO2). To examine the accuracy of 2H2(18)O during changing nutritional regimens, we compared 2H2(18)O and periodic open-circuit respiratory gas exchange (RGE) in postsurgical infants who were changing from parenteral to alternative parenteral and/or oral nutrition. The two methods were compared before and after correction for shifts in isotopic abundance of the infant water pools during the energy-expenditure period. Baseline corrections were predicted using the difference between abundances of the initial body water and final nutrient solutions. Before isotopic correction, 2H2(18)O underestimated RCO2 in eight subjects by 11.8 +/- 20.1% (mean +/- SD). After correction, agreement between the two methods improved; the underestimate was then -8.7 +/- 12.9%. To obtain maximum precision of 2H2(18)O, subjects should be maintained on the same nutritional regimen before and during the study unless valid correction formulae are used.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1988 by The American Society for Nutrition