Comparison of a Handheld Indirect Calorimetry Device and Predictive Energy Equations Among Individuals on Maintenance Hemodialysis

Objectives Practical methods for determining resting energy expenditure (REE) among individuals on maintenance hemodialysis (MHD) are needed because of the limitations of indirect calorimetry. Two disease-specific predictive energy equations (PEEs) have been developed for this metabolically complex population. The aim of this study was to compare estimated REE (eREE) by PEEs to measured REE (mREE) with a handheld indirect calorimetry device (HICD). Methods A prospective pilot study of adults on MHD (N = 40) was conducted at 2 dialysis clinics in Houston and Texas City, Texas. mREE by an HICD was compared with eREE determined by 6 PEEs using Bland-Altman analysis with a band of acceptable agreement of ±10% of the group mean mREE. Paired t-test and the intraclass correlation coefficient were also used to compare the alternate methods of measuring REE. A priori alpha was set at P <.05. Results The mean (±standard deviation) age was 56.7 ± 12.9 years, 52.5% (n = 21) were female, and 85% (n = 34) were African American. Body mass index (BMI) ranged from 18.1 to 47.1 kg/m², 67.5% were overweight (BMI ≥25 kg/m²) and 50% were obese (BMI ≥30 kg/m²). The Maintenance Hemodialysis Equation-Creatinine version (MHCD-CR) was the most accurate PEE with 52.5% of values within the band of acceptable agreement, followed by the Mifflin-St. Jeor Equation and the Vilar et al. Equation at 45.0% and 42.5%, respectively. Conclusion When compared with mREE by the HICD, the MHDE-CR was more accurate and precise than other PEEs evaluated; however, this must be interpreted with caution as mREE was consistently lower than eREE from all PEEs. Further research is needed to validate the MHDE-CR and other practical methods for determining REE among individuals on MHD.