ArticlePloS one2025
Accuracy of bedside ultrasound for predicting resting energy expenditure in critically ill patients: A feasibility study.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Phase-Related Resting Energy Expenditure in Critically Ill Adults: Metabolic Phenotypes and Determinants of Weight-Normalized Indices-A Retrospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to assess the accuracy of bedside ultrasound in predicting resting energy expenditure (REE) in critically ill patients.
methodsWe studied critically ill patients admitted to our hospital's ICU between November 2021 and March 2023 who underwent REE, cardiac ultrasound, and muscle ultrasound evaluations. General demographic information and ultrasound data (including cardiac output, biceps brachii and quadriceps femoris thickness) were collected to estimate REE (REE-US). Simultaneously, REE was measured using indirect calorimetry (REE-IC). Correlations between REE-US and established equations (Harris-Benedict, Penn State University (PSU), Mifflin, ASPEN standard) as well as REE-IC were evaluated. Additionally, the feasibility and application of ultrasound for REE prediction across different disease conditions in critically ill patients were analysed.
resultsNinety-seven critically ill patients with 124 ultrasound measurements were included. The Penn State University formula showed the highest correlation with REE-IC (r = 0.779, p < 0.001), followed by ultrasound estimation (r = 0.668, p < 0.001). Correlation between the PSU formula and REE-IC remained robust across subgroups. However, REE-US correlation was weaker in patients with low BMI (BMI < 20 kg/m2) (r = 0.521, p = 0.009) but comparable to the PSU formula in normal and high BMI groups (BMI 20-30 kg/m2: r = 0.682 vs. r = 0.714, p = 0.5743; BMI > 30 kg/m2: r = 0.712 vs. r = 0.882, p = 0.1294). In subgroup analysis, REE-US performed similarly to the PSU formula in the sepsis subgroup (r = 0.612 vs r = 0.661, p = 0.6852) and ICU patients in the late period of the acute phase (r = 0.675 vs r = 0.751, p = 0.2762).
conclusionsThe Penn State University formula demonstrated the strongest correlation with REE-IC in critically ill patients. Ultrasound may replace the PSU formula in non-mechanically ventilated patients with unavailable gas measurement parameters. However, ultrasound-derived REE is less predictive in patients with low BMI or during the early acute phase of critical illness. Further research is warranted to refine ultrasound application in these populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.