Search Results
You are looking at 1 - 3 of 3 items for
- Author or Editor: Brian A. Wilson x
- Refine by Access: Content accessible to me x
Abstract
Objective—To assess accuracy and reliability of open-flow indirect calorimetry in dogs.
Animals—13 clinically normal dogs.
Procedure—In phase 1, oxygen consumption per kilogram of body weight (VO2kg) was determined in 6 anesthetized dogs by use of open-flow indirect calorimetry before and after determination of VO2/kg by use of closed-circuit spirometry. In phase 2, four serial measurements of VO2 and carbon dioxide production (VCO2) were obtained in 7 awake dogs by use of indirect calorimetry on 2 consecutive days. Resting energy expenditure (REE) was calculated.
Results—Level of clinical agreement was acceptable between results of indirect calorimetry and spirometry. Mean VO2/kg determined by use of calorimetry before spirometry was significantly greater than that obtained after spirometry. In phase 2, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) for REE and VO2 were 0.779 and 0.786, respectively, when data from all 4 series were combined. When the first series was discounted, ICC increased to 0.904 and 0.894 for REE and VO2, respectively. The most reliable and least variable measures of REE and VO2 were obtained when the first 2 series were discounted.
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Open-flow indirect calorimetry may be used clinically to obtain a measure of VO2 and an estimate of REE in dogs. Serial measurements of REE and VO2 in clinically normal dogs are reliable, but a 10-minute adaption period should be allowed, the first series of observations should be discounted, multiple serial measurements should be obtained, and REE. (Am J Vet Res 2001;62:1761–1767).
Abstract
Objective—To determine the level of clinical agreement between 2 methods for the measurement of resting energy expenditure (REE).
Design—Prospective case series.
Animals—77 dogs.
Procedure—Oxygen consumption (
O2) and CO2 production
(CO2) were measured with an open-flow indirect
calorimeter in healthy (n = 10) and ill (67) dogs.
Measurements were collected at 3 time periods on 2
days. The O2 and the CO2 measurements were then
used to calculate the REE values.
Results—Mean values of measured (MREE) and predicted (PREE) REEs in healthy dogs and a dog with medical illnesses or trauma were not significantly different. There was a significant difference on day 2 between the MREE and PREE in the group of dogs recovering from major surgery. More importantly, there was significant variation between the PREE and MREE on an individual-dog basis. The PREE only agreed to within ± 20% of the MREE in 51% to 57% of the dogs.
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—The level of agreement between these two methods for determining the 24-hour REE was poor in individual dogs. The level of disagreement between the 2 methods indicates that these methods may not be used interchangeably in a clinical setting. Measurement of REE by use of indirect calorimetry may be the only reliable method of determining REE in an individual ill or healthy dog. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2004;225:58–64)
