Prediction Equations Underestimate Resting Energy Expenditure in Patients With End-Stage Cystic Fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Resting energy expenditure (REE) is increased in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) with end-stage lung disease due to chronic inflammation and pulmonary infections. After lung transplantation (LTx), energy expenditure is expected to be lower because inflammation will decrease. We assessed the agreement between measured and predicted REE in pre-LTx CF and post-LTx patients with CF and differences in REE in pre-LTx CF and post-LTx patients with CF in a cross-sectional study. METHODS: Included were 12 pre-LTx patients with CF (9 women; median age 31.6 years; interquartile range [IQR], 23.3-40.0) and 12 patients with CF within 2 years after LTx (6 women; median age 33.5 years; IQR, 22.3-40.3). REE was measured in a fasted state using indirect calorimetry. Values were compared with predicted REE calculated by formulas of Harris-Benedict (1919 and 1984), Schofield, and the World Health Organization (1985). A calculated REE between 90% and 110% of REE measured was considered adequate. RESULTS: Prediction equations underestimate REE in at least 75% of pre-LTx and 33% of post-LTx patients with CF. Mean (SD) REE measured by indirect calorimetry was 1735 (251) kcal pre-LTx and 1650 (235) kcal post-LTx ( P = .40). REE expressed per kilogram of fat-free mass (FFM) was 40.5 kcal/kg in pre-LTx patients with CF, which was higher than the 34.3 kcal/kg in post-LTx patients with CF ( P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Prediction equations underestimate REE in patients with end-stage CF. REE per kg of FFM is lower post-LTx than pre-LTx in patients with CF. Measurement of REE is recommended for patients with CF, especially pre-LTx, to optimize energy requirements for improving nutrition status.

Immune status assessment in adult lung transplant candidates.

BACKGROUND: Lung transplant recipients have an increased susceptibility to a variety of infections due to immunosuppressive therapy. Current guidelines recommend pneumococcal and other vaccinations, prior to lung transplantation to protect against post-transplant infections, but measurement of the antibody response to vaccination is not advised. Immune status investigation in lung transplant candidates, including the response to pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccination, has not been described. METHODS: Immune status investigation, including measurement of immunoglobulins, complement and the response to 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccination (23vPPV) was performed in 81 adult lung transplant candidates. RESULTS: Eighteen patients had low IgG levels and 32 patients had low IgG1 and/or IgG2 levels. After vaccination with 23vPPV the median antibody concentration of all serotypes increased significantly. Fifty-two patients had protective IgG-post-vaccination antibody levels to at least 10 serotypes. Twenty-nine patients had an impaired response to 23vPPV. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, a significant proportion of our cohort of lung transplant candidates had one or more abnormalities in the immune status. It is likely that these patients have an increased risk for infections after transplantation. Revaccination, including measurement of antibody response, and possibly antibody replacement therapy should be considered to minimize infection risk.