Skip to main content

Indirect calorimetry-guided nutrition during weaning from prolonged mechanical ventilation: a double-blind randomized controlled trial

In brief

Indirect calorimetry did not significantly improve weaning in 211 ventilated adults

Successful weaning occurred in 58% of patients fed using indirect calorimetry and 50% receiving predictive-equation-guided feeding, but the difference was not statistically significant; time to weaning was also similar, at 27 versus 31 days. Calorimetry better matched energy intake to measured needs, and a smaller energy gap was linked to weaning success in a post hoc analysis, but larger trials are needed to test whether this improves outcomes.

Journal
Critical care (London, England) (Q1)
Published
28 August 2026
Study design
Randomized controlled trial
Evidence level
Level 1, High (CEBM 1b)
Authors
Mila Fradkin, Maya Elyashiv, Michael Brik, Nirit Agay, Michal G Kait, Lee Bornstein, et al.
PMID
42791574
DOI
10.1186/s13054-026-06272-7

Why clinicians should know about it

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine whether indirect calorimetry (IC)-guided nutritional prescriptions improve weaning success and time to liberation from prolonged mechanical ventilation (PMV) compared with predictive-equation-guided feeding. METHODS: In this double-blind randomized controlled trial conducted at Reuth Tel-Aviv Rehabilitation Hospital (Nov 2019-Apr 2023), with 1-year follow-up, adults ventilated ≥ 21 days were randomized to receive IC-guided energy targets or predictive-equation-guided feeding. Primary outcomes were successful weaning (≥ 7 consecutive days of spontaneous breathing) and time to successful weaning. Secondary outcomes included number of weaning cycles and 1-year mortality. Metabolic/nutritional safety parameters were recorded. Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle, with additional per-protocol analyses. Time-to-event outcomes were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier estimates and Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Among 211 randomized patients (111 IC; 100 control), successful weaning was achieved in 58% of the IC arm and 50% of the control arm (absolute difference 8%; p = 0.33). Median time to successful weaning was 27 vs. 31 days, respectively (p = 0.58). One-year mortality was 48% in the IC arm and 56% in the control arm (absolute difference of -8%, 95%CI: -21.2%, 5.5%; p = 0.29). In a post hoc analysis of the per-protocol cohort (n = 198), a smaller difference between measured energy expenditure and delivered energy intake (energy-gap) was independently associated with a higher likelihood of successful weaning (HR = 1.02 per 50-kcal/day reduction in the energy-gap; 95%CI: 1.00, 1.05; p = 0.02). IC-guided feeding resulted in closer alignment between measured energy expenditure and delivered energy intake and reduced the tendency toward overfeeding observed with predictive-equation-based prescriptions. Successful weaning was independently associated with lower one-year mortality (HR = 0.54; 95%CI: 0.36-0.82), adjusting for study arm. CONCLUSION: The observed rates of successful weaning and one-year survival were numerically higher, and median time to liberation was shorter, with IC-guided nutrition than with predictive-equation-guided feeding, although between-group differences were not statistically significant. Closer alignment between measured energy expenditure and delivered energy intake was independently associated with successful weaning. These findings support further evaluation of energy delivery guided by measured energy expenditure in adequately powered multicenter trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT04825717. Registered March 15, 2021.

Abstract as published, via PubMed.

View on PubMedFull text at the publisherOpen in the app

For healthcare professionals. The summary is generated by AI from the published abstract, and the evidence level is assigned automatically from the study design on the Oxford CEBM hierarchy. Neither is medical advice. Read the full paper before changing practice.