Whole body protein kinetics in severely septic patients. The response to glucose infusion and total parenteral nutrition

J H Shaw, M Wildbore, R R Wolfe, J H Shaw, M Wildbore, R R Wolfe

Abstract

Rates of whole body protein synthesis and catabolism in normal volunteers and in a group of severely septic patients were isotopically determined. In addition, the effect in the patients of either glucose infusion or total parenteral nutrition (TPN) on protein dynamics was assessed. The basal rate of net protein catabolism (NPC) was significantly higher in the septic patients than in the volunteers (p less than 0.05). The values obtained in the volunteers and patients were 1.44 +/- 0.18 and 2.20 +/- 0.10 g/kg/day, respectively. This increase in NPC was primarily due to a major increase in whole body catabolism that was partially counteracted by a modest increase in protein synthesis. When the patients were infused with glucose (4 mg/kg/min), NPC decreased significantly (p less than 0.001) to 1.96 +/- 0.08 g/kg/day, and during TPN the value was significantly lower again (p less than 0.04) (0.63 +/- 0.28 g/kg/day). In each instance the conservation of host tissue was due to an increase in protein synthesis: the accelerated rate of whole body protein catabolism continued irrespective of the nutritional status. The following conclusions were reached from these data: severely ill septic patients have an accelerated rate of NPC compared with normal volunteers, and this is primarily due to a large increase in whole body protein catabolism; TPN is an effective means of conserving host tissue in severely septic patients via the promotion of whole body protein synthesis; despite the beneficial effect of TPN in these patients, whole body protein catabolism continues unabated, and as a result, protein losses still occur at approximately one fourth the rate seen in the absence of TPN; and there is no obvious advantage in terms of protein-sparing when protein is provided in amounts exceeding 1.5 g/kg/day.

References

    1. Adv Enzyme Regul. 1964;2:1-38
    1. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1959 Sep 25;82:420-30
    1. Am J Clin Nutr. 1977 Aug;30(8):1333-9
    1. Am J Clin Nutr. 1977 Aug;30(8):1340-4
    1. Br J Surg. 1977 Feb;64(2):129-33
    1. Metabolism. 1978 Jan;27(1):27-34
    1. Surgery. 1979 Aug;86(2):163-93
    1. Am J Physiol. 1981 Apr;240(4):E428-34
    1. Surg Clin North Am. 1981 Jun;61(3):681-90
    1. Metabolism. 1982 Aug;31(8):749-54
    1. Ann Surg. 1983 Feb;197(2):163-71
    1. N Engl J Med. 1983 Mar 10;308(10):545-52
    1. N Engl J Med. 1983 Mar 10;308(10):553-8
    1. Br J Surg. 1984 Jan;71(1):1-9
    1. Surgery. 1984 May;95(5):553-61
    1. Am J Physiol. 1985 Feb;248(2 Pt 1):E236-43
    1. Surgery. 1985 May;97(5):557-68
    1. Ann Surg. 1986 Dec;204(6):665-72
    1. J Biol Chem. 1974 Sep 10;249(17):5458-63

Source: PubMed

Подписаться