Objetivo: O objetivo do presente estudo foi determinar o Gasto Energético Basal (GEB) através da Calorimetria Indireta (CI) em pacientes com carcinoma epidermóide de esôfago (CEE). Métodos: Estudo transversal com 30 pacientes internados com diagnóstico de CEE submetidos à CI antes de iniciar a terapia oncológica. A avaliação nutricional foi realizada a partir de parâmetros antropométricos (Índice de Massa Corporal, Circunferência do Braço, Dobra Cutânea Triciptal, Circunferência Muscular do Braço e Percentual de Perda de Peso), parâmetros bioquímicos (albumina, transferrina e Proteína C Reativa) e bioimpedância tetrapolar. Além disso, foram determinados a capacidade pulmonar e o estadiamento clínico. A CI foi realizada depois de uma noite de jejum. Valores de p < 0,05 foram considerados estatisticamente significativos. Resultados: A média do GEB pela CI foi de 1.421,8 ± 348,2 kcal e pela Equação de Harris e Benedict (EHB) de 1.310,6 ± 215,1 kcal. A EHB subestimou o GEB comparado com a CI (p= 0,014). Foi encontrada diferença significativa no GEB entre os pacientes desnutridos (1.181,7 ± 278,1 kcal) e bem nutridos (1.509,1 ± 334,1 kcal) pelo IMC (p=0,020). Pelo %PP não foram encontradas diferenças significativas entre o GEB dos pacientes com PP significativa e não significativa (p=0,526). Entre os pacientes que apresentavam o percentual de massa magra abaixo do esperado, foi encontrada GEB de 1.408,9 ± 364,3 kcal, enquanto que os que tinham o percentual de massa magra adequado o GEB foi de 1.538,4 ± 97,5 kcal (p=0,550). Não houve associação entre o GEB pela CI e o estadiamento (p=0,255) e o Índice de Tiffeneau (p=0,946). Na associação entre os exames laboratoriais e o GEB pela CI, não foram encontradas associações significativas entre os que tinham alteração e os que não a tinham (p= 0,364, 0,309 e 0,780, respectivamente). Conclusões: O GEB de pacientes com CEE foi subestimado pela EHB sem fator injúria e superestimado pela EHB com fator injúria de 1,3 quando comparado ao GEB medido pela CI. / Expenditure (BEE) of patients with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the esophagus by indirect calorimetry (IC). Methods: Cross-sectional study involving 30 patients admitted with a diagnosis of SCC who underwent IC before starting cancer therapy. Nutritional assessment was conducted using anthropometric parameters (body mass index, arm circumference, triceps skinfold thickness, arm muscle circumference and percentage weight loss), biochemical parameters (albumin, transferrin and Creactive protein) and tetrapolar bioimpedance analysis. Additionally, lung capacity and clinical staging were determined. IC was carried out after overnight fasting. P values <0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results: The mean of the BEE for IC and Harris-Benedict equation were 1421.8 ± 348.2 kcal/day and 1310.6 ± 215.1 kcal/day, respectively. The HBE underestimated the BEE when compared with IC (p=0.014). A significant difference was found in the BEE between malnourished (1181.7 ± 278.1 kcal/day) and well-nourished (1509.1 ± 334.1 kcal/day) patients by BMI (p=0.020). In terms of percentage weight loss, no significant difference was found in BEE between patients with significant or non-significant weight loss (p=0.526). BEE for patients presenting with a lower than expected lean body mass was 1408.9 ± 364.3 kcal/day, whereas for those with an adequate lean body mass it was 1538.4 ± 97.5 kcal/day (p=0.550). No association was found between BEE measured by IC and clinical staging (p=0.255) or the Tiffeneau Index (p=0.946). Additionally, when comparing laboratory examinations with BEE measured by IC, no significant association was found between those with and those without alterations (p=0.364, 0.309 and 0.780 respectively). Conclusion: When compared to BEE measured by IC of patients with SCC, it was found that the HBE without injury factor underestimated, whereas the HBE with an injury factor of 1.3 overestimated BEE.

Objetivo: O objetivo do presente estudo foi determinar o Gasto Energético Basal (GEB) através da Calorimetria Indireta (CI) em pacientes com carcinoma epidermóide de esôfago (CEE). Métodos: Estudo transversal com 30 pacientes internados com diagnóstico de CEE submetidos à CI antes de iniciar a terapia oncológica. A avaliação nutricional foi realizada a partir de parâmetros antropométricos (Índice de Massa Corporal, Circunferência do Braço, Dobra Cutânea Triciptal, Circunferência Muscular do Braço e Percentual de Perda de Peso), parâmetros bioquímicos (albumina, transferrina e Proteína C Reativa) e bioimpedância tetrapolar. Além disso, foram determinados a capacidade pulmonar e o estadiamento clínico. A CI foi realizada depois de uma noite de jejum. Valores de p < 0,05 foram considerados estatisticamente significativos. Resultados: A média do GEB pela CI foi de 1.421,8 ± 348,2 kcal e pela Equação de Harris e Benedict (EHB) de 1.310,6 ± 215,1 kcal. A EHB subestimou o GEB comparado com a CI (p= 0,014). Foi encontrada diferença significativa no GEB entre os pacientes desnutridos (1.181,7 ± 278,1 kcal) e bem nutridos (1.509,1 ± 334,1 kcal) pelo IMC (p=0,020). Pelo %PP não foram encontradas diferenças significativas entre o GEB dos pacientes com PP significativa e não significativa (p=0,526). Entre os pacientes que apresentavam o percentual de massa magra abaixo do esperado, foi encontrada GEB de 1.408,9 ± 364,3 kcal, enquanto que os que tinham o percentual de massa magra adequado o GEB foi de 1.538,4 ± 97,5 kcal (p=0,550). Não houve associação entre o GEB pela CI e o estadiamento (p=0,255) e o Índice de Tiffeneau (p=0,946). Na associação entre os exames laboratoriais e o GEB pela CI, não foram encontradas associações significativas entre os que tinham alteração e os que não a tinham (p= 0,364, 0,309 e 0,780, respectivamente). Conclusões: O GEB de pacientes com CEE foi subestimado pela EHB sem fator injúria e superestimado pela EHB com fator injúria de 1,3 quando comparado ao GEB medido pela CI. / Expenditure (BEE) of patients with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the esophagus by indirect calorimetry (IC). Methods: Cross-sectional study involving 30 patients admitted with a diagnosis of SCC who underwent IC before starting cancer therapy. Nutritional assessment was conducted using anthropometric parameters (body mass index, arm circumference, triceps skinfold thickness, arm muscle circumference and percentage weight loss), biochemical parameters (albumin, transferrin and Creactive protein) and tetrapolar bioimpedance analysis. Additionally, lung capacity and clinical staging were determined. IC was carried out after overnight fasting. P values <0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results: The mean of the BEE for IC and Harris-Benedict equation were 1421.8 ± 348.2 kcal/day and 1310.6 ± 215.1 kcal/day, respectively. The HBE underestimated the BEE when compared with IC (p=0.014). A significant difference was found in the BEE between malnourished (1181.7 ± 278.1 kcal/day) and well-nourished (1509.1 ± 334.1 kcal/day) patients by BMI (p=0.020). In terms of percentage weight loss, no significant difference was found in BEE between patients with significant or non-significant weight loss (p=0.526). BEE for patients presenting with a lower than expected lean body mass was 1408.9 ± 364.3 kcal/day, whereas for those with an adequate lean body mass it was 1538.4 ± 97.5 kcal/day (p=0.550). No association was found between BEE measured by IC and clinical staging (p=0.255) or the Tiffeneau Index (p=0.946). Additionally, when comparing laboratory examinations with BEE measured by IC, no significant association was found between those with and those without alterations (p=0.364, 0.309 and 0.780 respectively). Conclusion: When compared to BEE measured by IC of patients with SCC, it was found that the HBE without injury factor underestimated, whereas the HBE with an injury factor of 1.3 overestimated BEE.

The theoretical part of the thesis deals with the issue of energy balance. Principles of its regulation and factors that affect it through energy intake or energy output are described in the thesis. It also describes methods of measuring and calculating energy output for proper adjustment of energy needs and achieving energy balance. In addition, the thesis presents energy needs in in specific life stages and pathological conditions that may occur during prolonged disruption of the energy balance. Both physiological and pharmacological factors which may impact energy metabolism are mentioned. The main objective of the practical part was to analyze freely available articles on the Internet providing different ways of weight reduction. The articles were subjected to a critical assessment from the point of view of a nutritional therapist and compared with expert studies. The secondary objective was to evaluate the questionnaire which also dealt with weight reduction. The individual responses were focused on the respondents' personal experience with weight loss. The results showed that up to 90 % of respondents attempted to reduce weight and that freely available articles, which do not always provide relevant information, were often used for this purpose. Keywords: energy balance, basal energy...

Objetivo: O objetivo do presente estudo foi determinar o Gasto Energético Basal (GEB) através da Calorimetria Indireta (CI) em pacientes com carcinoma epidermóide de esôfago (CEE). Métodos: Estudo transversal com 30 pacientes internados com diagnóstico de CEE submetidos à CI antes de iniciar a terapia oncológica. A avaliação nutricional foi realizada a partir de parâmetros antropométricos (Índice de Massa Corporal, Circunferência do Braço, Dobra Cutânea Triciptal, Circunferência Muscular do Braço e Percentual de Perda de Peso), parâmetros bioquímicos (albumina, transferrina e Proteína C Reativa) e bioimpedância tetrapolar. Além disso, foram determinados a capacidade pulmonar e o estadiamento clínico. A CI foi realizada depois de uma noite de jejum. Valores de p < 0,05 foram considerados estatisticamente significativos. Resultados: A média do GEB pela CI foi de 1.421,8 ± 348,2 kcal e pela Equação de Harris e Benedict (EHB) de 1.310,6 ± 215,1 kcal. A EHB subestimou o GEB comparado com a CI (p= 0,014). Foi encontrada diferença significativa no GEB entre os pacientes desnutridos (1.181,7 ± 278,1 kcal) e bem nutridos (1.509,1 ± 334,1 kcal) pelo IMC (p=0,020). Pelo %PP não foram encontradas diferenças significativas entre o GEB dos pacientes com PP significativa e não significativa (p=0,526). Entre os pacientes que apresentavam o percentual de massa magra abaixo do esperado, foi encontrada GEB de 1.408,9 ± 364,3 kcal, enquanto que os que tinham o percentual de massa magra adequado o GEB foi de 1.538,4 ± 97,5 kcal (p=0,550). Não houve associação entre o GEB pela CI e o estadiamento (p=0,255) e o Índice de Tiffeneau (p=0,946). Na associação entre os exames laboratoriais e o GEB pela CI, não foram encontradas associações significativas entre os que tinham alteração e os que não a tinham (p= 0,364, 0,309 e 0,780, respectivamente). Conclusões: O GEB de pacientes com CEE foi subestimado pela EHB sem fator injúria e superestimado pela EHB com fator injúria de 1,3 quando comparado ao GEB medido pela CI. / Expenditure (BEE) of patients with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the esophagus by indirect calorimetry (IC). Methods: Cross-sectional study involving 30 patients admitted with a diagnosis of SCC who underwent IC before starting cancer therapy. Nutritional assessment was conducted using anthropometric parameters (body mass index, arm circumference, triceps skinfold thickness, arm muscle circumference and percentage weight loss), biochemical parameters (albumin, transferrin and Creactive protein) and tetrapolar bioimpedance analysis. Additionally, lung capacity and clinical staging were determined. IC was carried out after overnight fasting. P values <0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results: The mean of the BEE for IC and Harris-Benedict equation were 1421.8 ± 348.2 kcal/day and 1310.6 ± 215.1 kcal/day, respectively. The HBE underestimated the BEE when compared with IC (p=0.014). A significant difference was found in the BEE between malnourished (1181.7 ± 278.1 kcal/day) and well-nourished (1509.1 ± 334.1 kcal/day) patients by BMI (p=0.020). In terms of percentage weight loss, no significant difference was found in BEE between patients with significant or non-significant weight loss (p=0.526). BEE for patients presenting with a lower than expected lean body mass was 1408.9 ± 364.3 kcal/day, whereas for those with an adequate lean body mass it was 1538.4 ± 97.5 kcal/day (p=0.550). No association was found between BEE measured by IC and clinical staging (p=0.255) or the Tiffeneau Index (p=0.946). Additionally, when comparing laboratory examinations with BEE measured by IC, no significant association was found between those with and those without alterations (p=0.364, 0.309 and 0.780 respectively). Conclusion: When compared to BEE measured by IC of patients with SCC, it was found that the HBE without injury factor underestimated, whereas the HBE with an injury factor of 1.3 overestimated BEE.