Assessment of resting energy expenditure in patients with cirrhosis

Table 3 Comparisons and correlations between resting energy expenditure measured by indirect calorimetry and different predictive methods

Variable	mean ± SD (kcal)	Difference (95%CI)	P value	R2 (P)
Indirect calorimetry	1607.72 ± 257.4	-	-	-
Bioelectrical impedance	1790.48 ± 352.1	-182.8 (-217.3 to -148.1)	< 0.001	0.899 (< 0.001)
Cunningham	1764.29 ± 246.2	-156.5 (-180.3 to -132.7)	< 0.001	0.899 (< 0.001)
Harris & Benedict	2373.54 ± 254.9	-765.8 (-802.4 to -729.1)	< 0.001	0.767 (< 0.001)
FAO/WHO	1616.07 ± 214.6	-8.35 (-61.8 to 45.1)	0.757	0.457 (< 0.001)
IOM	1648.95 ± 185.6	-41.23 (-61.6 to -20.8)	< 0.001	0.955 (< 0.001)
McArdle et al	1611.30 ± 241.8	-3.58 (−27.3 to -20.1)	0.765	0.899 (< 0.001)
Mifflin et al	1558.71 ± 201.0	49.00 (30.4 to 67.58)	< 0.001	0.955 (< 0.001)

FAO: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; WHO: World Health Organization; UNU: United Nations University.