In the article entitled “Estimating resting energy expenditure in critically ill patients: a retrospective exploratory comparison of predictive equations and Fick-derived Weir estimates in Italy” [1], the following corrections should be noted as pointed out by a reader.
1. On page 501, the percentage error of estimated continuous cardiac output (esCCO) was described as “between 18% and 69%.” The correct range should be “between 18% and 46%,” as reported by Joshi et al. [2].
2. The esCCO system was described as “minimally invasive” or “less invasive” (Key Message, p. 493, p. 501-502). The correct description should be “non-invasive.”
REFERENCES
- 1. Romanelli A, Calicchio A, Palmese S, Pascarella S, Pisapia B, Gammaldi R. Estimating resting energy expenditure in critically ill patients: a retrospective exploratory comparison of predictive equations and Fick-derived Weir estimates in Italy. Acute Crit Care 2025;40:491-504.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
- 2. Joshi M, Rathod R, Bhosale SJ, Kulkarni AP. Accuracy of estimated continuous cardiac output monitoring (esCCO) using pulse wave transit time (PWTT) compared to arterial pressure-based CO (APCO) measurement during major surgeries. Indian J Crit Care Med 2022;26:496-500.PubMedPMC
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
