Dataset Information

Accuracy and Practical Considerations for Doubly Labeled Water Analysis in Nutrition Studies Using a Laser-Based Isotope Instrument (Off-Axis Integrated Cavity Output Spectroscopy).

ABSTRACT:

Background

Given the utility of the doubly labeled water (DLW) method for determination of energy expenditure, additional techniques for isotope analysis of the samples are welcome. Laser-based instruments are one such new analytical tool, but their accuracy and feasibility for DLW studies are grossly understudied.

Objectives

We assessed the accuracy of laser-based isotope ratio measurements as part of the DLW method for estimation of carbon dioxide production rate (rCO2) and total energy expenditure (TEE), in between-group comparison study designs.

Methods

Urine samples from a previous study were analyzed with a laser-based instrument [off-axis integrated cavity output spectroscopy (OA-ICOS)]. In that study, participants consumed a high-, moderate-, or low-carbohydrate diet for 20 wk; urine samples were obtained in weeks 18-20 before and after a 2H- and 18O-enriched water dose. Isotope ratios (δ2H and δ18O), rCO2, and TEE calculated by standard methods were compared to results previously obtained with the standard technique of isotope ratio mass spectrometry (IRMS). Bias, SD, and bias ± 1.96SD bands between IRMS and OA-ICOS were computed.

Results

The between OA-ICOS and IRMS rCO2 and TEE trends were equivalent (within 1.2% and 4.1%, respectively), in spite of the differences in measured δ18O values at high enrichment levels. The OA-ICOS δ18O values displayed an increasing offset from the IRMS results as the 18O enrichment increased (mean ± SD 4.6-5.7‰ ± 2‰ offset at the time point with highest 18O enrichment, ∼135‰), whereas the hydrogen isotope ratio (δ2H) differed only slightly between the methods (mean offset -4.9‰ for all time points). The between-diet differences in TEE from the previous study were recapitulated with a smaller subset of participants and time points.

Conclusions

OA-ICOS analysis is an accurate and feasible technique for the DLW method. Given the δ18O offset observed at high enrichment, validation of each OA-ICOS instrumental setup against established methods (e.g., IRMS) is recommended.

SUBMITTER: Reynard LM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8754563 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLow-carbohydrate diets have been reported to significantly increase human energy expenditure when measured using doubly labeled water (DLW) but not by respiratory chambers. Although DLW may reveal true physiological differences undetected by respiratory chambers, an alternative possibility is that the expenditure differences resulted from failure to correctly estimate the respiratory quotient (RQ) used in the DLW calculations.ObjectiveTo examine energy expenditure differences between isocaloric diets varying widely in carbohydrate and to quantitatively compare DLW data with respiratory chamber and body composition measurements within an energy balance framework.DesignDLW measurements were obtained during the final 2 wk of month-long baseline (BD; 50% carbohydrate, 35% fat, 15% protein) and isocaloric ketogenic diets (KD; 5% carbohydrate, 80% fat, 15% protein) in 17 men with a BMI of 25-35 kg/m2. Subjects resided 2 d/wk in respiratory chambers to measure energy expenditure (EEchamber). DLW expenditure was calculated using chamber-determined RQ either unadjusted (EEDLW) or adjusted (EEDLWΔRQ) for net energy imbalance using diet-specific coefficients. Accelerometers measured physical activity. Body composition changes were measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) which were combined with energy intake measurements to calculate energy expenditure by balance (EEbal).ResultsAfter transitioning from BD to KD, neither EEchamber nor EEbal were significantly changed (∆EEchamber = 24 ± 30 kcal/d; P = 0.43 and ∆EEbal = -141 ± 118 kcal/d; P = 0.25). Similarly, physical activity (-5.1 ± 4.8%; P = 0.3) and exercise efficiency (-1.6 ± 2.4%; P = 0.52) were not significantly changed. However, EEDLW was 209 ± 83 kcal/d higher during the KD (P = 0.023) but was not significantly increased when adjusted for energy balance (EEDLWΔRQ = 139 ± 89 kcal/d; P = 0.14). After removing 2 outliers whose EEDLW were incompatible with other data, EEDLW was marginally increased during the KD by 126 ± 62 kcal/d (P = 0.063) and EEDLW∆RQ was only 46 ± 65 kcal/d higher (P = 0.49).ConclusionsDLW calculations failing to account for diet-specific energy imbalance effects on RQ erroneously suggest that low-carbohydrate diets substantially increase energy expenditure. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01967563.