Permissive underfeeding and intensive insulin therapy in critically ill patients: a randomized controlled trial

A randomized controlled pilot study to evaluate the effect of an enteral formulation designed to improve gastrointestinal tolerance in the critically ill patient-the SPIRIT trial

Background

Diarrhea is frequent in patients in intensive care units (ICU) and is associated with discomfort and complications and may increase the length of stay and nursing workload.

Methods

This was a prospective, double-blind, randomized, controlled single-center pilot study to assess the incidence and frequency of diarrhea and the respective effects of a modified enteral diet (intervention: Peptamen® AF, rich in proteins, medium chain triglycerides and fish oil) compared to a standard diet (control: Isosource® Energy) in 90 randomized adult patients (intervention, n = 46; control, n = 44) with an ICU stay ≥5 days and tube feeding ≥3 days. Tube feeding was initiated within 72 h of ICU admission and continued up to 10 days. The caloric goal was adjusted to needs by indirect calorimetry. Gastrointestinal function, nutritional intake, and nursing workload were recorded. Follow-up was until 28 days after randomization.

Results

Median age was 63.3 (interquartile range (IQR) 51.0–73.2) years and Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II was 61.0 (IQR 47.8–74). Time to reach caloric goal (intervention: 2.2 (0.8–3.7) days (median, IQR); control: 2.0 (1.3–2.7) days; p = 0.16), length of time on study nutrition (intervention: 5.0 (3.6–6.4) days; control: 7.0 (5.3–8.7) days; p = 0.26), and calorie intake (intervention: 18.0 (12.5–20.9) kcal/kg/day; control 19.7 (17.3–23.1) kcal/kg/day; p = 0.08) did not differ between groups, with a higher protein intake for Peptamen® group (1.13 (0.78–1.31) g/kg/day vs 0.80 (0.70–0.94); p < 0.001). No difference in diarrhea incidence (intervention group: 29 (64%); control group: 31 (70%); p = 0.652), use of fecal collectors (23 (51%) vs. 24 (55%); p = 0.83), or diarrhea-free days (161 (64%) vs 196 (68%); p = 0.65) was found. Nursing workload and cost for diarrhea care were not different between the groups. In a post-hoc analysis, adjusted for treatment group, age, sex, and SAPS II score, diarrhea was associated with length of mechanical ventilation (9.5 (6.0–13.1) vs. 3.9 (3.2–4.6) days; p = 0.006) and length of ICU stay (11.0 (8.9–13.1) vs. 5.0 (3.8–6.2) days; p = 0.001).

Conclusions

In this pilot study, we found a high incidence of diarrhea, which was not attenuated by Peptamen® AF. Patients with diarrhea stayed longer in the ICU.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT01581957. Registered on 18 April 2012.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13054-017-1730-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Prevention of acute kidney injury and protection of renal function in the intensive care unit: update 2017 : Expert opinion of the Working Group on Prevention, AKI section, European Society of Intensive Care Medicine

BACKGROUND

Acute kidney injury (AKI) in the intensive care unit is associated with significant mortality and morbidity.

OBJECTIVES

To determine and update previous recommendations for the prevention of AKI, specifically the role of fluids, diuretics, inotropes, vasopressors/vasodilators, hormonal and nutritional interventions, sedatives, statins, remote ischaemic preconditioning and care bundles.

METHOD

A systematic search of the literature was performed for studies published between 1966 and March 2017 using these potential protective strategies in adult patients at risk of AKI. The following clinical conditions were considered: major surgery, critical illness, sepsis, shock, exposure to potentially nephrotoxic drugs and radiocontrast. Clinical endpoints included incidence or grade of AKI, the need for renal replacement therapy and mortality. Studies were graded according to the international GRADE system.

RESULTS

We formulated 12 recommendations, 13 suggestions and seven best practice statements. The few strong recommendations with high-level evidence are mostly against the intervention in question (starches, low-dose dopamine, statins in cardiac surgery). Strong recommendations with lower-level evidence include controlled fluid resuscitation with crystalloids, avoiding fluid overload, titration of norepinephrine to a target MAP of 65-70 mmHg (unless chronic hypertension) and not using diuretics or levosimendan for kidney protection solely.

CONCLUSION

The results of recent randomised controlled trials have allowed the formulation of new recommendations and/or increase the strength of previous recommendations. On the other hand, in many domains the available evidence remains insufficient, resulting from the limited quality of the clinical trials and the poor reporting of kidney outcomes.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016

OBJECTIVE

To provide an update to "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2012."

DESIGN

A consensus committee of 55 international experts representing 25 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict-of-interest (COI) policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. A stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in December 2015. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development.

METHODS

The panel consisted of five sections: hemodynamics, infection, adjunctive therapies, metabolic, and ventilation. Population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) questions were reviewed and updated as needed, and evidence profiles were generated. Each subgroup generated a list of questions, searched for best available evidence, and then followed the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the quality of evidence from high to very low, and to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or best practice statement when applicable.

RESULTS

The Surviving Sepsis Guideline panel provided 93 statements on early management and resuscitation of patients with sepsis or septic shock. Overall, 32 were strong recommendations, 39 were weak recommendations, and 18 were best-practice statements. No recommendation was provided for four questions.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial agreement exists among a large cohort of international experts regarding many strong recommendations for the best care of patients with sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for these critically ill patients with high mortality.

Nutrition support in hospitalised adults at nutritional risk

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of disease-related malnutrition in Western European hospitals is estimated to be about 30%. There is no consensus whether poor nutritional status causes poorer clinical outcome or if it is merely associated with it. The intention with all forms of nutrition support is to increase uptake of essential nutrients and improve clinical outcome. Previous reviews have shown conflicting results with regard to the effects of nutrition support.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of nutrition support versus no intervention, treatment as usual, or placebo in hospitalised adults at nutritional risk.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (Ovid SP), Embase (Ovid SP), LILACS (BIREME), and Science Citation Index Expanded (Web of Science). We also searched the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (www.who.int/ictrp); ClinicalTrials.gov; Turning Research Into Practice (TRIP); Google Scholar; and BIOSIS, as well as relevant bibliographies of review articles and personal files. All searches are current to February 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We include randomised clinical trials, irrespective of publication type, publication date, and language, comparing nutrition support versus control in hospitalised adults at nutritional risk. We exclude trials assessing non-standard nutrition support.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane and the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group. We used trial domains to assess the risks of systematic error (bias). We conducted Trial Sequential Analyses to control for the risks of random errors. We considered a P value of 0.025 or less as statistically significant. We used GRADE methodology. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, and health-related quality of life.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 244 randomised clinical trials with 28,619 participants that met our inclusion criteria. We considered all trials to be at high risk of bias. Two trials accounted for one-third of all included participants. The included participants were heterogenous with regard to disease (20 different medical specialties). The experimental interventions were parenteral nutrition (86 trials); enteral nutrition (tube-feeding) (80 trials); oral nutrition support (55 trials); mixed experimental intervention (12 trials); general nutrition support (9 trials); and fortified food (2 trials). The control interventions were treatment as usual (122 trials); no intervention (107 trials); and placebo (15 trials). In 204/244 trials, the intervention lasted three days or more.We found no evidence of a difference between nutrition support and control for short-term mortality (end of intervention). The absolute risk was 8.3% across the control groups compared with 7.8% (7.1% to 8.5%) in the intervention groups, based on the risk ratio (RR) of 0.94 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.86 to 1.03, P = 0.16, 21,758 participants, 114 trials, low quality of evidence). We found no evidence of a difference between nutrition support and control for long-term mortality (maximum follow-up). The absolute risk was 13.2% in the control group compared with 12.2% (11.6% to 13%) following nutritional interventions based on a RR of 0.93 (95% CI 0.88 to 0.99, P = 0.03, 23,170 participants, 127 trials, low quality of evidence). Trial Sequential Analysis showed we only had enough information to assess a risk ratio reduction of approximately 10% or more. A risk ratio reduction of 10% or more could be rejected.We found no evidence of a difference between nutrition support and control for short-term serious adverse events. The absolute risk was 9.9% in the control groups versus 9.2% (8.5% to 10%), with nutrition based on the RR of 0.93 (95% CI 0.86 to 1.01, P = 0.07, 22,087 participants, 123 trials, low quality of evidence). At long-term follow-up, the reduction in the risk of serious adverse events was 1.5%, from 15.2% in control groups to 13.8% (12.9% to 14.7%) following nutritional support (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.85 to 0.97, P = 0.004, 23,413 participants, 137 trials, low quality of evidence). However, the Trial Sequential Analysis showed we only had enough information to assess a risk ratio reduction of approximately 10% or more. A risk ratio reduction of 10% or more could be rejected.Trial Sequential Analysis of enteral nutrition alone showed that enteral nutrition might reduce serious adverse events at maximum follow-up in people with different diseases. We could find no beneficial effect of oral nutrition support or parenteral nutrition support on all-cause mortality and serious adverse events in any subgroup.Only 16 trials assessed health-related quality of life. We performed a meta-analysis of two trials reporting EuroQoL utility score at long-term follow-up and found very low quality of evidence for effects of nutritional support on quality of life (mean difference (MD) -0.01, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.01; 3961 participants, two trials). Trial Sequential Analyses showed that we did not have enough information to confirm or reject clinically relevant intervention effects on quality of life.Nutrition support may increase weight at short-term follow-up (MD 1.32 kg, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.00, 5445 participants, 68 trials, very low quality of evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is low-quality evidence for the effects of nutrition support on mortality and serious adverse events. Based on the results of our review, it does not appear to lead to a risk ratio reduction of approximately 10% or more in either all-cause mortality or serious adverse events at short-term and long-term follow-up.There is very low-quality evidence for an increase in weight with nutrition support at the end of treatment in hospitalised adults determined to be at nutritional risk. The effects of nutrition support on all remaining outcomes are unclear.Despite the clinically heterogenous population and the high risk of bias of all included trials, our analyses showed limited signs of statistical heterogeneity. Further trials may be warranted, assessing enteral nutrition (tube-feeding) for different patient groups. Future trials ought to be conducted with low risks of systematic errors and low risks of random errors, and they also ought to assess health-related quality of life.

Role of timing and dose of energy received in patients with acute lung injury on mortality in the Intensive Nutrition in Acute Lung Injury Trial (INTACT): a post hoc analysis

BACKGROUND

Our trial INTACT (Intensive Nutrition in Acute Lung Injury Trial) was designed to compare the impact of feeding from acute lung injury (ALI) diagnosis to hospital discharge, an interval that, to our knowledge, has not yet been explored. It was stopped early because participants who were randomly assigned to energy intakes at nationally recommended amounts via intensive medical nutrition therapy experienced significantly higher mortality hazards than did those assigned to standard nutrition support care that provided energy at 55% of recommended concentrations.

OBJECTIVE

We assessed the influence of dose and timing of feeding on hospital mortality.

DESIGN

Participants (n = 78) were dichotomized as died or discharged alive. Associations between the energy and protein received overall, early (days 1-7), and late (days ≥8) and the hazards of hospital mortality were evaluated between groups with multivariable analysis methods.

RESULTS

Higher overall energy intake predicted significantly higher mortality (OR: 1.14, 95% CI: 1.02, 1.27). Among participants enrolled for ≥8 d (n = 66), higher early energy intake significantly increased the HR for mortality (HR: 1.17, 95% CI: 1.07, 1.28), whereas higher late energy intake was significantly protective (HR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.83, 1.0). Results were similar for early but not late protein (grams per kilogram) exposure (early-exposure HR: 8.9, 95% CI: 2.3, 34.3; late-exposure HR: 0.15, 95% CI: 0.02, 1.1). Threshold analyses indicated early mean intakes ≥18 kcal/kg significantly increased subsequent mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Providing kilocalories per kilogram or grams of protein per kilogram early post-ALI diagnosis at recommended levels was associated with significantly higher hazards for mortality, whereas higher late energy intakes reduced mortality hazards. This time-varying effect violated the Cox proportionality assumption, indicating that feeding trials in similar populations should extend beyond 7 d and use time-varying statistical methods. Future trials are required for corroboration. INTACT was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01921101.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016

OBJECTIVE

To provide an update to "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2012".

DESIGN

A consensus committee of 55 international experts representing 25 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict-of-interest (COI) policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. A stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in December 2015. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development.

METHODS

The panel consisted of five sections: hemodynamics, infection, adjunctive therapies, metabolic, and ventilation. Population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) questions were reviewed and updated as needed, and evidence profiles were generated. Each subgroup generated a list of questions, searched for best available evidence, and then followed the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the quality of evidence from high to very low, and to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or best practice statement when applicable.

RESULTS

The Surviving Sepsis Guideline panel provided 93 statements on early management and resuscitation of patients with sepsis or septic shock. Overall, 32 were strong recommendations, 39 were weak recommendations, and 18 were best-practice statements. No recommendation was provided for four questions.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial agreement exists among a large cohort of international experts regarding many strong recommendations for the best care of patients with sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for these critically ill patients with high mortality.

A multicentre, randomised controlled trial comparing the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of early nutritional support via the parenteral versus the enteral route in critically ill patients (CALORIES)

BACKGROUND

Malnutrition is a common problem in critically ill patients in UK NHS critical care units. Early nutritional support is therefore recommended to address deficiencies in nutritional state and related disorders in metabolism. However, evidence is conflicting regarding the optimum route (parenteral or enteral) of delivery.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the effect of early nutritional support via the parenteral route compared with the enteral route on mortality at 30 days and on incremental cost-effectiveness at 1 year. Secondary objectives were to compare the route of early nutritional support on duration of organ support; infectious and non-infectious complications; critical care unit and acute hospital length of stay; all-cause mortality at critical care unit and acute hospital discharge, at 90 days and 1 year; survival to 90 days and 1 year; nutritional and health-related quality of life, resource use and costs at 90 days and 1 year; and estimated lifetime incremental cost-effectiveness.

DESIGN

A pragmatic, open, multicentre, parallel-group randomised controlled trial with an integrated economic evaluation.

SETTING

Adult general critical care units in 33 NHS hospitals in England.

PARTICIPANTS

2400 eligible patients.

INTERVENTIONS

Five days of early nutritional support delivered via the parenteral (n = 1200) and enteral (n = 1200) route.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

All-cause mortality at 30 days after randomisation and incremental net benefit (INB) (at £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year) at 1 year.

RESULTS

By 30 days, 393 of 1188 (33.1%) patients assigned to receive early nutritional support via the parenteral route and 409 of 1195 (34.2%) assigned to the enteral route had died [p = 0.57; absolute risk reduction 1.15%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.65 to 4.94; relative risk 0.97 (0.86 to 1.08)]. At 1 year, INB for the parenteral route compared with the enteral route was negative at -£1320 (95% CI -£3709 to £1069). The probability that early nutritional support via the parenteral route is more cost-effective - given the data - is < 20%. The proportion of patients in the parenteral group who experienced episodes of hypoglycaemia (p = 0.006) and of vomiting (p < 0.001) was significantly lower than in the enteral group. There were no significant differences in the 15 other secondary outcomes and no significant interactions with pre-specified subgroups.

LIMITATIONS

Blinding of nutritional support was deemed to be impractical and, although the primary outcome was objective, some secondary outcomes, although defined and objectively assessed, may have been more vulnerable to observer bias.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality at 30 days for early nutritional support via the parenteral route compared with the enteral route among adults admitted to critical care units in England. On average, costs were higher for the parenteral route, which, combined with similar survival and quality of life, resulted in negative INBs at 1 year.

FUTURE WORK

Nutritional support is a complex combination of timing, dose, duration, delivery and type, all of which may affect outcomes and costs. Conflicting evidence remains regarding optimum provision to critically ill patients. There is a need to utilise rigorous consensus methods to establish future priorities for basic and clinical research in this area.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN17386141.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 28. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Effect of Calories Delivered on Clinical Outcomes in Critically Ill Patients: Systemic Review and Meta-analysis

Introduction:

International guidelines are promoting early enteral nutrition (EN) as a means of feeding critically ill adult patients to improve clinical outcomes. The question of how much calorie intake is enough to improve the outcomes still remained inconclusive. Therefore, we carried out a meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of low calorie (LC) versus high calorie (HC) delivery on critically ill patients' outcomes.

Methods:

We included randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that compared LC EN with or without supplemental parenteral nutrition with HC delivery in this meta-analysis irrespective of the site of nutritional delivery in the gastrointestinal tract. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane central register of controlled trials electronic databases to identify RCTs that compared the effects of initially different calorie intake in critical illness. The primary outcome was overall mortality.

Results:

This meta-analysis included 17 RCTs with a total of 3,593 participants. The result of analysis showed that there was no significant difference between the LC group and HC group in overall mortality (risk ratio [RR], 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87–1.10; P = 0.74; I² = 6%; P = 0.38), or new-onset pneumonia (RR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.73–1.16, P = 0.46; I² = 38%, P = 0. 11).

Conclusion:

The current meta-analysis showed that there was no significant difference in mortality of critically ill patients initially between the two groups.

Effectiveness of enteral feeding protocol on clinical outcomes in critically ill patients: A before and after study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Enteral nutrition (EN) feeding protocol was proposed to have positive impact on critically ill patients. However, current studies showed conflicting results. The present study aimed to investigate whether enteral feeding protocol was able to improve clinical outcomes in critically ill patients.

METHODS

A before (stage 1) and after (stage 2) interventional study was performed in 10 tertiary care hospitals. All patients expected to stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) for over three days were potentially eligible. Clinical outcomes such as 28-day mortality, ICU length of stay, duration of mechanical ventilation (MV), and nosocomial infection were compared between the two stages.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 410 patients were enrolled during the study period, including 236 in stage 1 and 174 in stage 2. EN feeding protocol was able to increase the proportion of EN in day 2 (41.8±22.3 vs. 50.0±28.3%; p = 0.006) and day 6 (70.3±25.2 vs. 77.6±25.8%; p = 0.006). EN percentages tended to be higher in stage 1 than that in stage 2 on other days, but statistical significance was not reached. There was no difference in 28-day mortality between stage 1 and 2 (0.14 vs. 0.14; p = 0.984). Implementation of EN feeding protocol marginally reduced ICU length of stay (19.44±18.48 vs. 16.29±16.19 days; p = 0.077). There was no difference in the duration of MV between stage a and stage 2 (14.24±14.49 vs. 14.51±17.55 days; p = 0.877).

CONCLUSIONS

The study found that the EN feeding protocol was able to increase the proportion of EN feeding, but failed to reduce 28-day mortality, incidence of nosocomial infection or duration of MV.

Autophagy--A free meal in sickness-associated anorexia

Activation of the immune system is metabolically costly, yet a hallmark of an infection is a reduction in appetite with a subsequent reduction in metabolite provision. What is the functional value of decreasing nutrient intake when an infection imposes large demands on metabolic parameters? Here, we propose that sickness-associated anorexia (SAA) upregulates the ancient process of autophagy systemically, thereby profoundly controlling not only immune- but also nonimmune-competent cells. This allows an advanced impact on the resolution of an infection through direct pathogen killing, enhancement of epitope presentation and the contribution toward the clearance of noxious factors. By rendering a 'free meal,' autophagy is thus most fundamentally harnessed during an anorexic response in order to promote both host tolerance and resistance. These findings strongly suggest a reassessment of numerous SAA-related clinical applications and a re-evaluation of current efforts in patient care.

Proceedings of the 2016 Clinical Nutrition Week Research Workshop-The Optimal Dose of Protein Provided to Critically Ill Patients

Recent literature has created considerable confusion about the optimal amount of protein/amino acids that should be provided to the critically ill patient. In fact, the evidentiary basis that directly tries to answer this question is relatively small. As a clinical nutrition research community, there is an urgent need to develop the optimal methods to assess the impact of exogenous protein/amino acid administration in the intensive care unit setting. That assessment can be conducted at various levels: (1) impact on stress response pathways, (2) impact on muscle synthesis and protein balance, (3) impact on muscle mass and function, and (4) impact on the patient's recovery. The objective of this research workshop was to review current literature relating to protein/amino acid administration for the critically ill patient and clinical outcomes and to discuss the key measurement and methodological features of future studies that should be done to inform the optimal protein/amino acid dose provided to critically ill patients.

Lower versus higher dose of enteral caloric intake in adult critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is conflicting evidence about the relationship between the dose of enteral caloric intake and survival in critically ill patients. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare the effect of lower versus higher dose of enteral caloric intake in adult critically ill patients on outcome.

METHODS

We reviewed MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus from inception through November 2015. We included randomized and quasi-randomized studies in which there was a significant difference in the caloric intake in adult critically ill patients, including trials in which caloric restriction was the primary intervention (caloric restriction trials) and those with other interventions (non-caloric restriction trials). Two reviewers independently extracted data on study characteristics, caloric intake, and outcomes with hospital mortality being the primary outcome.

RESULTS

Twenty-one trials mostly with moderate bias risk were included (2365 patients in the lower caloric intake group and 2352 patients in the higher caloric group). Lower compared with higher caloric intake was not associated with difference in hospital mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.953; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.838-1.083), ICU mortality (RR 0.885; 95 % CI 0.751-1.042), total nosocomial infections (RR 0.982; 95 % CI 0.878-1.077), mechanical ventilation duration, or length of ICU or hospital stay. Blood stream infections (11 trials; RR 0.718; 95 % CI 0.519-0.994) and incident renal replacement therapy (five trials; RR 0.711; 95 % CI 0.545-0.928) were lower with lower caloric intake. The associations between lower compared with higher caloric intake and primary and secondary outcomes, including pneumonia, were not different between caloric restriction and non-caloric restriction trials, except for the hospital stay which was longer with lower caloric intake in the caloric restriction trials.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no association between the dose of caloric intake in adult critically ill patients and hospital mortality. Lower caloric intake was associated with lower risk of blood stream infections and incident renal replacement therapy (five trials only). The heterogeneity in the design, feeding route and timing and caloric dose among the included trials could limit our interpretation. Further studies are needed to clarify our findings.

The optimal target for acute glycemic control in critically ill patients: a network meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The optimal target blood glucose concentration for acute glycemic control remains unclear because few studies have directly compared 144-180 with 110-144 or >180 mg/dL. Accordingly, we performed a network meta-analysis to compare four different target blood glucose levels (<110, 110-144, 144-180, and >180 mg/dL) in terms of the benefit and risk of insulin therapy.

METHODS

We included all of the studies from three systematic reviews and searched the PubMed and Cochrane databases for other studies investigating glucose targets among critically ill patients. The primary outcome was hospital mortality, and the secondary outcomes were sepsis or bloodstream infection and the risk of hypoglycemia. Network meta-analysis to identify an optimal target glucose concentration.

RESULTS

The network meta-analysis included 18,098 patients from 35 studies. There were no significant differences in the risk of mortality and infection among the four blood glucose ranges overall or in subgroup analysis. Conversely, target concentrations of <110 and 110-144 mg/dL were associated with a four to ninefold increase in the risk of hypoglycemia compared with 144-180 and >180 mg/dL. However, there were no significant differences between the target concentrations of 144-180 and >180 mg/dL.

CONCLUSIONS

This network meta-analysis found no significant difference in the risk of mortality and infection among four target blood glucose ranges in critically ill patients, but indicated that target blood glucose levels of <110 and 110-144 mg/dL were associated with a higher risk of hypoglycemia than target levels of 144-180 and >180 mg/dL. Further studies are required to refute or confirm our findings.

Significant Published Articles for Pharmacy Nutrition Support Practice in 2014 and 2015

PURPOSE

To assist the pharmacy clinician engaged in nutrition support in staying current with the most pertinent literature.

METHODS

Several experienced board-certified clinical pharmacists engaged in nutrition support therapy compiled a list of articles published in 2014 and 2015 that they considered to be important to their practice. Only those articles available in print format were considered for potential inclusion. Articles available only in preprint electronic format were not evaluated. The citation list was compiled into a single spreadsheet where the author participants were asked to ascertain whether they considered the paper important to nutrition support pharmacy practice. A culled list of publications was then identified whereby the majority of author participants (at least 5 out of 8) considered the paper to be important.

RESULTS

A total of 108 articles were identified; 36 of which were considered to be of high importance. An important guideline article published in early 2016, but not ranked, was also included. The top-ranked articles from the primary literature were reviewed.

CONCLUSION

It is recommended that the informed pharmacist, who is engaged in nutrition support therapy, be familiar with the majority of these articles.

Sickness-Associated Anorexia: Mother Nature's Idea of Immunonutrition?

During an infection, expansion of immune cells, assembly of antibodies, and the induction of a febrile response collectively place continual metabolic strain on the host. These considerations also provide a rationale for nutritional support in critically ill patients. Yet, results from clinical and preclinical studies indicate that aggressive nutritional support does not always benefit patients and may occasionally be detrimental. Moreover, both vertebrates and invertebrates exhibit a decrease in appetite during an infection, indicating that such sickness-associated anorexia (SAA) is evolutionarily conserved. It also suggests that SAA performs a vital function during an infection. We review evidence signifying that SAA may present a mechanism by which autophagic flux is upregulated systemically. A decrease in serum amino acids during an infection promotes autophagy not only in immune cells, but also in nonimmune cells. Similarly, bile acids reabsorbed postprandially inhibit hepatic autophagy by binding to farnesoid X receptors, indicating that SAA may be an attempt to conserve autophagy. In addition, augmented autophagic responses may play a critical role in clearing pathogens (xenophagy), in the presentation of epitopes in nonprovisional antigen presenting cells and the removal of damaged proteins and organelles. Collectively, these observations suggest that some patients might benefit from permissive underfeeding.

Supplemental Parenteral Nutrition Is the Key to Prevent Energy Deficits in Critically Ill Patients

This review emphasizes the role of a timely supplemental parenteral nutrition (PN) for critically ill patients. It contradicts the recommendations of current guidelines to avoid the use of PN, as it is associated with risk. Critical illness results in severe metabolic stress. During the early phase, inflammatory cytokines and mediators induce catabolism to meet the increased body energy demands by endogenous sources. This response is not suppressed by exogenous energy administration, and the early use of PN to reach the energy target leads to overfeeding. On the other hand, early and progressive enteral nutrition (EN) is less likely to cause overfeeding because of variable gastrointestinal tolerance, a factor frequently associated with significant energy deficit. Recent studies demonstrate that adequate feeding is beneficial during and after the intensive care unit (ICU) stay. Supplemental PN allows for timely adequate feeding, if sufficient precautions are taken to avoid overfeeding. Indirect calorimetry can precisely define the adequate energy prescription. Our pragmatic approach is to start early EN to progressively test the gut tolerance and add supplemental PN on day 3 or 4 after ICU admission, only if EN does not meet the measured energy target. We believe that supplemental PN plays a pivotal role in the achievement of adequate feeding in critically ill patients with intolerance to EN and does not cause harm if overfeeding is avoided by careful prescription, ideally based on energy expenditure measured by indirect calorimetry.

Impact of decreasing energy intakes in major burn patients: A 15-year retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Nutritional therapy is particularly important after major burn injury and specific nutritional guidelines have been developed. The study aimed at evaluating the impact of the changes in our nutritional practice, general compliance with the guidelines and potential consequences.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data in burn patients requiring intensive care (ICU) between 1999 and 2014.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

admission on day 1, full treatment and length of ICU stay >7 days. Four periods (P) were defined by protocol changes (P1: 1999-2001, P2: 2002-2005, P3: 2006-2010, P4: 2011-2014). Collected data: demographic and nutritional data, infectious complications, weights, CRP and prealbumin concentrations during the first 21 days.

RESULTS

240 patients were included (median age 43 years, burned area 25%). Measured energy expenditure (MEE) was stable through all periods but the prescribed caloric target decreased significantly, and below MEE (P1: 33 kcal/kg, IQR 7, P4: 28 kcal/kg, IQR 8, p < 0.001). Energy delivery ended decreasing below 30 kcal/kg/day (P1: 30 kcal/kg, IQR 23, P4: 25 kcal/kg, IQR 12, p < 0.001). Protein intakes increased due the use of high protein solutions and glutamine (P1: 1.04 g/kg, IQR 0.90, P4: 1.26, IQR 0.99, p < 0.001). Weight loss by day 21 increased significantly according to area under the curve (P1: 701, IQR 38, P2: 722, IQR 51, P4: 689 IQR 63, p = 0.02). Prealbumin levels decreased with energy decrease (P1: 150 mg/L, IQR 110, P4: 80 mg/L, IQR 70, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

The observed reduction of the energy delivery <30 kcal/kg was associated with a supplemental weight loss and lower prealbumin concentrations.

Event-rate and delta inflation when evaluating mortality as a primary outcome from randomized controlled trials of nutritional interventions during critical illness: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of high-quality evidence that proves that nutritional interventions during critical illness reduce mortality.

OBJECTIVES

We evaluated whether power calculations for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of nutritional interventions that used mortality as the primary outcome were realistic, and whether overestimation was systematic in the studies identified to determine whether this was due to overestimates of event rate or delta.

DESIGN

A systematic review of the literature between 2005 and 2015 was performed to identify RCTs of nutritional interventions administered to critically ill adults that had mortality as the primary outcome. Predicted event rate (predicted mortality during the control), predicted mortality during intervention, predicted delta (predicted difference between mortality during the control and intervention), actual event rate (observed mortality during control), observed mortality during intervention, and actual delta (difference between observed mortality during the control and intervention) were recorded. The event-rate gap (predicted event rate minus observed event rate), the delta gap (predicted delta minus observed delta), and the predicted number needed to treat were calculated. Data are shown as median (range).

RESULTS

Fourteen articles were extracted, with power calculations provided for 10 studies. The predicted event rate was 29.9% (20.0–52.4%), and the predicted delta was 7.9% (3.0–20.0%). If the study hypothesis was proven correct then, on the basis of the power calculations, the number needed to treat would have been 12.7 (5.0–33.3) patients. The actual event rate was 25.3% (6.1–50.0%), the observed mortality during the intervention was 24.4% (6.3–39.7%), and the actual delta was 0.5% (−10.2–10.3%), such that the event-rate gap was 2.6% (−3.9–23.7%) and delta gap was 7.5% (3.2–25.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Overestimates of delta occur frequently in RCTs of nutritional interventions in the critically ill that are powered to determine a mortality benefit. Delta inflation may explain the number of "negative" studies in this field of research.

The dilemma of protein delivery in the intensive care unit

OBJECTIVE

Optimal protein delivery in the intensive care unit (ICU) may offer a significant mortality benefit, whereas energy overfeeding leads to worse outcomes. The aim of the present study was to assess actual protein versus energy delivery in a multidisciplinary adult ICU.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of ICU charts to determine total protein delivery and energy delivery, inclusive of non-nutritional energy sources (NNES), from admission until a maximum of 7 d. The outcome variables were protein and energy delivery relative to targets and cumulative protein and energy balance.

RESULTS

We included 71 patients (49% male), with a mean age of 49.2 ± 17.1 y. Of the patients, 68% were medical and 32% surgical. Nutrition therapy was initiated within 14.5 ± 14.1 h. The majority (80%) received enteral nutrition (EN). Median protein delivery and energy delivery were 75 g/d (1.1 g·kg·d(-1), range 21-135 g/d) and 1642 kcal/d (26 kcal·kg·d(-1), range 740-2619 kcal/d), meeting 89% (range 24-103%) and 100% (range 39-133%) of target, respectively. NNES, mostly from carbohydrate-containing intravenous fluids, contributed 8% (range 0-29%) to total energy delivery (133 kcal/d, range 0-561). Protein and energy underfeeding occurred in 51% and 27% of cases, respectively. Only 59% of those with an adequate energy delivery (90-110% of target) achieved an adequate protein delivery. A significant negative correlation was found between cumulative protein and energy balance and time to initiation of NT (protein: R = -0.33, P = 0.006; energy: R = -0.28, P = 0.017).

CONCLUSIONS

Early initiation of EN with currently available energy-rich formulas is insufficient to achieve adequate protein delivery. NNES add to total energy delivery. Novel EN formulas with a lower nonprotein energy-to-nitrogen ratio may help to optimize protein delivery without the harmful effects of energy overfeeding.

Is early starvation beneficial for the critically ill patient?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Anorexia is a preserved evolutionally response that may be beneficial during acute illness. Yet current clinical practice guidelines recommend early and targeted enteral nutritional support. However, the optimal timing of the initiation of enteral nutrition and the caloric and protein requirements of critically ill patients is controversial.

RECENT FINDINGS

Starvation promotes autophagy and this may play a key role in promoting host defenses and the immune response to intracellular pathogens. Because of the perceived benefits of early enteral nutrition and the lack of clinical equipoise, randomized controlled trials comparing short-term starvation to targeted normocaloric enteral nutrition have until recently not been performed. The results of the recently reported PYTHON trial (Pancreatitis, Very Early Compared with Selective Delayed Start of Enteral Feeding) dispel the notion that short-term starvation is harmful. Furthermore, six recent randomized controlled trials that compared trophic and permissive underfeeding to normocaloric goals, failed to demonstrate any outcome benefit from the more aggressive approach. In addition, recent evidence suggests that intermittent enteral nutation may be preferable to continuous tube feeding.

SUMMARY

Limiting nutrient intake during the first 48-72 h of acute illness may be beneficial; in those patients who are unable to resume an oral diet after this time period intermittent enteral nutrition targeting 20-25 cal/kg/day is recommended.

Nutritional needs for the critically ill in relation to inflammation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review focuses on nutritional needs in critically ill patients. The inflammation corresponding to acute stress is highlighted. Simultaneously, we try to avoid limiting the perspective to only the acute phase.

RECENT FINDINGS

During the last year, a number of important studies on nutritional needs in the critically ill have been published, including large randomized controlled trials. In particular studies addressing the needs for energy and proteins in the critically ill have imparted new knowledge in this field. However, there are few studies concerning the rehabilitation phase after critical illness.

SUMMARY

Although the recent findings and publications contribute to a more nuanced understanding of nutrition during critical illness, the implications for clinical practice are not in discord with the current recommendations of guidelines.

Parenteral nutrition in the ICU setting: need for a shift in utilization

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The difficulties to feed the patients adequately with enteral nutrition alone have drawn the attention of the clinicians toward the use of parenteral nutrition, although recommendations by the recent guidelines are conflicting. This review focuses on the intrinsic role of parenteral nutrition, its new indication, and modalities of use for the critically ill patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

A recent trial demonstrated that selecting either parenteral nutrition or enteral nutrition for early nutrition has no impact on clinical outcomes. However, it must be acknowledged that the risk of relative overfeeding is greater when using parenteral nutrition and the risk of underfeeding is greater when using enteral nutrition because of gastrointestinal intolerance. Both overfeeding and underfeeding in the critically ill patients are associated with deleterious outcomes. Thus, early and adequate feeding according to the specific energy needs can be recommended as the optimal feeding strategy.

SUMMARY

Parenteral nutrition can be used to substitute or supplement enteral nutrition, if adequately prescribed. Testing for enteral nutrition tolerance during 2-3 days after ICU admission provides the perfect timing to start parenteral nutrition, if needed. In case of absolute contraindication for enteral nutrition, consider starting parenteral nutrition carefully to avoid overfeeding.

Association between aspirin therapy and the outcome in critically ill patients: a nested cohort study

Background

Antiplatelet therapy may attenuate the undesirable effects of platelets on the inflammatory cascades in critical illness. The objective of this study was to evaluate the association between aspirin therapy during intensive care unit (ICU) stay and all-cause mortality.

Methods

This was a nested cohort study within two randomized controlled trials in which all enrolled patients (N = 763) were grouped according to aspirin intake during ICU stay. The primary endpoints were all-cause ICU mortality and hospital mortality. Secondary endpoints included the development of severe sepsis during the ICU stay, ICU and hospital length of stay and the duration of mechanical ventilation. Propensity score was used to adjust for clinically and statistically relevant variables.

Results

Of the 763 patients, 154 patients (20 %) received aspirin. Aspirin therapy was not associated with a reduction in ICU mortality (adjusted OR 1.18, 95 % CI 0.69–2.02, P = 0.55) nor with hospital mortality (adjusted OR 0.95, 95 % CI 0.61–1.50, P = 0.82). Aspirin use had no preferential association with mortality among any of the study subgroups. Additionally, aspirin therapy was associated with higher risk of ICU-acquired severe sepsis, and increased mechanical ventilation duration and ICU length of stay.

Conclusion

Our study showed that the use of aspirin in critically ill patients was not associated with lower mortality, but rather with an increased morbidity.

Trial Registration Number

ISRCTN07413772 and ISRCTN96294863.

Effects of implementation of a computerized nutritional protocol in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients: A single-centre before and after study

INTRODUCTION

Optimal nutrition, defined as adequate intake of energy, macronutrients -especially proteins- and micronutrients impacts on outcome of patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). However, both nutrition below and over target have been associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Computerized nutrition protocols may help to improve nutrition adequacy. In July 2014 a computerized nutritional protocol was implemented in our ICU. We designed a study to address the effects of this protocol implementation on energy and protein adequacy and outcome.

METHODS

A retrospective pre-post analysis of nutrition adequacy in adult mechanically ventilated critically ill patients before and after the implementation of an electronic nutritional protocol to initiate feeding and with hourly feedback. Primary outcome was adequacy of total caloric intake from day 2-7, secondary outcomes were adequacy of protein intake, clinical outcome results (length of ICU and hospital stay, ICU and hospital mortality, duration of tube feeding, duration of mechanical ventilation, number of patients with parenteral nutrition), and glucose and electrolyte abnormalities.

RESULTS

In total 146 patients were included (73 patients before and 73 patients after implementation). Before implementation we encountered more patients who were fed above target (actual caloric intake >110% of target) than after implementation (during day 2-7: 12% vs. 3%, P = 0.029) without significant reduction of protein intake (daily means during day 2-7: 1.18 g/kg vs. 1.08 g/kg, P = 0.09). Only on day 6, significantly more patients were fed on target after implementation (80-110%; 47% vs. 67%, P = 0.028). No differences in numbers of patients who were fed below target (<80%) were found. Numbers of patients with hypokalaemia after implementation (59% vs. 38%, P = 0.013) were lower. The incidence of electrolyte abnormalities (hypernatraemia, hyponatraemia and hypokalaemia) was lower after implementation, however hypomagnesaemia incidence increased. No statistical significant differences in clinical outcome were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of an electronic nutritional protocol to initiate feeding with hourly feedback in our ICU reduced the rate of mechanically ventilated patients fed above target without reducing protein intake or increasing the rates of feeding below target, while reducing the incidence of electrolyte abnormalities. No statistical significant differences in other clinical outcomes were observed.

Clinical Guide for the Use of Metabolic Carts: Indirect Calorimetry--No Longer the Orphan of Energy Estimation

Critically ill patients often require nutrition support, but accurately determining energy needs in these patients is difficult. Energy expenditure is affected by patient characteristics such as weight, height, age, and sex but is also influenced by factors such as body temperature, nutrition support, sepsis, sedation, and therapies. Using predictive equations to estimate energy needs is known to be inaccurate. Therefore, indirect calorimetry measurement is considered the gold standard to evaluate energy needs in clinical practice. This review defines the indications, limitations, and pitfalls of this technique and gives practice suggestions in various clinical situations.

Winning the war against ICU-acquired weakness: new innovations in nutrition and exercise physiology

Over the last 10 years we have significantly reduced hospital mortality from sepsis and critical illness. However, the evidence reveals that over the same period we have tripled the number of patients being sent to rehabilitation settings. Further, given that as many as half of the deaths in the first year following ICU admission occur post ICU discharge, it is unclear how many of these patients ever returned home. For those who do survive, the latest data indicate that 50-70% of ICU "survivors" will suffer cognitive impairment and 60-80% of "survivors" will suffer functional impairment or ICU-acquired weakness (ICU-AW). These observations demand that we as intensive care providers ask the following questions: "Are we creating survivors ... or are we creating victims?" and "Do we accomplish 'Pyrrhic Victories' in the ICU?" Interventions to address ICU-AW must have a renewed focus on optimal nutrition, anabolic/anticatabolic strategies, and in the future employ the personalized muscle and exercise evaluation techniques utilized by elite athletes to optimize performance. Specifically, strategies must include optimal protein delivery (1.2-2.0 g/kg/day), as an athlete would routinely employ. However, as is clear in elite sports performance, optimal nutrition is fundamental but alone is often not enough. We know burn patients can remain catabolic for 2 years post burn; thus, anticatabolic agents (i.e., beta-blockers) and anabolic agents (i.e., oxandrolone) will probably also be essential. In the near future, evaluation techniques such as assessing lean body mass at the bedside using ultrasound to determine nutritional status and ultrasound-measured muscle glycogen as a marker of muscle injury and recovery could be utilized to help find the transition from the acute phase of critical illness to the recovery phase. Finally, exercise physiology testing that evaluates muscle substrate utilization during exercise can be used to diagnose muscle mitochondrial dysfunction and to guide a personalized ideal heart rate, assisting in recovery of muscle mitochondrial function and functional endurance post ICU. In the end, future ICU-AW research must focus on using a combination of modern performance-enhancing nutrition, anticatabolic/anabolic interventions, and muscle/exercise testing so we can begin to create more "survivors" and fewer victims post ICU care.

Normocaloric versus hypocaloric feeding on the outcomes of ICU patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Current clinical practice guidelines recommend providing ICU patients a daily caloric intake estimated to match 80-100 % of energy expenditure (normocaloric goals). However, recent clinical trials of intentional hypocaloric feeding question this approach.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the outcomes of ICU patients randomized to intentional hypocaloric or normocaloric goals. We included randomized controlled trials that enrolled ICU patients and compared intentional hypocaloric with normocaloric nutritional goals. We included studies that evaluated both trophic feeding as well as permissive underfeeding. Data sources included MEDLINE, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials and citation review of relevant primary and review articles. The outcomes of interest included hospital acquired infection, hospital mortality, ICU length of stay (LOS) and ventilator-free days (VFDs).

RESULTS

Six studies which enrolled 2517 patients met our inclusion criteria. The mean age and body mass index (BMI) across the studies were 53 ± 5 years and 29.1 ± 1.5 kg/m(2), respectively. Two studies compared normocaloric feeding (77% of goal) with trophic feeding (20% of goal), while four studies compared normocaloric feeding (72% of goal) with permissive underfeeding (49% of goal). Overall, there was no significant difference in the risk of infectious complications (OR 1.03; 95% CI 0.84-1.27, I(2) = 16%), hospital mortality (OR 0.91; 95% CI 0.75-1.11, I(2) = 8%) or ICU LOS (mean difference 0.05 days; 95% CI 1.33-1.44 days; I(2) = 37%) between groups. VFDs were reported in three studies with no significant difference between the normocaloric and intentional hypocaloric groups (data not pooled).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis demonstrated no difference in the risk of acquired infections, hospital mortality, ICU length of stay or ventilator-free days between patients receiving intentional hypocaloric as compared to normocaloric nutritional goals.

Protein-energy nutrition in the ICU is the power couple: A hypothesis forming analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

We hypothesize that an optimal and simultaneous provision of energy and protein is favorable to clinical outcome of the critically ill patients.

METHODS

We conducted a review of the literature, obtained via electronic databases and focused on the metabolic alterations during critical illness, the estimation of energy and protein requirements, as well as the impact of their administration.

RESULTS

Critically ill patients undergo severe metabolic stress during which time a great amount of energy and protein is utilized in a variety of reactions essential for survival. Energy provision for critically ill patients has drawn attention given its association with morbidity, survival and long-term recovery, but protein provision is not sufficiently taken into account as a critical component of nutrition support that influences clinical outcome. Measurement of energy expenditure is done by indirect calorimetry, but protein status cannot be measured with a bedside technology at present.

CONCLUSIONS

Recent studies suggest the importance of optimal and combined provision of energy and protein to optimize clinical outcome. Clinical randomized controlled studies measuring energy and protein targets should confirm this hypothesis and therefore establish energy and protein as a power couple.

Editorial on the original article entitled "Permissive underfeeding of standard enteral feeding in critically ill adults" published in the New England Journal of Medicine on June 18, 2015

On June 18, 2015, the New England Journal of Medicine published an article entitled "Permissive underfeeding of standard enteral feeding in critically ill adults", which reports the results of a study that examined the impact of prolonged nutritional energy restriction for critically ill patients. The study design was unique in the sense that patients in both groups received similar doses of protein during the intervention, while the non-protein energy intake was reduced in the intervention group. The study showed no differences in outcome between the two study groups. These results add to a growing body of high quality evidence against the dogmatic belief that full enteral or parenteral feeding should be given as early as possible during critical illness to prevent complications. Further research is now needed to address the question of the optimal timing to provide more nutritional support for the benefit of the patients, possibly guided by improved biomarkers that need to be developed and validated, and to investigate underlying mechanisms.

A J-shaped relationship between caloric intake and survival in critically ill patients

Background

There is much controversy around the optimal caloric intake in intensive care unit (ICU) patients, based on the diverging results of prospective studies. Therefore, we assessed the presence of an association between caloric intake and outcome in a large cohort included in the Glucontrol study.

Methods

Patients (n = 1004) were divided into four quartiles (q1–q4) according to the daily caloric intake (n = 251/quartile). ICU, hospital and 28-day mortality and the length of stay (LOS) in ICU and in the hospital were compared between each quartile, before and after adjustment in case of differences in baseline characteristics.

Results

Caloric intake averaged 0.5 ± 0.6 (q1), 3.0 ± 0.7 (q2), 13.4 ± 5.1 (q3) and 32.4 ± 8.5 (q4) kcal/kg/day (p < 0.001 between quartiles). Comparisons among quartiles revealed that ICU, hospital and 28-day mortality were lower in q2 than in the other quartiles. ICU and hospital LOS were lower in q1 and q2. After adjustment for age, type of admission and severity scores, hospital mortality was lower in q2 than in the other quartiles, and LOS was lower in q1and q2 than in q3–q4.

Conclusions

In this large and heterogeneous cohort of ICU short stayers, a J-shaped relationship between the amount of calories provided and outcome was found. These hypothesis generating findings are consistent with the concept of improved clinical outcome by early energy restriction.

Trial registration#: ClinicalTrials.gov# NCT00107601, EUDRA-CT Number: 200400391440

The Association Between Nutritional Adequacy and Long-Term Outcomes in Critically Ill Patients Requiring Prolonged Mechanical Ventilation: A Multicenter Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association between short-term nutritional adequacy received while in the ICU and long-term outcomes including 6-month survival and health-related quality of life in critically ill patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of data prospectively collected in the context of a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

An international sample of ICUs.

PATIENTS

Adult patients who were mechanically ventilated for more than 8 days in the ICU.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Nutritional adequacy was obtained from the average proportion of prescribed calories received over the amount prescribed during the first 8 days. Survival status and health-related quality of life as assessed using the Short-Form 36 v2 were obtained at 3- and 6 months post ICU admission. Of the 1,223 patients enrolled in the randomized controlled trial, 475 met the inclusion criteria for this study. At 6-month follow-up, 302 of the 475 patients (64%) were alive. Survival time in those who received low nutritional adequacy was significantly shorter than those who received high nutritional adequacy while adjusting for important covariates (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.1-2.6). At 3-month follow-up, a 25% increase in nutritional adequacy was associated with improvements in Physical Functioning and Role Physical of 7.3 (p = 0.02) and 8.3 (p = 0.004) points, respectively. At 6-month follow-up, adjusted increases in Physical Functioning and Role Physical scores for every 25% increase in nutrition adequacy became smaller and were no longer statistically significant (adjusted estimate for Physical Functioning = 4.2, p = 0.14; for Role Physical = 3.2, p = 0.25).

CONCLUSIONS

Greater amounts of nutritional intake received during the first week in the ICU were associated with longer survival time and faster physical recovery to 3 months but not 6 months post ICU discharge in critically ill patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation. Current recommendations to underfeed critically ill patients may cause harm in some long-stay patients.

Enhanced Protein-Energy Provision via the Enteral Route in Critically Ill Patients (PEP uP Protocol): A Review of Evidence

Nutrition support is an integral part of care among critically ill patients. However, critically ill patients are commonly underfed, leading to consequences such as increased length of hospital and intensive care unit stay, time on mechanical ventilation, infectious complications, and mortality. Nevertheless, the prevalence of underfeeding has not resolved since the first description of this problem more than 15 years ago. This may be due to the traditional conservative feeding approaches. A novel feeding protocol (the Enhanced Protein-Energy Provision via the Enteral Route Feeding Protocol in Critically Ill Patients [PEP uP] protocol) was proposed and proven to improve feeding adequacy significantly. However, some of the components in the protocol are controversial and subject to debate. This article is a review of the supporting evidences and some of the controversy associated with each component of the PEP uP protocol.