How to choose the best route of feeding during critical illness

Enteral nutrition practice in the prone position in patients with coronavirus disease 2019: An international one-day point prevalence analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Enteral nutrition (EN) in the prone position for severe respiratory failure is considered possible with care. However, the extent to which it is feasible, especially its association with the length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, is unclear. Therefore, we investigated the relationship between the duration of prone position therapy and adequacy of EN delivery and explored factors associated with this relationship in an observational study of critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who were actively treated in the prone position.

METHODS

This study was a secondary analysis of a worldwide one-day prevalence study in the COVID-19 era. We investigated the care and nutritional therapy provided to critically ill patients with COVID-19 admitted to ICU, along with ICU-related information. We targeted patients who received only tube feeding and analyzed the relationship between the duration of prone position, length of ICU stays, and nutrition delivery via EN. In addition, a multivariate analysis was performed to examine factors affecting the achievement of EN delivery of 20 kcal/kg/day or more in patients who were placed in the prone position for at least 6 h.

RESULTS

A total of 399 patients who received only EN, excluding parenteral nutrition and oral intake, were included, of whom 58 % received EN energy delivery of ≥20 kcal/kg/day; this rate increased with the length of ICU stay, regardless of the duration of prone position. In a multivariate analysis of 121 patients who were in the prone position for at least 6 h, the presence of dedicated dietitians in the ICU (OR = 6.91, 95 % CI = 1.98 to 24.1, p < 0.01) was associated with a higher energy delivery. Conversely, the use of muscle relaxants (OR = 0.32, 95 % CI = 0.11 to 0.98, p = 0.04) and presence of nutrition protocols (OR = 0.24, 95 % CI = 0.07 to 0.77, p = 0.02) was associated with a lower energy delivery.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with COVID-19 received adequate nutrition by EN even during prone position. Target EN delivery would be achieved with the introduction of prone position.

Use of mNUTRIC-Score for Nutrition Risk Assessment and Prognosis Prediction in Critically Ill Patients with COVID-19: A Retrospective Observational Study

Introduction

Nutritional risk is highly prevalent in patients with COVID-19. Relevant data on nutritional assessment in the critically ill population are scarce. This study was conducted to evaluate the modified Nutrition Risk in the Critically Ill (mNUTRIC)-Score as a mortality risk factor in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19.

Methods

We conducted this retrospective observational study in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Patients' characteristics and clinical information were obtained from electronic medical records. The nutritional risk for each patient was assessed at the time of mechanical ventilation using the mNUTRIC-Score. The major outcome was 28-day mortality.

Results

Ninety-eight patients were analyzed (mean age, 57.22 ± 13.66 years, 68.4% male); 46.9% of critically ill COVID-19 patients were categorized as being at high nutrition risk (mNUTRIC-Score of ≥5). A multivariate logistic regression model indicated that high nutritional risk has higher 28-day hospital mortality (OR = 4.206, 95% CI: 1.147-15.425, p=0.030). A multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that high-risk mNUTRIC-Score had a significantly increased full-length mortality risk during hospitalization (OR = 1.991, 95% CI: 1.219-3.252, p=0.006).

Conclusion

The mNUTRIC-Score is an independent mortality risk factor during hospitalization in critically ill COVID-19 patients.

Safety and tolerance of enteral nutrition in COVID-19 critically ill patients, a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of evidence about the tolerance of enteral nutrition (EN) in COVID-19 critically ill patients. However, several gastrointestinal manifestations related to COVID-19 have been described. The aims of this study were to analyze the incidence of gastrointestinal intolerance (GI) associated to EN (diarrhea, vomiting, gastroparesis and constipation) and to describe energy/protein provision along with biochemical alterations during the first week of EN.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort of COVID-19 critically ill patients under mechanical ventilation. We reported daily enteral nutrition infusion and gastrointestinal manifestations within the first week of intubation and enteral nutrition initiation.

RESULTS

Fifty-two patients were included; 40.3% were overweight and 46.2% were obese. During the first 7 days of EN, manifestations of GI intolerance such as vomiting, diarrhea and gastroparesis were present in 18 patients (32.4%). Hypernatremia (39%) was the most frequent electrolyte abnormality. Only Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) diagnosis was associated with a higher energy deficit on day 7. No associations between drug prescription and GI intolerance were observed. On day 4, 94.5% of patients were receiving more than 80% of energy requirements and 94.2% of protein requirements. Accumulated energy and protein deficits at day 3 were 2171.2 ± 945 kcal and 114.9 ± 49.2 g, respectively; and 2586.4 ± 1151 kcal, 133.3 ± 60.4 g at day 7.

CONCLUSION

Enteral nutrition is feasible and well-tolerated in COVID-19 patients with mechanical ventilation within the first week of enteral nutrition initiation. More studies are needed to elucidate the impact of nutritional therapy on infection course and outcomes.