Replacing protein via enteral nutrition in a stepwise approach in critically ill patients: A pilot randomized controlled trial (REPLENISH pilot trial)

The impact of guideline recommended protein intake on mortality and length of intensive care unit and hospital stay in critically ill adults: A systematic review

International guidelines recommend a target protein intake of ≥1.2 g/kg/day to all critically ill patients for optimal outcomes. There are however various conflicting data related to this recommendation. The primary objective of this review was to compare a protein intake group (≥1.2 g/kg/day) with a lower protein intake group (<1.2 g/kg/day) in critically ill adult patients on mortality, length of intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital stay. Secondly, the effect of protein intake on length of mechanical ventilation, adverse nutrition-related events and muscle mass and strength parameters were investigated. Sixteen randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adult patients admitted to an intensive or high care unit and receiving nutrition support in the form of enteral- and/or parenteral nutrition were selected against prespecified eligibility criteria. Two independent reviewers extracted relevant data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. Review Manager 5.4.1 was used to analyse data and GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) was used to evaluate the certainty of the evidence. The higher protein group, when compared to the lower protein group, probably results in little to no difference in mortality (risk ratio [RR] 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.89 to 1.14; moderate-certainty evidence); with a probable slight increase in length of ICU stay (mean difference [MD] 0.33; 95% CI -0.57 to 1.23; moderate-certainty) and length of hospital stay (MD 1.72; 95% CI -0.58 to 4.01; moderate-certainty evidence), on average. For secondary outcomes, it was found that the higher protein group probably does not reduce the length of mechanical ventilation (MD 0.08; 95% CI -0.38 to 0.53; moderate-certainty evidence). Higher protein group probably reduces the occurrence of diarrhoea and high gastric residual volume and may reduce the occurrence of constipation. It may also increase nitrogen balance (MD 3.66; 95% CI 1.81 to 5.51; low-certainty evidence). Importantly, there does not seem to be harm associated with the higher protein group, though it should be mentioned that for many of the adverse events in this study, the certainty of evidence was low or very low.

Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Rehabilitation in Critically Ill Patients 2023 (J-ReCIP 2023)

Providing standardized, high-quality rehabilitation for critically ill patients is a crucial issue. In 2017, the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine (JSICM) promulgated the "Evidence-Based Expert Consensus for Early Rehabilitation in the Intensive Care Unit" to advocate for the early initiation of rehabilitations in Japanese intensive care settings. Building upon this seminal work, JSICM has recently conducted a rigorous systematic review utilizing the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. This endeavor resulted in the formulation of Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs), designed to elucidate best practices in early ICU rehabilitation. The primary objective of this guideline is to augment clinical understanding and thereby facilitate evidence-based decision-making, ultimately contributing to the enhancement of patient outcomes in critical care settings. No previous CPGs in the world has focused specifically on rehabilitation of critically ill patients, using the GRADE approach. Multidisciplinary collaboration is extremely important in rehabilitation. Thus, the CPGs were developed by 73 members of a Guideline Development Group consisting of a working group, a systematic review group, and an academic guideline promotion group, with the Committee for the Clinical Practice Guidelines of Early Mobilization and Rehabilitation in Intensive Care of the JSICM at its core. Many members contributed to the development of the guideline, including physicians and healthcare professionals with multiple and diverse specialties, as well as a person who had been patients in ICU. Based on discussions among the group members, eight important clinical areas of focus for this CPG were identified. Fourteen important clinical questions (CQs) were then developed for each area. The public was invited to comment twice, and the answers to the CQs were presented in the form of 10 GRADE recommendations and commentary on the four background questions. In addition, information for each CQ has been created as a visual clinical flow to ensure that the positioning of each CQ can be easily understood. We hope that the CPGs will be a useful tool in the rehabilitation of critically ill patients for multiple professions.

Study protocol for TARGET protein: The effect of augmented administration of enteral protein to critically ill adults on clinical outcomes: A cluster randomised, cross-sectional, double cross-over, clinical trial

Background

It is unknown whether increasing dietary protein to 1.2-2.0 g/kg/day as recommended in international guidelines compared to current practice improves outcomes in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. The TARGET Protein trial will evaluate this.

Objective

To describe the study protocol for the TARGET Protein trial.

Design setting and participants

TARGET Protein is a cluster randomised, cross-sectional, double cross-over, pragmatic clinical trial undertaken in eight ICUs in Australia and New Zealand. Each ICU will be randomised to use one of two trial enteral formulae for three months before crossing over to the other formula, which is then repeated, with enrolment continuing at each ICU for 12 months. All patients aged ≥16 years in their index ICU admission commencing enteral nutrition will be eligible for inclusion. Eligible patients will receive the trial enteral formula to which their ICU is allocated. The two trial enteral formulae are isocaloric with a difference in protein dose: intervention 100g/1000 ml and comparator 63g/1000 ml. Staggered recruitment commenced in May 2022.

Main outcomes measures

The primary outcome is days free of the index hospital and alive at day 90. Secondary outcomes include days free of the index hospital at day 90 in survivors, alive at day 90, duration of invasive ventilation, ICU and hospital length of stay, incidence of tracheostomy insertion, renal replacement therapy, and discharge destination.

Conclusion

TARGET Protein aims to determine whether augmented enteral protein delivery reduces days free of the index hospital and alive at day 90.

Trial registration

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12621001484831).

Replacing protein via enteral nutrition in a stepwise approach in critically ill patients: the REPLENISH randomized clinical trial protocol

BACKGROUND

Protein intake is recommended in critically ill patients to mitigate the negative effects of critical illness-induced catabolism and muscle wasting. However, the optimal dose of enteral protein remains unknown. We hypothesize that supplemental enteral protein (1.2 g/kg/day) added to standard enteral nutrition formula to achieve high amount of enteral protein (range 2-2.4 g/kg/day) given from ICU day 5 until ICU discharge or ICU day 90 as compared to no supplemental enteral protein to achieve moderate amount enteral protein (0.8-1.2 g/kg/day) would reduce all-cause 90-day mortality in adult critically ill mechanically ventilated patients.

METHODS

The REPLENISH (Replacing Protein Via Enteral Nutrition in a Stepwise Approach in Critically Ill Patients) trial is an open-label, multicenter randomized clinical trial. Patients will be randomized to the supplemental protein group or the control group. Patients in both groups will receive the primary enteral formula as per the treating team, which includes a maximum protein 1.2 g/kg/day. The supplemental protein group will receive, in addition, supplemental protein at 1.2 g/kg/day starting the fifth ICU day. The control group will receive the primary formula without supplemental protein. The primary outcome is 90-day all-cause mortality. Other outcomes include functional and quality of life assessments at 90 days. The trial will enroll 2502 patients.

DISCUSSION

The study has been initiated in September 2021. Interim analysis is planned at one third and two thirds of the target sample size. The study is expected to be completed by the end of 2025.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04475666 . Registered on July 17, 2020.

The effect of higher protein dosing in critically ill patients with high nutritional risk (EFFORT Protein): an international, multicentre, pragmatic, registry-based randomised trial

BACKGROUND

On the basis of low-quality evidence, international critical care nutrition guidelines recommend a wide range of protein doses. The effect of delivering high-dose protein during critical illness is unknown. We aimed to test the hypothesis that a higher dose of protein provided to critically ill patients would improve their clinical outcomes.

METHODS

This international, investigator-initiated, pragmatic, registry-based, single-blinded, randomised trial was undertaken in 85 intensive care units (ICUs) across 16 countries. We enrolled nutritionally high-risk adults (≥18 years) undergoing mechanical ventilation to compare prescribing high-dose protein (≥2·2 g/kg per day) with usual dose protein (≤1·2 g/kg per day) started within 96 h of ICU admission and continued for up to 28 days or death or transition to oral feeding. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1) to high-dose protein or usual dose protein, stratified by site. As site personnel were involved in both prescribing and delivering protein dose, it was not possible to blind clinicians, but patients were not made aware of the treatment assignment. The primary efficacy outcome was time-to-discharge-alive from hospital up to 60 days after ICU admission and the secondary outcome was 60-day morality. Patients were analysed in the group to which they were randomly assigned regardless of study compliance, although patients who dropped out of the study before receiving the study intervention were excluded. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03160547.

FINDINGS

Between Jan 17, 2018, and Dec 3, 2021, 1329 patients were randomised and 1301 (97·9%) were included in the analysis (645 in the high-dose protein group and 656 in usual dose group). By 60 days after randomisation, the cumulative incidence of alive hospital discharge was 46·1% (95 CI 42·0%-50·1%) in the high-dose compared with 50·2% (46·0%-54·3%) in the usual dose protein group (hazard ratio 0·91, 95% CI 0·77-1·07; p=0·27). The 60-day mortality rate was 34·6% (222 of 642) in the high dose protein group compared with 32·1% (208 of 648) in the usual dose protein group (relative risk 1·08, 95% CI 0·92-1·26). There appeared to be a subgroup effect with higher protein provision being particularly harmful in patients with acute kidney injury and higher organ failure scores at baseline.

INTERPRETATION

Delivery of higher doses of protein to mechanically ventilated critically ill patients did not improve the time-to-discharge-alive from hospital and might have worsened outcomes for patients with acute kidney injury and high organ failure scores.

FUNDING

None.

When a calorie isn't just a calorie: a revised look at nutrition in critically ill patients with sepsis and acute kidney injury

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To discuss how nutritional management could be optimized to promote protective metabolism in sepsis and associated acute kidney injury.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent evidence suggests that sepsis is a metabolically distinct critical illness and that certain metabolic alterations, such as activation of fasting metabolism, may be protective in bacterial sepsis. These findings may explain the lack of survival benefit in recent randomized controlled trials of nutrition therapy for critical illness. These trials are limited by cohort heterogeneity, combining both septic and nonseptic critical illness, and the use of inaccurate caloric estimates to determine energy requirements. These energy estimates are also unable to provide information on specific substrate preferences or the capacity for substrate utilization. As a result, high protein feeding beyond the capacity for protein synthesis could cause harm in septic patients. Excess glucose and insulin exposures suppress fatty acid oxidation, ketogenesis and autophagy, of which emerging evidence suggest are protective against sepsis associated organ damage such as acute kidney injury.

SUMMARY

Distinguishing pathogenic and protective sepsis-related metabolic changes are critical to enhancing and individualizing nutrition management for critically ill patients.

Nutrition priorities in obese critically ill patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

During critical illness, several neuroendocrine, inflammatory, immune, adipokine, and gastrointestinal tract hormone pathways are activated; some of which are more intensified among obese compared with nonobese patients. Nutrition support may mitigate some of these effects. Nutrition priorities in obese critically ill patients include screening for nutritional risk, estimation of energy and protein requirement, and provision of macronutrients and micronutrients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Estimation of energy requirement in obese critically ill patients is challenging because of variations in body composition among obese patients and absence of reliable predictive equations for energy expenditure. Whereas hypocaloric nutrition with high protein has been advocated in obese critically ill patients, supporting data are scarce. Recent studies did not show differences in outcomes between hypocaloric and eucaloric nutrition, except for better glycemic control. Sarcopenia is common among obese patients, and the provision of increased protein intake has been suggested to mitigate catabolic changes especially after the acute phase of critical illness. However, high-quality data on high protein intake in these patients are lacking. Micronutrient deficiencies among obese critically ill patients are common but the role of their routine supplementation requires further study.

SUMMARY

An individualized approach for nutritional support may be needed for obese critically ill patients but high-quality evidence is lacking. Future studies should focus on nutrition priorities in this population, with efficient and adequately powered studies.