[Fish oil containing lipid emulsions in critically ill patients: Critical analysis and future perspectives]

[Parenteral supplementation with EPA/DHA omega-3 fatty acids improves recovery prognosis in critically ill patients]

Introduction

Introduction: the decision to supplement total parenteral nutrition (TPN) with emulsions of omega-3 (Ω3) eicosapentaenoic (EPA) and docosahexaenoic (DHA) fatty acids (FA) of marine origin is based on the clinical benefits obtained in different medical situations and surgical procedures, among which reductions in hospital stay, days of mechanical ventilation, incidence of infections and mortality stand out. However, the evidence in critically ill patients remains contradictory. Objective: the objective of this clinical trial was to analyze the effect of supplementation with EPA/DHA Ω3 FAs on clinical prognostic markers - medical, nutritional and biochemical - in critically ill patients, relating to outcome. Method: a clinical, controlled, randomized, single-center trial in 64 critically ill adult patients, of which 47 patients were randomized to receive TPN supplemented with EPA/DHA Ω3 FAs in doses of 0.1 g/kg/day (n = 23) and 0.2 g/kg/day (n = 24), compared with a historical control group with TPN without supplementation (n = 17). Clinical prognosis markers were determined at baseline and at the end of nutritional support (medical, nutritional and biochemical). Results: the two groups with supplementation showed a statistically significant reduction in mortality (p < 0.005); the clinical prognostic markers SOFA, APACHE II, SAPS 3, NUTRIC, RTL and CRS were consistent in showing a significant improvement (p < 0.005), of prognosis with doses of 0.1 and 0.2 g/kg/day of EPA/DHA Ω3 FAs, respectively. Conclusion: supplementation of parenteral nutrition with EPA/DHA Ω3 fatty acids at doses of 0.1 g and 0.2 g/kg/day improves recovery prognosis and the probability of survival in critically ill patients.

Can Specialized Pro-resolving Mediators Deliver Benefit Originally Expected from Fish Oil?

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

Fish oil (FO) supplementation has historically been used by individuals suffering from cardiovascular disease and other inflammatory processes. However, a meta-analysis of several large randomized control trials (RCTs) suggested FO conferred no benefit in reducing cardiovascular risk. Skeptics surmised that the lack of benefit was related to FO dose or drug interactions; therefore, the widely accepted practice of FO consumption was brought into question.

RECENT FINDINGS

Thereafter, Serhan et al. identified specialized pro-resolving mediators (SPMs) to be one of the bioactive components and mechanisms of action of FO. SPMs are thought to enhance resolution of inflammation, as opposed to classic anti-inflammatory agents which inhibit inflammatory pathways. Numerous diseases, including persistent Inflammation, immunosuppression, and catabolic syndrome (PICS), are rooted in a burden of chronic inflammation. SPMs are gaining traction as potential therapeutic agents used to resolve inflammation in cardiovascular disorders, inflammatory bowel disease, sepsis, pancreatitis, and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). This narrative reviews the history of FO and the various studies that made the health benefits of FO inconclusive, as well as an overview of SPMs and their use in specific disease states.

Intravenous lipid emulsions in the critically ill: an update

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Purpose of the review is to summarize recent research addressing the role of intravenous lipid emulsions (IVLEs) in the critically ill.

RECENT FINDINGS

Soybean oil-based IVLEs, which are high in the omega-6 polyunsaturated fatty acids, have been largely used in parenteral nutrition over the last several decades. However, it is now generally accepted that the higher content of phytosterols and polyunsaturated fatty acids in soybean oil IVLE may adversely affect the immunological and inflammatory status of the critically ill. In the last few years, alternative IVLEs with lower soybean oil content have been associated with important improvements in clinical outcomes, such as mortality, mechanical ventilation days, and ICU length of stay. Olive oil and fish oil IVLEs have been reported to reduce the incidence of infections, with no clear benefits in other clinical outcomes. Despite the promising results with these new parenteral nutrition strategies, the optimum composition, dosage and indication for alternative IVLEs still remain controversial. Nevertheless, according to current knowledge alternative IVLEs may be associated with improved clinical outcomes and should be considered in critically ill patients requiring parenteral nutrition.

SUMMARY

There is a growing body of evidence suggesting that improved clinical outcomes can be achieved with selective use of alternative IVLEs in parenteral nutrition regimens for the critically ill. More high quality trials are needed, to better evaluate the efficacy of alternative IVLEs.