Early Enteral Combined with Parenteral Nutrition Treatment for Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: Effects on Immune Function, Nutritional Status and Outcomes

ESPEN practical and partially revised guideline: Clinical nutrition in the intensive care unit

Following the new ESPEN Standard Operating Procedures, the previous 2019 guideline to provide best medical nutritional therapy to critically ill patients has been shortened and partially revised. Following this update, we propose this publication as a practical guideline based on the published scientific guideline, but shortened and illustrated by flow charts. The main goal of this practical guideline is to increase understanding and allow the practitioner to implement the Nutrition in the ICU guidelines. All the items discussed in the previous guidelines are included as well as special conditions.

Progress in research on the role of clinical nutrition in treating traumatic brain injury affecting the neurovascular unit

The neurovascular unit (NVU) is composed of neurons, glial cells, and blood vessels. NVU dysfunction involves the processes of neuroinflammation, and microcirculatory disturbances, as well as neuronal injury after traumatic brain injury (TBI). Traditional anti-inflammatory drugs have limited efficacy in improving the prognosis of TBI. Thus, treatments that target NVU dysfunction may provide a breakthrough. A large number of clinical studies have shown that the nutritional status of patients with TBI was closely related to their conditions and prognoses. Nutrient complexes and complementary therapies for the treatment of TBI are therefore being implemented in many preclinical studies. Importantly, the mechanism of action for this treatment may be related to repair of NVU dysfunction by ensuring adequate omega-3 fatty acids, curcumin, resveratrol, apigenin, vitamins, and minerals. These nutritional supplements hold promise for translation to clinical therapy. In addition, dietary habits also play an important role in the rehabilitation of TBI. Poor dietary habits may worsen the pathology and prognosis of TBI. Adjusting dietary habits, especially with a ketogenic diet, may improve outcomes in patients with TBI. This article discusses the impact of clinical nutrition on NVU dysfunction after TBI, focusing on nutritional complexes and dietary habits.

The Efficacy of Parenteral Nutrition and Enteral Nutrition Supports in Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systemic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Background

Enteral nutrition (EN) is often used in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI), but some studies have shown that EN has its disadvantages. However, it is not clear which nutritional support is appropriate to reduce mortality, improve prognosis, and improve nutritional status in patients with TBI. We performed this Bayesian network meta-analysis to evaluate the improvement of nutritional indicators and the clinical outcomes of patients with TBI.

Methods

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science from inception until December 2021. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which compared the effects of different nutritional supports on clinical outcomes and nutritional indicators in patients with TBI were included. The co-primary outcomes included mortality and the value of serum albumin. The secondary outcomes were nitrogen balance, the length of study (LOS) in the ICU, and feeding-related complications. The network meta-analysis was performed to adjust for indirect comparison and mixed treatment analysis.

Results

7 studies enroll a total of 456 patients who received different nutritional supports including parenteral nutrition (PN), enteral nutrition (EN), and PN + EN. No effects on in-hospital mortality (Median RR = 1.06, 95% Crl = 0.12 to 1.77) and the value of 0-1 days of serum albumin were found between the included regimens. However, the value of 11-13 days of serum albumin of EN was better than that of PN (WMD = -4.95, 95% CI = -7.18 to -2.72, P < 0.0001, I ² = 0%), and 16-20 days of serum albumin of EN + PN was better than that of EN (WMD = -7.42, 95% CI = -14.51 to -0.34, P=0.04, I ² = 90%). No effects on the 5-7 day nitrogen balance were found between the included regimens. In addition, the complications including pneumonia and sepsis have no statistical difference between EN and PN. EN was superior to PN in terms of LOS in the ICU and the incidence rate of stress ulcers. Although the difference in indirect comparisons between the included regimens was not statistically significant, the results showed that PN seemed to rank behind other regimens, and the difference between them was extremely small.

Conclusion

Available evidence suggests that EN + PN appears to be the most effective strategy for patients with TBI in improving clinical outcomes and nutritional support compared with other nutritional supports. Further trials are required.

Effect of supplemental parenteral nutrition on all-cause mortality in critically Ill adults: A meta-analysis and subgroup analysis

Objective

Several observational studies have demonstrated that increased nutritional delivery by supplemental parenteral nutrition (SPN) plus enteral nutrition (EN) reduces the rate of all-cause mortality in critically ill patients. Therefore, we aimed to compare and evaluate the effect of SPN plus EN on all-cause mortality in critically ill adults.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, and Sinomed (up to May 2021). Adults with severe illness treated with SPN plus EN or with EN alone were enrolled. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale, and a meta-analysis was conducted using Stata software. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality and was evaluated by pooled odds ratio (OR) with the fixed-effects model. Required information size was also calculated using trial sequential analysis.

Results

We identified 10 randomized controlled trials, with a total of 6,908 patients. No significant differences in rate of all-cause mortality (OR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.84-1.09, P = 0.518), intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (OR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.75-1.07, P = 0.229), and hospital mortality (OR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.82-1.10, P = 0.482) were found between the SPN plus EN and EN alone groups. SPN plus EN support was associated with a significantly decreased risk of infection (OR = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.74-0.93, P = 0.001), although the duration of mechanical ventilation [standardized mean difference (SMD) = - 0.20], length of hospital stay (SMD = 0.12), and ICU stay (SMD = - 0.57) were similar between the two groups (all P > 0.05). Meta-regression analyses showed no significant correlations between all-cause mortality and baseline clinical factors, including patients' age, the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score, time of SPN initiation, and follow-up duration (all P > 0.05). Subgroup analysis showed that SPN plus EN support was associated with a trend toward decreased rate of all-cause mortality in studies with follow-up < 30 days (OR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.36-1.02, P = 0.058). Trial sequence analysis showed that the required information size for all-cause mortality was 16,972, and the cumulative Z-curve indicated no significant differences in the risk of all-cause mortality between the two groups (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

SPN plus EN support can significantly reduce the risk of infection, although it has no significant effect on all-cause mortality among critically ill patients. More studies are warranted to confirm these findings.

Nursing Practice Based on Evidence-Based Concepts to Prevent Enteral Nutrition Complications for Critically Ill Neurosurgical Patients

Purpose

To explore the practical value of enteral nutrition care guided by evidence-based concepts in preventing enteral nutritional complications in critically ill neurosurgical patients.

Methods

Three hundred critically ill patients from March 2020 to October 2021 from our neurosurgery department were included in the study. Patients were divided into a control group (March to December 2020, n = 150) and a study group (January to October 2021, n = 150) according to the order of their admission. The control group received conventional enteral nutrition care, and the study group received enteral nutrition care based on evidence-based concept guidance. The levels of serum nutritional indicators [hemoglobin (Hb), albumin (ALB), and total protein (TP)], feeding compliance rate, the incidence of complications (gastric retention, bloating, diarrhea, reflux, vomiting, aspiration, stress ulcers, etc.), and prognosis during the observation period were compared between the two groups. The scores of the questionnaire of knowledge, attitude, and practice on nutrition among neurosurgical nurses before and after the implementation of evidence-based care were compared among nursing staff in the study group.

Results

At 1 and 2 weeks after enrollment, Hb, ALB, and TP levels were lower in both groups than before enrollment in the same group (P < 0.05). At 2 weeks after enrollment, Hb, ALB, and TP levels were higher in both groups than at 1 week after enrollment in the same group (P < 0.05). At 1 and 2 weeks after enrollment, Hb, ALB, and TP levels were higher in the study group than in the control group (P < 0.05). At 7 days after feeding, the feeding compliance rate was higher in the study group (94.67%) than in the control group (70.00%) (P < 0.05). The total complication rate was lower in the study group (8.00%) than in the control group (16.00%) (P < 0.05). The percentage of good prognosis was higher in the study group (34.00%) than in the control group (23.33%) (P < 0.05). After the implementation of evidence-based care, caregivers in the study group scored higher on nutrition knowledge, nutrition attitudes, and nutrition practices than those before the implementation (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

The implementation of evidence-based nursing interventions in critically ill neurosurgical patients based on evidence-based concepts is of great clinical value in correcting their nutritional status, preventing enteral nutritional complications, improving prognosis, and enhancing the nutritional knowledge, attitudes, and practices of nursing staff.

Incidence and Predictors of Aspiration Pneumonia Among Traumatic Brain Injury in Northwest Ethiopia

Background

A significantly greater proportion of patients who die due to aspiration pneumonia were diagnosed with in-hospital aspiration pneumonia (19%). The incidence and major predictors are not known clearly, especially in Ethiopia.

Objective

To determine the incidence and predictors of aspiration pneumonia among adult traumatic brain injury patients at Felege Hiwot comprehensive specialized hospital, Bahir Dar, North west Ethiopia, in 2021.

Methods

An institution-based retrospective study was conducted from all admitted adult traumatic brain injury patients at Felege Hiwot comprehensive specialized hospital from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2020 for 51 days of survival. Descriptive statistics, Kaplan–Meier survival curve log rank test, and the Cox proportional hazard regression model were used.

Results

A total of 396 adult patients diagnosed and admitted with traumatic brain injury in the past 5 years were included. Seventy patients (17.67%) developed aspiration pneumonia, providing an incidence rate of 32.39 (95% CI=25-62–40.94) per 1,000 person days of observation. Independent predictors were being referred for AHR (2.43; 95% CI=1.12–5.25), nasogastric tube insertion AHR (3.02; 95% CI=1.43–6.39), and baseline Glasgow coma scale <8 AHR (3.88; 95% CI=1.42–10.062).

Conclusion

Having a nasogastric tube and low baseline Glasgow coma scale were significant predictors. This improves prehospital and hospital care during transportation and admission time.

A Retrospective Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials on Traumatic Brain Injury: Evaluation of CONSORT Item Adherence

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) contributes to death and disability, resulting in an enormous individual and socio-economic challenges. Despite huge efforts, there are still controversies on treatment strategies and early outcome estimation. We evaluate current randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on TBI according to their fulfillment of the CONSORT (Consolidated Statement of Reporting Trials) statement’s criteria as a marker of transparency and the quality of study planning and realization. A PubMed search for RCTs on TBI (January 2014–December 2019) was carried out. After screening of the abstracts (n = 1.926), the suitable full text manuscripts (n = 72) were assessed for the fulfillment of the CONSORT criteria. The mean ratio of consort statement fulfillment was 59% (±13%), 31% of the included studies (n = 22) complied with less than 50% of the CONSORT criteria. Citation frequency was moderately related to ratio of CONSORT item fulfillment (r = 0.4877; p < 0.0001) and citation frequency per year (r = 0.5249; p < 0.0001). The ratio of CONSORT criteria fulfillment was associated with the impact factor of the publishing journal (r = 0.6428; p < 0.0001). Essential data for study interpretation, such as sample size determination (item 7a), participant flow (item 13a) as well as losses and exclusions (item 13b), were only reported in 53%, 60% and 63%, respectively. Reporting and methodological aspects in RCTs on TBI still may be improved. Thus, the interpretation of study results may be hampered due to methodological weaknesses.

Effect of Early Versus Delayed Parenteral Nutrition on the Health Outcomes of Critically Ill Adults: A Systematic Review

Objectives

This systematic review aims to evaluate and summarise the findings of all relevant studies which identified the effect of early vs delayed parenteral nutrition (PN), early PN vs early supplemental PN and early PN vs standard care for critically ill adults.

Methods

The literature search was undertaken using PubMed, Embase, Medline, Clinical Key, and Ovid discovery databases. The reference lists of studies published from 2000 till June 2020 were hand searched.

Result

On screening 2088 articles, a total of five RCTs with 6,277 patients were included in this review. Only one clinical trial compared early PN and late PN; the results reported significantly shorter periods in intensive care unit (ICU) stay (p=0.02) and less ICU related infections (p=0.008) in the late PN group compared to the Early PN group. Two trials compared total parenteral nutrition (TPN) and enteral nutrition (EN) +TPN groups. Both found a significantly longer hospital stay duration (p<0.05 and p<0.01) with a higher mortality rate in the TPN group compared to the EN+TPN group. A statistically significant improvement was observed in patients' quality of life receiving early PN compared to standard care (p=0.01). In contrast, no significant difference was found in the supplemental PN vs the standard care group.

Conclusion

The supplemental PN patients had shorter ICU stay and lower mortality rates than TPN. However, these findings should be interpreted carefully as included studies have different initiation timing of nutritional support, and the patients' diagnosis varied.

Clinical effects of Lactobacillus acidophilus combined with mosapride in treatment of gastrointestinal dysfunction after craniocerebral injury

BACKGROUND

Most patients with severe craniocerebral injury have gastrointestinal motility deficiency. When the body is exposed to external mechanical trauma, infection, vomiting, and gastric content reflux tend to occur, which causes early gastrointestinal dysfunction, affects nutrient intake, aggravates brain edema, delays wound healing, and is not conducive to the prognosis of patients. Mosapride is a commonly used gastrointestinal motility agent, which can improve gastrointestinal motility and speed up gastric emptying. Lactobacillus acidophilus can regulate the intestinal flora, protect the intestinal mucosal barrier, maintain intestinal balance, and relieve gastric motility. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of Lactobacillus acidophilus combined with mosapride treatment on the time to reach enteral nutrition standards, intestinal flora, rehabilitation process, and other aspects of patients with gastrointestinal dysfunction after craniocerebral injury, and to evaluate its clinical effects.

AIM

To observe the clinical effects of Lactobacillus acidophilus combined with mosapride in the treatment of gastrointestinal dysfunction after craniocerebral injury.

METHODS

A total of 92 patients with gastrointestinal dysfunction after craniocerebral injury at our hospital from February 2018 to February 2021 were selected and divided into a study group and a control group at a ratio of 1:1 using a random number table, with 46 cases in each group. On the basis of conventional treatment, the control group was given mosapride, and the study group was given Lactobacillus acidophilus combined with mosapride for 1 wk. The clinical efficacy, time to reach enteral nutrition standards, recovery progress, 28-d mortality rate, gastric motility indexes [intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) and residual gastric volume (GRA)], and intestinal motility before treatment and after 3 d and 1 wk of treatment were compared between the two groups. Intestinal barrier function indexes [D-lactic acid (D-LA) and diamine oxidase (DAO)] and intestinal flora (Bifidobacterium, Lactobacillus, Enterococcus, and Enterobacter) were also compared.

RESULTS

The total effective rate of the study group was higher than that of the control group (93.48% vs 78.26%, P < 0.05). The time to reach enteral nutrition standards, time to mechanical ventilation, and the length of ICU stay in the study group were shorter than those of the control group (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the 28-d mortality rate between the two groups (P > 0.05). The APACHE II and SOFA scores of the study group were lower than those of the control group after 3 d and 1 wk of treatment, and the Glasgow Coma scale scores were higher than those of the control group (P < 0.05). The levels of IAP, GRA, D-LA, and DAO in the study group were lower than those of the control group after 3 d and 1 wk of treatment (P < 0.05). The numbers of Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus in the study group were more than those of the control group after 3 d and 1 wk of treatment, and the numbers of Enterococcus and Enterobacter were less than those of the control group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Lactobacillus acidophilus and mosapride are effective in treating gastrointestinal dysfunction after craniocerebral injury. They can shorten the time to reach enteral nutrition standards, adjust the intestinal flora, protect the intestinal mucosal barrier, promote the recovery of the gastrointestinal tract and nerve function, and accelerate the recovery process of patients.

Mortality and overall and specific infection complication rates in patients who receive parenteral nutrition: systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

Parenteral nutrition (PN) is an available option for nutritional therapy and is often required in the hospital setting to overcome malnutrition.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess whether PN is associated with an increased risk of mortality or infectious complications in all groups of hospitalized patients compared with those receiving other nutritional support strategies.

METHODS

For this systematic review and meta-analysis MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central, Scopus, clinicaltrials.gov, and Web of Science were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies with parallel groups that explored the effect of PN on mortality and infectious complications, published until March 2021. Two independent reviewers extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias. Fixed-effects meta-analysis was performed to compare the groups from RCTs. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was used to identify whether the results were sufficient to reach definitive conclusions.

RESULTS

Of the 83 included studies that compared patients receiving PN with those receiving other strategies, 67 RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. PN was not associated with a higher risk of mortality (RR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.95, 1.07). On the other hand, PN was associated with a higher risk of infectious events (RR: 1.23; 95% CI: 1.12, 1.36). PN was specifically associated with abdominal infection and catheter infection. The TSA showed that there were sufficient data to make numerical conclusions about mortality, any infectious event, and abdominal infectious complications.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that although PN is not associated with greater mortality in hospitalized patients, it is associated with infectious complications. Through TSA, definite conclusions about survival and infection rates could be made.This review was registered at www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ as CRD42018075599.

Synbiotic Therapy Prevents Nosocomial Infection in Critically Ill Adult Patients: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Based on a Bayesian Framework

Background: The efficacy of synbiotics, probiotics, prebiotics, enteral nutrition or adjuvant peripheral parenteral nutrition (EPN) and total parenteral nutrition (TPN) in preventing nosocomial infection (NI) in critically ill adults has been questioned. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate and rank the effectiveness of these therapies on NI amongst critically ill adults.

Methods: Four electronic databases were systematically searched up to June 30, 2019 for RCTs comparing the administration of probiotics, prebiotics, synbiotics, EPN and TPN in critically ill adults. The primary outcome was NI. The relative efficacy of all outcomes was determined by a Bayesian framework with random effects NMA. We estimated the odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) and ranked the comparative effects of all regimens with the surface under the cumulative ranking probabilities. The study has been registered on PROSPERO (CRD42019147032).

Results: Fifty-five RCTs (7,119 patients) were identified. Primary outcome showed that synbiotics had the best effect in preventing NI than EPN (OR 0.37; 95% CrI 0.22–0.61), probiotics followed (OR 0.52; 95% CrI 0.34–0.77), whereas TPN significantly increased NI (OR 2.29; 95% CrI 1.48–3.67). Subgroup analysis showed that TPN significantly increased NI in intensive care unit (ICU) patients (OR 1.57; 95% CrI 1.01–2.56) and severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) patients (OR 3.93; 95% CrI 1.74–9.15). Secondary outcomes showed that synbiotics were more effective in preventing hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) (OR 0.34; 95% CrI 0.11–0.85), catheter-related bloodstream infection (OR 0.08; 95% CrI 0.01–0.80), urinary tract infection (OR 0.27; 95% CrI 0.08–0.71) and sepsis (OR 0.34; 95% CrI 0.16–0.70) than EPN. Amongst the treatments, probiotics were most effective for shortening the mechanical ventilation duration (MD −3.93; 95% CrI −7.98 to −0.02), prebiotics were most effective for preventing diarrhea (OR 0.24; 95% CrI 0.05–0.94) and TPN was the least effective in shortening hospital length of stay (MD 4.23; 95% CrI 0.97–7.33).

Conclusions: Amongst the five therapies, synbiotics not only prevented NI in critically ill adults but also demonstrated the best treatment results. By contrast, TPN did not prevent NI and ranked last, especially in ICU and SAP patients.

Take-Home Message: Nosocomial infection is a leading cause of mortality in critically ill patients in the ICU. However, the efficacy of synbiotics, probiotics, prebiotics, enteral nutrition or adjuvant peripheral parenteral nutrition and total parenteral nutrition in preventing nosocomial infection in critically ill adults has been questioned. The network meta-analysis provides evidence that amongst the five therapies, synbiotics not only prevented NI in critically ill adults but also demonstrated the best treatment results. By contrast, TPN did not prevent NI and ranked last, especially in ICU and SAP patients. The results of this study will provide a new scientific basis and a new idea for the debate on the efficacy of synbiotics and other treatments in the improvement of prognosis in critically ill adult patients.

Tweet: Synbiotic prevents nosocomial infection in critically ill adults, while total parenteral nutrition has the adverse curative.

Combination of enteral and parenteral nutrition in the acute phase of critical illness: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Uncertainty remains about the best route and timing of medical nutrition therapy in the acute phase of critical illness. Early combined enteral nutrition (EN) and parenteral nutrition (PN) may represent an attractive option to achieve recommended energy and protein goals in select patient groups. This meta-analysis aims to update and summarize the current evidence.

METHODS

This systematic review and meta-analysis includes randomized controlled trials (RCTs) targeting the effect of EN alone vs a combination of EN with PN in the acute phase of critical illness in adult patients. Assessed outcomes include mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay (LOS), ventilation days, infectious complications, physical recovery, and quality-of-life outcomes.

RESULTS

Twelve RCTs with 5543 patients were included. Treatment with a combination of EN with PN led to increased delivery of macronutrients. No statistically significant effect of a combination of EN with PN vs EN alone on any of the parameters was observed: mortality (risk ratio = 1.0; 95% CI, 0.79-1.28; P = .99), hospital LOS (mean difference, -1.44; CI, -5.59 to 2.71; P = .50), ICU LOS, and ventilation days. Trends toward improved physical outcomes were observed in two of four trials.

CONCLUSION

A combination of EN with PN improved nutrition intake in the acute phase of critical illness in adults and was not inferior regarding the patients' outcomes. Large, adequately designed trials in select patient groups are needed to answer the question of whether this nutrition strategy has a clinically relevant treatment effect.

Clinical observation of individualized nutritional formula on inflammation index, immune status and gastrointestinal tolerance in patients with severe head injury

Objectives:

To evaluate the clinical significance of individualized nutritional formulas on inflammatory factors, immune status and gastrointestinal tolerance in patients with severe head injury.

Methods:

A total of 80 patients with severe head injury who were hospitalized in Baoding No.1 Central Hospital from March 2017 to March 2020 were randomly divided into two groups with 40 cases in each group. Patients in both groups were given enteral nutrition (EN), the control group was given conventional enteral nutrition formula through nasointestinal tube, and the experimental group was given individualized nutrition formula. All patients were tested for tumor necrosis factor(TNF-α), C-reactive protein(CRP), interleukin 6(IL-6), IgA, IgM, IgG, serum intestinal fatty acid binding protein(I-FABP) and D-lactic acid concentration before and after enteral nutrition treatment. The incidence of adverse reactions such as abdominal distension, diarrhea, constipation, and gastric retention within seven days after treatment of two groups were compared and analyzed.

Results:

There was no significant difference in inflammatory factors such as TNF-a, CRP, IL-6, immunoglobulin levels, I-FABP and D-lactic acid concentration between the two groups before treatment (p>0.05). After treatment, the above indicators of the two groups of patients were better than before treatment, the difference was statistically significant (p<0.05), and the experimental group was significantly better than the control group (p<0.05). The experimental group had a gastrointestinal adverse reaction rate of 10%, and the control group had 27.5%, the difference was statistically significant (p=0.04).

Conclusions:

Individualized nutritional formula has more significant advantages than conventional nutritional formula for patients with severe head injury, which can reduce inflammatory response, increase the patient’s immune level, improve the intestinal mucosal barrier function, have good gastrointestinal tolerance, and have a low incidence of adverse reactions.

A new index (A/G) associated with early complications of radical cystectomy and intestinal urinary diversion

OBJECTIVES

To put forward a new index (A/G, the postoperative ratio of albumin to blood glucose) associated with complications occurring within 30-day of radical cystectomy and intestinal urinary diversion (RC-IUD).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The charts of 565 patients undergoing RC-IUD at our single center between 2008 and 2018 were reviewed. All baseline information and perioperative data were collected. We finally picked up 360 of them with complete postoperative laboratory test results to find a new index. Early complications (within 30-day) after surgery were graded using the standardized Clavien-Dindo scale. Single and multivariate logistic regression determined the association between perioperative variables and post RC-IUD complications.

RESULTS

A total of 485 men and 80 women with a median age of 61 years and BMI of 24.8 were included. As for intestinal urinary diversion, most patients (n = 513, 90.8%) received ileal conduits, 47 (8.3%) received Ileal orthotopic neobladders and 5 received Mainz pouch bladders (0.9%). Robotic surgeries were conducted in 311(55.0%) patients and other 254 (45.0%) accepted laparoscopic surgeries. Available laboratory markers were obtained from 359 cases. Postoperative complications occurred in 129 patients (22.8%), including 117 (90.7%) Minor (Clavien I or Clavien II events) complications, and 12 (9.3%) major (Clavien III or greater events) complications. A single logistic regression identified 4 variables associated with postoperative complications, including hypertension, surgical procedures, postoperative A/G, operating time, and blood loss. A further multivariate logistic regression identified 2 significant indices: operating time and postoperative A/G. Moreover, we built a receiver operating characteristic curve of A/G to identify a threshold of 3.65 as a new indicator of postoperative complication.

CONCLUSIONS

We put forward a new index named A/G associated with complications after radical cystectomy, not singular considering albumin or blood glucose any more. This novel related index may provide an early alert for RC-IUD patients thus aiding in directing individual rehabilitation and improving postoperative outcomes after RC-IUD.

Effect of Supplemental Parenteral Nutrition Versus Enteral Nutrition Alone on Clinical Outcomes in Critically Ill Adult Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Enteral nutrition (EN) is considered the first feeding route for critically ill patients. However, adverse effects such as gastrointestinal complications limit its optimal provision, leading to inadequate energy and protein intake. We compared the clinical outcomes of supplemental parenteral nutrition added to EN (SPN + EN) and EN alone in critically ill adults. Electronic databases restricted to full-text randomized controlled trials available in the English language and published from January 1990 to January 2019 were searched. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Jadad scale, and the meta-analysis was conducted using the MedCalc software. A total of five studies were eligible for inclusion in the systematic review and meta-analysis. Compared to EN alone, SPN + EN decreased the risk of nosocomial infections (relative risk (RR) = 0.733, p = 0.032) and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (RR = 0.569, p = 0.030). No significant differences were observed between SPN + EN and EN in the length of hospital stay, hospital mortality, length of ICU stay, and duration of mechanical ventilation. In conclusion, when enteral feeding fails to fulfill the energy requirements in critically ill adult patients, SPN may be beneficial as it helps in decreasing nosocomial infections and ICU mortality, in addition to increasing energy and protein intakes with no negative effects on other clinical outcomes.

First international meeting of early career investigators: Current opportunities, challenges and horizon in critical care nutrition research

BACKGROUND

Appropriate nutritional support is a key component of care for critically ill patients. While malnutrition increases complications, impacting long term outcomes and healthcare-related costs, uncertainties persist regarding optimal provision of nutritional support in this setting.

METHODS

An international group of healthcare providers (HCPs) from critical care specialties and nutrition researchers convened to identify knowledge gaps and learnings from studies in critical care nutrition. Clinical research needs were identified in order to better inform future nutrition practices.

RESULTS

Challenges in critical care nutrition arise, in part, from inconsistent outcomes in several large-scale studies regarding the optimal amount of calories and protein to prescribe, the optimal time to initiate nutritional support and the role of parental nutrition to support critically ill patients. Furthermore, there is uncertainty on how best to identify patients at nutritional risk, and the appropriate outcome measures for ICU nutrition studies. Given HCPs have a suboptimal evidence base to inform the nutritional management of critically ill patients, further well-designed clinical trials capturing clinically relevant endpoints are needed to address these knowledge gaps.

CONCLUSIONS

The identified aspects for future research could be addressed in studies designed and conducted in collaboration with an international team of interdisciplinary nutrition experts. The aim of this collaboration is to address the unmet need for robust clinical data needed to develop high-quality evidence-based nutritional intervention recommendations to better inform the future management of critically ill patients.

Controlling nutritional status score and prognostic nutrition index predict the outcome after severe traumatic brain injury

OBJECTIVES

Immune-nutritional status is correlated with a clinical outcome in critical illness. Recently, controlling nutritional status (CONUT) score and prognostic nutrition index (PNI) has been reported to predict prognosis following cancer and other diseases. The aim of this study was to explore the relationship between the CONUT score and PNI and 6-month outcome in patients with severe traumatic brain injury (STBI).

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 78 patients with STBI, including the CONUT score and PNI. Patients were divided into high CONUT group and low CONUT group. Patients were also divided into high PNI and low PNI group respectively. The 6-month outcome was evaluated by the modified Rankin scale (mRS). The unfavorable outcome was defined as mRS score ≥3.

RESULTS

The unfavorable outcome group had lower Glasgow coma scale (GCS) scores, serum albumin, total cholesterol, PNI, and higher CONUT scores (P < 0.05). Both CONUT scores and PNI were strongly correlated with mRS (r = 0.429, P < 0.05; r = -0.590, P < 0.05, respectively). After adjustment for confounding factors, the odds ratios of CONUT scores and PNI for predicting unfavorable outcome were 10.478 (95% CI: 2.793-39.301) and -0.039 (95% CI: 0.008-0.204), respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) of CONUT scores for predicting unfavorable outcome was 0.777 (95% CI: 0.674-0.880, P < 0.01), which was similar to PNI (0.764, 95% CI: 0.657-0.87, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Both CONUT scores and PNI might be novel independent predictors of the poor outcome in STBI.

Development and Validation of a Logic Model for Utilization of Nutrition Support among Patients with Cancer

Cancer is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality, and about one in six people die from cancer globally. Approximately 20% to 70% of cancer patients are accompanied with malnutrition, and nutrition support plays an important role among cancer patients. However, the utilization of nutrition support is generally irrational in clinical practices and it is affected by multiple factors. Logic models not only present a framework to improve intervention of health care setting but also identify all the elements, pathways, outcomes, and their relationships between systems. This study developed a logic model of nutrition support for cancer patients based on current literature and conducted interview with medical staff in Macao to validate the logic model. In addition, suggestions were given as references to improve the utilization of nutrition support among cancer patients.

The implementation of a nutrition protocol in a surgical intensive care unit; a randomized controlled trial at a tertiary care hospital

Background

Malnutrition in critically ill patients is linked with significant mortality and morbidity. However, it remains controversial whether nutrition therapy protocols are effective in improving clinical outcomes. The present study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a surgical ICU nutrition protocol, and to compare the hospital mortality, hospital LOS, and ICU LOS of protocol and non-protocol groups.

Methods

A randomized controlled trial was conducted at the Surgical ICU, Siriraj Hospital. The nutrition administration of the control group was at the discretion of the attending physicians, whereas that of the intervention group followed the “Siriraj Surgical ICU Nutrition Protocol”. Details of the demographic data, nutritional data, and clinical outcomes were collected.

Results

In all, 170 patients underwent randomization, with 85 individuals each in the protocol and non-protocol groups. More than 90% of the patients in both groups were at risk of malnutrition, indicated by a score of ≥ 3 on the Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 tool. The average daily calories of the 2 groups were very similar (protocol group, 775.4±342.2 kcal vs. control group, 773.0±391.9 kcal; p = 0.972). However, the median time to commence enteral nutrition was shorter for the protocol group (1.94 days) than the control group (2.25 days; p = 0.503). Enteral nutrition was provided within the first 48 hours to 53.7% of the protocol patients vs. 47.4% of the control patients (p = 0.589). In addition, a higher proportion of the protocol patients (36.5%) reached the 60% calorie-target on Day 4 after admission than that for the non-protocol group (25.9%; p = 0.136). All other clinical outcomes and nutrition-related complications were not significantly different.

Conclusions

The implementation of the nutrition protocol did not improve the feeding effectiveness or clinical outcomes as compared to usual nutrition management practices of the Surgical ICU.

Impact of Intravenous Fluids and Enteral Nutrition on the Severity of Gastrointestinal Dysfunction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Introduction

Gastrointestinal dysfunction (GDF) is one of the primary causes of morbidity and mortality in critically ill patients. Intensive care interventions, such as intravenous fluids and enteral feeding, can exacerbate GDF. There exists a paucity of high-quality literature on the interaction between these two modalities (intravenous fluids and enteral feeding) as a combined therapy on its impact on GDF.

Aim

To review the impact of intravenous fluids and enteral nutrition individually on determinants of gut function and implications in clinical practice.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials on intravenous fluids and enteral feeding on GDF were identified by a comprehensive database search of MEDLINE and EMBASE. Extraction of data was conducted for study characteristics, provision of fluids or feeding in both groups and quality of studies was assessed using the Cochrane criteria. A random-effects model was applied to estimate the impact of these interventions across the spectrum of GDF severity.

Results

Restricted/ goal-directed intravenous fluid therapy is likely to reduce ‘mild’ GDF such as vomiting (p = 0.03) compared to a standard/ liberal intravenous fluid regime. Enterally fed patients experienced increased episodes of vomiting (p = <0.01) but were less likely to develop an anastomotic leak (p = 0.03) and peritonitis (p = 0.03) compared to parenterally fed patients. Vomiting (p = <0.01) and anastomotic leak (p = 0.04) were significantly lower in the early enteral feeding group.

Conclusions

There is less emphasis on the combined approach of intravenous fluid resuscitation and enteral feeding in critically ill patients. Conservative fluid resuscitation and aggressive enteral feeding are presumably key factors contributing to severe life-threatening GDF. Future trials should evaluate the impact of cross-interaction between conservative and aggressive modes of these two interventions on the severity of GDF.

Effect of combined parenteral and enteral nutrition for patients with a critical illness: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Whether combined parenteral nutrition (PN) and enteral nutrition (EN) is superior to EN alone remains controversial.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of combined PN and EN versus EN alone for critically ill patients based on published randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

DATA SOURCES

Studies designed as RCTs evaluating the treatment effectiveness of combined PN and EN versus EN alone for critically ill patients were identified from PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from inception to April 2019.

METHODS

The pooled relative risks and weighted mean differences with corresponding 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the random-effects model. Twelve RCTs recruiting a total of 5609 adults and 1440 children were selected for the final meta-analysis.

RESULTS

The summary relative risks indicated that combined PN and EN was not associated with the risk of all-cause mortality, respiratory infection, urinary tract infection, and nutrition-related complications. Moreover, combined PN and EN was associated with longer hospital stay and higher albumin and prealbumin levels compared with EN alone. No significant differences were, however, found between combined PN and EN and EN alone in terms of ventilatory support, intensive care unit stay, and transferrin and C-reactive protein levels.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that combined PN and EN significantly increased hospital stay duration and albumin and prealbumin levels compared with EN alone for critically ill patients. Large-scale RCTs should be conducted to compare the treatment effectiveness of combined PN and EN versus EN alone for critically ill patients due to a specific cause.

Reduced Neuroinflammation and Improved Functional Recovery after Traumatic Brain Injury by Prophylactic Diet Supplementation in Mice

Currently, there are no approved therapeutic drugs for the treatment of traumatic brain injury (TBI), and new targets and approaches are needed to provide relief from the long-term effects of TBI. Recent studies suggest that nutrition plays a critical role in improving the outcome from TBI in both civilians and military personnel. We have previously shown that GrandFusion^® (GF) diets improved recovery from cerebral ischemia and enhanced physical activity and endurance in rodent models. We, therefore, sought to determine the impact of a prophylactic diet enriched in fruits and vegetables on recovery from TBI in the controlled cortical impact rodent model. Results demonstrated that mice fed the diets had improved neuromotor function, reduced lesion volume, increased neuronal density in the hippocampus and reduced inflammation. As previously shown, TBI increases cathepsin B as part of the inflammasome complex resulting in elevated inflammatory markers like interleukin-1β (IL-1β). Consumption of the GF diets attenuated the increase in cathepsin B levels and prevented the increase in the proapoptotic factor Bax following TBI. These data suggest that prior consumption of diets enriched in fruits and vegetables either naturally or through powdered form can provide protection from the detrimental effects of TBI.

The effect of enteral versus parenteral nutrition for critically ill patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To analyze the effect of enteral nutrition compared with parenteral nutrition in critically ill patients.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

SETTING

Intensive care unit.

PATIENTS

23 trials containing 6478 patients met our inclusion criteria.

INTERVENTION

A systematical literature search was conducted to identify eligible trials in electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, Scopus, EBSCO and Cochrane Library. The primary outcome was mortality, the secondary outcomes were gastrointestinal complications, bloodstream infections, organ failures, length of stay in ICU and hospital. We performed a predefined subgroup analyses to explore the treatment effect by mean age, publication date and disease types.

MAIN RESULTS

The result showed no significant effect on overall mortality rate (OR 0.98, 95%CI 0.81 to 1.18, P = 0.83, I² = 19%) and organ failure rate (OR 0.87, 95%CI 0.75 to 1.01, P = 0.06, I² = 16%). The use of EN had more beneficial effects with fewer bloodstream infections when compared to PN (OR 0.59, 95%CI 0.43 to 0.82, P = 0.001, I² = 27%) and this was more noteworthy in the subgroup analysis for critical surgical patients (OR 0.36, 95%CI 0.22 to 0.59, P < 0.0001, I² = 0%). EN was associated with reduction in hospital LOS (MD -0.90, 95%CI -1.63 to -0.17, P = 0.21, I² = 0%) but had an increase incidence of gastrointestinal complications (OR 2.00, 95%CI 1.76 to 2.27, P < 0.00001, I² = 0%).

CONCLUSION

For critically ill patients, the two routes of nutrition support had no different effect on mortality rate. The use of EN could decrease the incidence of bloodstream infections and reduce hospital LOS but was associated with increased risk of gastrointestinal complications.

Effect of combined parenteral and enteral nutrition versus enteral nutrition alone for critically ill patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The increased mortality rate and other poor prognosis make malnutrition a serious issue for adult critically ill patients in intensive care unit care. This study was to compare outcomes between combined parenteral and enteral nutrition and enteral nutrition alone for adult critically ill patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The PubMed (June 30, 2018), EMBASE (June 30, 2018), and Cochrane library databases (June 30, 2018) were searched systematically. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of comparing combined PN and EN with EN alone were eligible. Relative risks (RRs), mean differences (MDs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for dichotomous and continuous outcomes.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs involving 5360 patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared with combined PN and EN, fewer respiratory infections (RR, 1.13 [95% CI 1.01-1.25]) and shorter length of days at hospital (MD, 1.83 [95% CI 1.05-2.62]) were observed in EN alone group. And no significant differences were found on hospital mortality (RR, 0.91 [95% CI 0.74-1.12]), length of days in ICU (MD, -0.23 [95% CI -1.79 to 1.32]), duration of ventilatory support (MD, -1.10 [95% CI -3.15 to 0.94]), albumin (MD, -0.04 [95% CI, -0.12 to 0.21]), or prealbumin (MD, -0.77 [95% CI -0.22 to 1.75]) between theses 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

Receiving EN alone decreased the respiratory infections and length of days at hospital for critically ill patients. Combined PN and EN did not add up the potential risk from PN and EN on hospital mortality, length of days in ICU, duration of ventilatory support, albumin, and prealbumin.

ESPEN guideline on clinical nutrition in the intensive care unit

Following the new ESPEN Standard Operating Procedures, the previous guidelines to provide best medical nutritional therapy to critically ill patients have been updated. These guidelines define who are the patients at risk, how to assess nutritional status of an ICU patient, how to define the amount of energy to provide, the route to choose and how to adapt according to various clinical conditions. When to start and how to progress in the administration of adequate provision of nutrients is also described. The best determination of amount and nature of carbohydrates, fat and protein are suggested. Special attention is given to glutamine and omega-3 fatty acids. Particular conditions frequently observed in intensive care such as patients with dysphagia, frail patients, multiple trauma patients, abdominal surgery, sepsis, and obesity are discussed to guide the practitioner toward the best evidence based therapy. Monitoring of this nutritional therapy is discussed in a separate document.

Enteral versus parenteral nutrition and enteral versus a combination of enteral and parenteral nutrition for adults in the intensive care unit

BACKGROUND

Critically ill people are at increased risk of malnutrition. Acute and chronic illness, trauma and inflammation induce stress-related catabolism, and drug-induced adverse effects may reduce appetite or increase nausea and vomiting. In addition, patient management in the intensive care unit (ICU) may also interrupt feeding routines. Methods to deliver nutritional requirements include provision of enteral nutrition (EN), or parenteral nutrition (PN), or a combination of both (EN and PN). However, each method is problematic. This review aimed to determine the route of delivery that optimizes uptake of nutrition.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of enteral versus parenteral methods of nutrition, and the effects of enteral versus a combination of enteral and parenteral methods of nutrition, among critically ill adults, in terms of mortality, number of ICU-free days up to day 28, and adverse events.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase on 3 October 2017. We searched clinical trials registries and grey literature, and handsearched reference lists of included studies and related reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled studies (RCTs) and quasi-randomized studies comparing EN given to adults in the ICU versus PN or versus EN and PN. We included participants that were trauma, emergency, and postsurgical patients in the ICU.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We assessed the certainty of evidence with GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 25 studies with 8816 participants; 23 studies were RCTs and two were quasi-randomized studies. All included participants were critically ill in the ICU with a wide range of diagnoses; mechanical ventilation status between study participants varied. We identified 11 studies awaiting classification for which we were unable to assess eligibility, and two ongoing studies.Seventeen studies compared EN versus PN, six compared EN versus EN and PN, two were multi-arm studies comparing EN versus PN versus EN and PN. Most studies reported randomization and allocation concealment inadequately. Most studies reported no methods to blind personnel or outcome assessors to nutrition groups; one study used adequate methods to reduce risk of performance bias.Enteral nutrition versus parenteral nutritionWe found that one feeding route rather than the other (EN or PN) may make little or no difference to mortality in hospital (risk ratio (RR) 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80 to 1.77; 361 participants; 6 studies; low-certainty evidence), or mortality within 30 days (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.13; 3148 participants; 11 studies; low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether one feeding route rather than the other reduces mortality within 90 days because the certainty of the evidence is very low (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.17; 2461 participants; 3 studies). One study reported mortality at one to four months and we did not combine this in the analysis; we reported this data as mortality within 180 days and it is uncertain whether EN or PN affects the number of deaths within 180 days because the certainty of the evidence is very low (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.97; 46 participants).No studies reported number of ICU-free days up to day 28, and one study reported number of ventilator-free days up to day 28 and it is uncertain whether one feeding route rather than the other reduces the number of ventilator-free days up to day 28 because the certainty of the evidence is very low (mean difference, inverse variance, 0.00, 95% CI -0.97 to 0.97; 2388 participants).We combined data for adverse events reported by more than one study. It is uncertain whether EN or PN affects aspiration because the certainty of the evidence is very low (RR 1.53, 95% CI 0.46 to 5.03; 2437 participants; 2 studies), and we found that one feeding route rather than the other may make little or no difference to pneumonia (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.48; 415 participants; 7 studies; low-certainty evidence). We found that EN may reduce sepsis (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.95; 361 participants; 7 studies; low-certainty evidence), and it is uncertain whether PN reduces vomiting because the certainty of the evidence is very low (RR 3.42, 95% CI 1.15 to 10.16; 2525 participants; 3 studies).Enteral nutrition versus enteral nutrition and parenteral nutritionWe found that one feeding regimen rather than another (EN or combined EN or PN) may make little or no difference to mortality in hospital (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.16; 5111 participants; 5 studies; low-certainty evidence), and at 90 days (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.18; 4760 participants; 2 studies; low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether combined EN and PN leads to fewer deaths at 30 days because the certainty of the evidence is very low (RR 1.64, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.54; 409 participants; 3 studies). It is uncertain whether one feeding regimen rather than another reduces mortality within 180 days because the certainty of the evidence is very low (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.55; 120 participants; 1 study).No studies reported number of ICU-free days or ventilator-free days up to day 28. It is uncertain whether either feeding method reduces pneumonia because the certainty of the evidence is very low (RR 1.40, 95% CI 0.91 to 2.15; 205 participants; 2 studies). No studies reported aspiration, sepsis, or vomiting.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found insufficient evidence to determine whether EN is better or worse than PN, or than combined EN and PN for mortality in hospital, at 90 days and at 180 days, and on the number of ventilator-free days and adverse events. We found fewer deaths at 30 days when studies gave combined EN and PN, and reduced sepsis for EN rather than PN. We found no studies that reported number of ICU-free days up to day 28. Certainty of the evidence for all outcomes is either low or very low. The 11 studies awaiting classification may alter the conclusions of the review once assessed.

Interventions for preventing upper gastrointestinal bleeding in people admitted to intensive care units

BACKGROUND

Upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding due to stress ulcers contributes to increased morbidity and mortality in people admitted to intensive care units (ICUs). Stress ulceration refers to GI mucosal injury related to the stress of being critically ill. ICU patients with major bleeding as a result of stress ulceration might have mortality rates approaching 48.5% to 65%. However, the incidence of stress-induced GI bleeding in ICUs has decreased, and not all critically ill patients need prophylaxis. Stress ulcer prophylaxis can result in adverse events such as ventilator-associated pneumonia; therefore, it is necessary to evaluate strategies that safely decrease the incidence of GI bleeding.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect and risk-benefit profile of interventions for preventing upper GI bleeding in people admitted to ICUs.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to 23 August 2017, using relevant search terms: MEDLINE; Embase; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature; and the Cochrane Upper Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Disease Group Specialised Register, as published in the Cochrane Library (2017, Issue 8). We searched the reference lists of all included studies and those from relevant systematic reviews and meta-analyses to identify additional studies. We also searched the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform search portal and contacted individual researchers working in this field, as well as organisations and pharmaceutical companies, to identify unpublished and ongoing studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs with participants of any age and gender admitted to ICUs for longer than 48 hours. We excluded studies in which participants were admitted to ICUs primarily for the management of GI bleeding and studies that compared different doses, routes, and regimens of one drug in the same class because we were not interested in intraclass effects of drugs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as recommended by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 2292 unique records.We included 129 records reporting on 121 studies, including 12 ongoing studies and two studies awaiting classification.We judged the overall risk of bias of two studies as low. Selection bias was the most relevant risk of bias domain across the included studies, with 78 studies not clearly reporting the method used for random sequence generation. Reporting bias was the domain with least risk of bias, with 12 studies not reporting all outcomes that researchers intended to investigate.Any intervention versus placebo or no prophylaxisIn comparison with placebo, any intervention seems to have a beneficial effect on the occurrence of upper GI bleeding (risk ratio (RR) 0.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39 to 0.57; moderate certainty of evidence). The use of any intervention reduced the risk of upper GI bleeding by 10% (95% CI -12.0% to -7%). The effect estimate of any intervention versus placebo or no prophylaxis with respect to the occurrence of nosocomial pneumonia, all-cause mortality in the ICU, duration of ICU stay, duration of intubation (all with low certainty of evidence), the number of participants requiring blood transfusions (moderate certainty of evidence), and the units of blood transfused was consistent with benefits and harms. None of the included studies explicitly reported on serious adverse events.Individual interventions versus placebo or no prophylaxisIn comparison with placebo or no prophylaxis, antacids, H2 receptor antagonists, and sucralfate were effective in preventing upper GI bleeding in ICU patients. Researchers found that with H2 receptor antagonists compared with placebo or no prophylaxis, 11% less developed upper GI bleeding (95% CI -0.16 to -0.06; RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.70; 24 studies; 2149 participants; moderate certainty of evidence). Of ICU patients taking antacids versus placebo or no prophylaxis, 9% less developed upper GI bleeding (95% CI -0.17 to -0.00; RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.99; eight studies; 774 participants; low certainty of evidence). Among ICU patients taking sucralfate versus placebo or no prophylaxis, 5% less had upper GI bleeding (95% CI -0.10 to -0.01; RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.88; seven studies; 598 participants; moderate certainty of evidence). The remaining interventions including proton pump inhibitors did not show a significant effect in preventing upper GI bleeding in ICU patients when compared with placebo or no prophylaxis.Regarding the occurrence of nosocomial pneumonia, the effects of H2 receptor antagonists (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.48; eight studies; 945 participants; low certainty of evidence) and of sucralfate (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.86 to 2.04; four studies; 450 participants; low certainty of evidence) were consistent with benefits and harms when compared with placebo or no prophylaxis. None of the studies comparing antacids versus placebo or no prophylaxis provided data regarding nosocomial pneumonia.H2 receptor antagonists versus proton pump inhibitorsH2 receptor antagonists and proton pump inhibitors are most commonly used in practice to prevent upper GI bleeding in ICU patients. Proton pump inhibitors significantly more often prevented upper GI bleeding in ICU patients compared with H2 receptor antagonists (RR 2.90, 95% CI 1.83 to 4.58; 18 studies; 1636 participants; low certainty of evidence). When taking H2 receptor antagonists, 4.8% more patients might experience upper GI bleeding (95% CI 2.1% to 9%). Nosocomial pneumonia occurred in similar proportions of participants taking H2 receptor antagonists and participants taking proton pump inhibitors (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.35; 10 studies; 1256 participants; low certainty of evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review shows that antacids, sucralfate, and H2 receptor antagonists might be more effective in preventing upper GI bleeding in ICU patients compared with placebo or no prophylaxis. The effect estimates of any treatment versus no prophylaxis on nosocomial pneumonia were consistent with benefits and harms. Evidence of low certainty suggests that proton pump inhibitors might be more effective than H2 receptor antagonists. Therefore, patient-relevant benefits and especially harms of H2 receptor antagonists compared with proton pump inhibitors need to be assessed by larger, high-quality RCTs to confirm the results of previously conducted, smaller, and older studies.

Comparing efficacy of enteral nutrition plus ranitidine and enteral nutrition alone as stress ulcer prophylaxis

Aim: Adequacy of enteral nutrition (EN) alone as stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) is controversial. The aim of this study was to compare efficacy of EN alone and ranitidine plus EN as SUP. Method: Critically ill adults with indications to receive SUP were randomized to ranitidine 50 mg IV every 8 h plus EN (SUP) or EN alone (non-SUP) group for 7 days. Besides, endoscopy was performed at the time of recruitment and on day 7. Results: During the study period, only one patient in each group of SUP and non-SUP experienced gastrointestinal bleeding. At the time of recruitment, gastric erosion and erythema were the most endoscopic findings in the SUP and non-SUP groups. These findings did not significantly change at the end of the study (p = 0.21). Conclusion: EN was at least effective as ranitidine plus EN as SUP.

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.