Oral nutritional supplementation increases caloric and protein intake in peritoneal dialysis patients

Sleep Quality After Intradialytic Oral Nutrition: A New Benefit of This Anabolic Strategy? A Pilot Study

Background

Since disturbances of appetite and sleep are closely related and both affect metabolic disorders, it would be expected that a renal specific oral nutritional supplement (RS-ONS) that covers the energy the patient does not consume on the HD day, could contribute to improve the nutritional status and body composition, as well as sleep quality. There is still scarce information related to this topic.

Aim

To evaluate the effect of the use of intra-dialytic RS-ONS vs. RS-ONS at home on sleep quality, nutritional status, and body composition in patients on HD.

Methods

Adult patients < 65 years, with ≥3 months on HD were invited to participate in an open randomized pilot study (ISRCTN 33897). Patients were randomized to a dialysis-specific high-protein supplement provided during the HD session (Intradialytic oral nutrition [ION]) or at home (control), during non-HD days (thrice weekly, for both) 12 weeks. The primary outcome was sleep quality defined by the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) score. Nutritional assessment included Malnutrition Inflammation Score (MIS), bioelectrical impedance analysis, anthropometry, 3-day food records, and routine blood chemistries.

Results

A total of 23 patients completed the study. Age was median 35 (range 24–48 years), 42% were women. At baseline, the PSQI score was median 4 (range 2–7), and MIS showed a median of 6 (range 5–8); there were no baseline differences between groups. After intervention, both groups improved their MIS scores and similarly when we analyzed the whole cohort (pre- vs. post-intervention P < 0.01). Patients in the ION group improved the overall PSQI score to median 3 (2–5), and assessment of sleep duration and sleep disturbances (pre- vs. post-intervention P < 0.05), with a trend toward an effect difference compared to patients consuming the supplement at home (P for treatment-effect across arms 0.07 for PSQI score and 0.05 for sleep latency).

Conclusion

Oral supplementation improved nutritional status in the whole cohort, but only ION improved the PSQI score. More studies are needed to explore the nutritional strategies that influence the relationship between sleep and nutritional status in HD patients.

Oral protein-based supplements versus placebo or no treatment for people with chronic kidney disease requiring dialysis

BACKGROUND

Malnutrition is common in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) on dialysis. Oral protein-based nutritional supplements are often provided to patients whose oral intake is otherwise insufficient to meet their energy and protein needs. Evidence for the effectiveness of oral protein-based nutritional supplements in this population is limited.

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this review were to determine the benefits and harms of using oral protein-based nutritional supplements to improve the nutritional state of patients with CKD requiring dialysis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 12 December 2019 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of patients with CKD requiring dialysis that compared oral protein-based nutritional supplements to no oral protein-based nutritional supplements or placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed studies for eligibility, risk of bias, and extracted data from individual studies. Summary estimates of effect were obtained using a random-effects model, and results were expressed as risk ratios and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes, and mean difference and 95% CI for continuous outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-two studies (1278 participants) were included in this review. All participants were adults on maintenance dialysis of whom 79% were on haemodialysis (HD) and 21% peritoneal dialysis. The follow-up period ranged from one to 12 months. The majority of studies were at unclear risk of selection, performance, and reporting bias. The detection bias was high for self-reported outcomes. Oral protein-based nutritional supplements probably lead to a higher mean change in serum albumin compared to the control group (16 studies, 790 participants: MD 0.19 g/dL, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.33; moderate certainty evidence), although there was considerable heterogeneity in the combined analysis (I² = 84%). The increase was more evident in HD participants (10 studies, 526 participants: MD 0.28 g/dL, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.46; P = 0.001 for overall effect) and malnourished participants (8 studies, 405 participants: MD 0.31 g/dL, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.52, P = 0.003 for overall effect). Oral protein-based nutritional supplements also probably leads to a higher mean serum albumin at the end of the intervention (14 studies, 715 participants: MD 0.14 g/dL, 95% CI 0 to 0.27; moderate certainty evidence), however heterogeneity was again high (I² = 80%). Again the increase was more evident in HD participants (9 studies, 498 participants: MD 0.21 g/dL, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.38; P = 0.02 for overall effect) and malnourished participants (7 studies, 377 participants: MD 0.25 g/dL, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.47; P = 0.03 for overall effect). Compared to placebo or no supplement, low certainty evidence showed oral protein-based nutritional supplements may result in a higher serum prealbumin (4 studies, 225 participants: MD 2.81 mg/dL, 95% CI 2.19 to 3.43), and mid-arm muscle circumference (4 studies, 216 participants: MD 1.33 cm, 95% CI 0.24 to 2.43) at the end of the intervention. Compared to placebo or no supplement, oral protein-based nutritional supplements may make little or no difference to weight (8 studies, 365 participants: MD 2.83 kg, 95% CI -0.43 to 6.09; low certainty evidence), body mass index (9 studies, 368 participants: MD -0.04 kg/m², 95% CI -0.74 to 0.66; moderate certainty evidence) and lean mass (5 studies, 189 participants: MD 1.27 kg, 95% CI -1.61 to 4.51; low certainty evidence). Due to very low quality of evidence, it is uncertain whether oral protein-based nutritional supplements affect triceps skinfold thickness, mid-arm circumference, C-reactive protein, Interleukin 6, serum potassium, or serum phosphate. There may be little or no difference in the risk of developing gastrointestinal intolerance between participants who received oral protein-based nutritional supplements compared with placebo or no supplement (6 studies, 426 participants: RR 2.81, 95% CI 0.58 to 13.65, low certainty evidence). It was not possible to draw conclusions about cost or quality of life, and deaths were not reported as a study outcome in any of the included studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, it is likely that oral protein-based nutritional supplements increase both mean change in serum albumin and serum albumin at end of intervention and may improve serum prealbumin and mid-arm muscle circumference. The improvement in serum albumin was more evident in haemodialysis and malnourished participants. However, it remains uncertain whether these results translate to improvement in nutritional status and clinically relevant outcomes such as death. Large well-designed RCTs in this population are required.

Randomized, Open Label, Controlled Clinical Trial of Oral Administration of an Egg Albumin-Based Protein Supplement to Patients on Continuous Ambulatory Peritoneal Dialysis

Background/Aim

Malnutrition is highly prevalent in patients on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) and is a strong predictor of increased morbidity and mortality. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of oral administration of an egg albumin-based protein supplement on the nutritional status of CAPD patients.

Methods

In this randomized, open label, controlled clinical trial, 28 CAPD patients were allocated to a study ( n = 13) or a control ( n = 15) group. Both groups received conventional nutritional counseling; the study group received, additionally, an oral egg albumin-based supplement. During a 6-month follow-up, all patients had monthly clinical and biochemical evaluations and quarterly assessments of adequacy of dialysis and nutrition.

Results

Serum albumin levels were not different between groups; however, a significant increase (baseline vs final) was observed in the study group (2.64 ± 0.35 vs 3.05 ± 0.72 g/dL) but not in the control group (2.66 ± 0.56 vs 2.80 ± 0.54 mg/dL). Calorie and protein intake increased more in the study group (calories 1331 ± 432 vs 1872 ± 698 kcal; proteins 1.0 ± 0.3 vs 1.7 ± 0.7 g/kg) than in the control group (calories 1423 ± 410 vs 1567 ± 381 kcal; proteins 1.0 ± 0.4 vs 1.0 ± 0.3 g/kg). Similarly, non-protein nitrogen appearance rate (nPNA) increased significantly more in the study (1.00 ± 0.23 vs 1.18 ± 0.35 g/kg/day) than in the control group (0.91 ± 0.11 vs 0.97 ± 0.14 g/kg/day). Triceps skinfold thickness (TSF) and midarm muscle area (MAMA) displayed a nonsignificant trend to a greater increase in the study group (TSF 16.7 ± 8.7 vs 18.3 ± 10.7 mm; MAMA 23.8 ± 6.2 vs 25.8 ± 5.9 cm2) than in controls (TSF 16.4 ± 5.7 vs 16.9 ± 7.0 mm; MAMA 28.7 ± 7.8 vs 30.0 ± 7.9 cm2). At the end of follow-up, the frequency of patients with moderate or severe malnutrition decreased 6% in the control group and decreased 28% in the study group. At the final evaluation, the most important predictors of serum albumin were the oral egg albumin-based supplement administration and protein intake ( p < 0.05); secondary predictors ( p = 0.06) were peritoneal transport rate and MAMA.

Conclusions

In the study group, oral administration of the egg albumin-based supplement significantly improved serum albumin, calorie and protein intake, and nPNA, and, compared to controls, this maneuver was associated with a trend to increased anthropometric parameters and improved Subjective Global Assessment evaluation. Oral administration of the albumin supplement and protein intake were the most significant predictors of serum albumin at the end of follow-up. This oral supplement may be a safe, effective, and cheap method to improve nutritional status in peritoneal dialysis patients.

Oral Protein-Energy Supplements in Peritoneal Dialysis: A Multicenter Study

Background

Protein-energy malnutrition is prevalent in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality.

Objective

To evaluate the impact of prophylactic treatment with an oral protein-energy supplement (Protenplus; Fresenius AG, Bad Homburg, Germany) on nutritional parameters in patients starting PD.

Design

Prospective, multicenter, randomized study of group A patients (Protenplus, n = 35) and group B (controls, n = 30), with evaluations at baseline and at 6 and 12 months. Statistical Methods: Efficacy of factors by linear mixed model analysis for repeated measurements, chi-square, t-test, and Mann–Whitney test.

Outcome Parameters

Patient compliance, serum albumin, and other nutritional parameters.

Results

No significant differences were found at baseline evaluation. During follow-up, a significant number of group A patients abandoned intake of the supplement due to noncompliance ( n = 7) or side effects ( n = 8) (χ2 p < 0.01). Patients with lower residual renal function were less likely to comply. The mixed model in the “intention to treat” analysis showed a significant increase related to supplement intake only in total lymphocyte count in group A. The “as treated” analysis of the 29 patients who fulfilled the study (9 in group A, 20 in group B) disclosed that belonging to group A constituted an independent factor for increased lymphocyte count ( p < 0.001), body weight ( p < 0.03), tricipital skinfold thickness ( p < 0.01), middle-arm muscle circumference ( p < 0.025), lean body mass (LBM) ( p < 0.002), creatinine LBM related to body surface area ( p < 0.001), and creatinine generation rate ( p < 0.002). However, these data may have been biased by the high rate of noncompliance in group A.

Conclusions

Protenplus proved to be unsuitable as a long term, oral protein-energy supplement in PD patients due to a high rate of noncompliance and intolerance, primarily among patients with lower residual renal function. The question of whether other products, better-tolerated as nutritional supplements, could compensate for daily protein peritoneal losses in long-term PD remains open.

Nutritional status among peritoneal dialysis patients after oral supplement with ONCE dialyze formula

BACKGROUND

Malnutrition is an important problem in patients treated with long-term dialysis, and most dialysis patients have lower dietary energy and protein intake. This study was undertaken to examine whether orally administered Otsuka Nutrition Pharmaceutical (ONCE) dialyze formula (ODF) supplement would improve energy intake without mineral and electrolyte disturbances in patients with continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD).

METHODS

The effects of ODF supplementation on nutrition markers including serum albumin and prealbumin concentrations and inflammatory stress in patients with chronic CAPD were evaluated. All patients received daily oral ODF supplements for 15 days. During follow-up, all patients were evaluated clinically and biochemically, and nutritional status was assessed.

RESULTS

Thirty patients with mean age 61.9±12.3 years and weekly Kt/V 2.2±0.4 were studied. The mean values for nutritional parameters included a body weight of 53.7±9.5 kg, a serum albumin level of 3.3±0.4 g/dL, a serum prealbumin level of 33.8±11.1 mg/dL, a dietary energy intake of 21.9±7.1 kcal/kg/day, and a dietary protein intake of 0.9±0.3 g/kg/day. After 15-day ODF treatment, these patients had significant dietary energy and protein, carbohydrate, fat, fiber, potassium, calcium, and magnesium intake from baseline (P<0.05). Furthermore, significant improvements were found in nutritional markers including body weight, blood urea nitrogen, and prealbumin levels, but no changes were observed in serum albumin and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein levels. At the end of follow-up, the frequency of patients with moderate malnutrition decreased from 24.2% to 18.2%, and no increased incidence was observed of hyperkalemia, hyperphosphatemia, and metabolic acidosis.

CONCLUSION

ODF supplementation ameliorates low dietary energy and nutrient intake as well as improves serum prealbumin and body weight in patients with long-term CAPD.

Supportive interventions for enhancing dietary intake in malnourished or nutritionally at-risk adults

BACKGROUND

Supportive interventions such as serving meals in a dining room environment or the use of assistants to feed patients are frequently recommended for the management of nutritionally vulnerable groups. Such interventions are included in many policy and guideline documents and have implications for staff time but may incur additional costs, yet there appears to be a lack of evidence for their efficacy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of supportive interventions for enhancing dietary intake in malnourished or nutritionally at-risk adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified publications from comprehensive searches of the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, AMED, British Nursing Index, CINAHL, SCOPUS, ISI Web of Science databases, scrutiny of the reference lists of included trials and related systematic reviews and handsearching the abstracts of relevant meetings. The date of the last search for all databases was 31 March 2013. Additional searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP were undertaken to September 2016. The date of the last search for these databases was 14 September 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of supportive interventions given with the aim of enhancing dietary intake in nutritionally vulnerable adults compared with usual care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors and for the final search, the editor, selected trials from titles and abstracts and independently assessed eligibility of selected trials. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias, as well as evaluating overall quality of the evidence utilising the GRADE instrument, and then agreed as they entered data into the review. The likelihood of clinical heterogeneity amongst trials was judged to be high as trials were in populations with widely different clinical backgrounds, conducted in different healthcare settings and despite some grouping of similar interventions, involved interventions that varied considerably. We were only able, therefore, to conduct meta-analyses for the outcome measures, 'all-cause mortality', 'hospitalisation' and 'nutritional status (weight change)'.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-one trials (10,681 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Trials were grouped according to similar interventions (changes to organisation of nutritional care (N = 13; 3456 participants), changes to the feeding environment (N = 5; 351 participants), modification of meal profile or pattern (N = 12; 649 participants), additional supplementation of meals (N = 10; 6022 participants) and home meal delivery systems (N = 1; 203 participants). Follow-up ranged from 'duration of hospital stay' to 12 months.The overall quality of evidence was moderate to very low, with the majority of trials judged to be at an unclear risk of bias in several risk of bias domains. The risk ratio (RR) for all-cause mortality was 0.78 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66 to 0.92); P = 0.004; 12 trials; 6683 participants; moderate-quality evidence. This translates into 26 (95% CI 9 to 41) fewer cases of death per 1000 participants in favour of supportive interventions. The RR for number of participants with any medical complication ranged from 1.42 in favour of control compared with 0.59 in favour of supportive interventions (very low-quality evidence). Only five trials (4451 participants) investigated health-related quality of life showing no substantial differences between intervention and comparator groups. Information on patient satisfaction was unreliable. The effects of supportive interventions versus comparators on hospitalisation showed a mean difference (MD) of -0.5 days (95% CI -2.6 to 1.6); P = 0.65; 5 trials; 667 participants; very low-quality evidence. Only three of 41 included trials (4108 participants; very low-quality evidence) reported on adverse events, describing intolerance to the supplement (diarrhoea, vomiting; 5/34 participants) and discontinuation of oral nutritional supplements because of refusal or dislike of taste (567/2017 participants). Meta-analysis across 17 trials with adequate data on weight change revealed an overall improvement in weight in favour of supportive interventions versus control: MD 0.6 kg (95% CI 0.21 to 1.02); 2024 participants; moderate-quality evidence. A total of 27 trials investigated nutritional intake with a majority of trials not finding marked differences in energy intake between intervention and comparator groups. Only three trials (1152 participants) reported some data on economic costs but did not use accepted health economic methods (very low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence of moderate to very low quality to suggest that supportive interventions to improve nutritional care results in minimal weight gain. Most of the evidence for the lower risk of all-cause mortality for supportive interventions comes from hospital-based trials and more research is needed to confirm this effect. There is very low-quality evidence regarding adverse effects; therefore whilst some of these interventions are advocated at a national level clinicians should recognise the lack of clear evidence to support their role. This review highlights the importance of assessing patient-important outcomes in future research.

APPETITE PREDICTS INTAKE AND NUTRITIONAL STATUS IN PATIENTS RECEIVING PERITONEAL DIALYSIS

BACKGROUND

Sub-optimal nutrition status is common amongst patients receiving peritoneal dialysis (PD) and leads to poor clinical outcome. This population experiences multi-factorial challenges to achieving optimal nutritional status, particularly driven by inadequate intake.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this investigation was to identify factors associated with inadequate protein intake and sub-optimal nutritional status in patients undergoing PD.

DESIGN/PARTICIPANTS

This was a cross-sectional study of 67 adult patients receiving PD (mean age 59 ± 14 years; 57% male) within a single centre. Participants were consecutively recruited and interviewed by renal dietitians, collecting: Subjective Global Assessment (SGA); quality of life (using EQ-5D); dietary intake (via dietary interview); and appetite (using Appetite and Diet Assessment Tool). Participant demographics were obtained via survey or medical charts. Main outcome measures were inadequate dietary protein intake (<1.1 g/kg adjusted body weight/day) and malnutrition (as defined by SGA rating B or C).

RESULTS

Overall, 15 (22%) patients were malnourished and 29 (43%) had inadequate protein intake. Poor appetite (anorexia) was reported in 62% (18/29) of participants with inadequate protein malnourished patients reported anorexia versus 12 (23%) of the well-nourished patients (p = 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Anorexia was a key risk factor for inadequate protein intake and malnutrition in patients undergoing PD. These findings highlight a need to closely monitor patients with appetite disturbances.

Nutrition in patients on peritoneal dialysis

Protein-energy wasting (PEW) is prevalent among patients on dialysis and has emerged as an important risk factor for morbidity and mortality in these patients. Numerous factors, including inflammation, inadequate dialysis, insufficient nutrient intake, loss of protein during dialysis, chronic acidosis, hypercatabolic illness and comorbid conditions, are involved in the development of PEW. The causes and clinical features of PEW in patients on peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis are comparable; assessment of the factors that lead to PEW in patients receiving peritoneal dialysis is important to ensure that PEW is managed correctly in these patients. For the past 20 years, much progress has been made in the prevention and treatment of PEW. However, the results of most nutritional intervention studies are inconclusive. In addition, the multifactorial and complicated pathogenesis of PEW makes it difficult to assess and treat. This Review summarizes the nutritional issues regarding the causes, assessment and treatment of PEW, with a focus on patients receiving peritoneal dialysis. In addition, an in-depth overview of the results of nutritional intervention studies is provided.

Diets and enteral supplements for improving outcomes in chronic kidney disease

Protein-energy wasting (PEW), which is manifested by low serum levels of albumin or prealbumin, sarcopenia and weight loss, is one of the strongest predictors of mortality in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Although PEW might be engendered by non-nutritional conditions, such as inflammation or other comorbidities, the question of causality does not refute the effectiveness of dietary interventions and nutritional support in improving outcomes in patients with CKD. The literature indicates that PEW can be mitigated or corrected with an appropriate diet and enteral nutritional support that targets dietary protein intake. In-center meals or oral supplements provided during dialysis therapy are feasible and inexpensive interventions that might improve survival and quality of life in patients with CKD. Dietary requirements and enteral nutritional support must also be considered in patients with CKD and diabetes mellitus, in patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis, renal transplant recipients, and in children with CKD. Adjunctive pharmacological therapies, such as appetite stimulants, anabolic hormones, and antioxidative or anti-inflammatory agents, might augment dietary interventions. Intraperitoneal or intradialytic parenteral nutrition should be considered for patients with PEW whenever enteral interventions are not possible or are ineffective. Controlled trials are needed to better assess the effectiveness of in-center meals and oral supplements.

Multinutrient Oral Supplements and Tube Feeding in Maintenance Dialysis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

This systematic review aims to determine the potential benefits of enteral multinutrient support (oral or tube) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) receiving maintenance dialysis.

METHODS

Studies of multinutrient oral supplements and enteral tube feeding that involved comparisons of nutritional support versus routine care (ie, usual diet), disease-specific formulae (with adapted macronutrient and micronutrient composition for use in maintenance dialysis patients) versus standard formulae, and enteral tube feeding versus parenteral nutrition are included in this review. The outcome measures sought were clinical (quality of life, complications, and mortality), biochemical (albumin and electrolyte levels), and nutritional (dietary intake and anthropometry). Meta-analyses were performed when possible.

RESULTS

This review of 18 studies (5 randomized controlled trials [RCTs], 13 non-RCTs) suggests that enteral nutritional support increased total (energy and protein) intake and increased serum albumin concentration by 0.23 g/dL (2.3 g/L; 95% confidence interval, 0.037 to 0.418 g/dL [0.37 to 4.18 g/L]; 1 RCT, 2 non-RCTs), with little effect on electrolyte status (serum phosphate and potassium). Few studies reported clinical outcome, and there was insufficient information to compare disease-specific versus standard formulae or enteral versus parenteral nutrition.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review suggests that enteral multinutrient support significantly increases serum albumin concentrations and improves total dietary intake. This may improve clinical outcome, especially in malnourished patients, but insufficient published data exist to examine this. Additional research is required to investigate clinical, economic, and nutritional consequences of using oral supplements and tube feeding (using standard or disease-specific feeds) in patients with CKD receiving maintenance dialysis.

Protein and energy nutrition among adult patients treated with chronic peritoneal dialysis

Protein-energy malnutrition (PEM) in adult patients treated with chronic peritoneal dialysis (CPD), which is highly prevalent and frequently severe in its manifestation, poses a significant therapeutic dilemma. The causes of PEM include inflammation, low nutrient intake, nutrient losses during dialysis, metabolic acidemia, coexisting illnesses, and possibly the endocrine disorders of uremia. Treatment strategies for PEM in CPD patients include the following: attempt to treat the potentially reversible causes of anorexia, increase nutrient intake (by nutritional counseling, oral food supplements, consideration of appetite stimulants and intraperitonial amino acid solutions), and the correction of metabolic acidosis. Coexisting illnesses engendering PEM should be treated. Experimental evidence suggests that such agents as anabolic steroids, human growth hormone, insulin-like growth factor-I, and L-carnitine may engender positive protein balance in these individuals. Finally, the use of anti-inflammatory agents to improve the nutritional status of malnourished CPD patients remains to be defined. There is a need to carry out clinical trials that examine whether an improvement in the nutritional status of CPD patients is associated with an improvement in their mortality, morbidity and/or quality of life.