Early versus Late Parenteral Nutrition in Critically Ill Children

Nutritional Management of the Critically Ill Neonate: A Position Paper of the ESPGHAN Committee on Nutrition

OBJECTIVES

The nutritional management of critically ill term neonates and preterm infants varies widely, and controversies exist in regard to when to initiate nutrition, mode of feeding, energy requirements, and composition of enteral and parenteral feeds. Recommendations for nutritional support in critical illness are needed.

METHODS

The ESPGHAN Committee on Nutrition (ESPGHAN-CoN) conducted a systematic literature search on nutritional support in critically ill neonates, including studies on basic metabolism. The Medline database and the Cochrane Library were used in the search for relevant publications. The quality of evidence was reviewed and discussed before voting on recommendations, and a consensus of 90% or more was required for the final approval. Important research gaps were also identified.

RESULTS

This position paper provides clinical recommendations on nutritional support during different phases of critical illness in preterm and term neonates based on available literature and expert opinion.

CONCLUSION

Basic research along with adequately powered trials are urgently needed to resolve key uncertainties on metabolism and nutrient requirements in this heterogeneous patient population.

Early Supplemental Parenteral Nutrition in Critically Ill Children: An Update

In critically ill children admitted to pediatric intensive care units (PICUs), enteral nutrition (EN) is often delayed due to gastrointestinal dysfunction or interrupted. Since a macronutrient deficit in these patients has been associated with adverse outcomes in observational studies, supplemental parenteral nutrition (PN) in PICUs has long been widely advised to meeting nutritional requirements. However, uncertainty of timing of initiation, optimal dose and composition of PN has led to a wide variation in previous guidelines and current clinical practices. The PEPaNIC (Early versus Late Parenteral Nutrition in the Pediatric ICU) randomized controlled trial recently showed that withholding PN in the first week in PICUs reduced incidence of new infections and accelerated recovery as compared with providing supplemental PN early (within 24 hours after PICU admission), irrespective of diagnosis, severity of illness, risk of malnutrition or age. The early withholding of amino acids in particular, which are powerful suppressors of intracellular quality control by autophagy, statistically explained this outcome benefit. Importantly, two years after PICU admission, not providing supplemental PN early in PICUs did not negatively affect mortality, growth or health status, and significantly improved neurocognitive development. These findings have an important impact on the recently issued guidelines for PN administration to critically ill children. In this review, we summarize the most recent literature that provides evidence on the implications for clinical practice with regard to the use of early supplemental PN in critically ill children.

Early versus late parenteral nutrition in critically ill, term neonates: a preplanned secondary subgroup analysis of the PEPaNIC multicentre, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Previous randomised studies showed that withholding parenteral nutrition for 1 week of critical illness was superior to early initiation (<24-48 h) of parenteral nutrition in children and adults. However, neonates are considered more susceptible to macronutrient deficits. We investigated the effect of withholding parenteral nutrition for 1 week in critically ill, term neonates.

METHODS

We previously did a randomised, controlled study (PEPaNIC) of children aged up to 17 years admitted to paediatric intensive-care units (ICUs) in three hospitals in Belgium, Canada, and the Netherlands randomly assigned (1:1) to either standard care of parenteral nutrition initiated early within 24 h of admission to an ICU or late parenteral nutrition (where supplemental parenteral nutrition was withheld for 1 week after admission to the ICU). In this preplanned, secondary subanalysis of PEPaNIC, we looked at data from critically ill, term neonate participants (gestational age ≥37 weeks) aged up to 28 days (studied in overlapping age groups of ≤4 weeks, ≤1 week, and <1 day-ie, age at admission). In both the early parenteral nutrition and late parenteral nutrition groups, enteral nutrition was initiated as soon as possible and increased according to local protocols. Outcome assessors and investigators not directly involved in the paediatric ICU were not informed of treatment allocation. The primary endpoints were incidence of new infections and duration of paediatric ICU dependency (quantified as the number of days in the paediatric ICU and likelihood of earlier live discharge from the ICU), analysed based on intention to treat. Multivariable analyses were adjusted for the following risk factors: centre, Paediatric Logistic Organ Dysfunction score, Paediatric Index of Mortality 2 score, diagnosis group, and weight-for-age Z scores on admission. Secondary safety outcomes were mortality (at 90 days, during the intervention, in the paediatric ICU, and in the hospital) and hypoglycaemic incidents during the intervention. All patients in the respective groups were included in the safety analysis.

FINDINGS

Between June 18, 2012, and July 27, 2015, we included 209 participants in this substudy, 145 of whom were aged up to and including 1 week and 45 aged younger than 1 day. In neonates aged up to and including 4 weeks, late parenteral nutrition increased the likelihood of earlier live discharge from the paediatric ICU compared with early parenteral nutrition (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1·61, 95% CI 1·19-2·20; p=0·0021) but did not affect the risk of infection. The risk of infection in neonates aged up to and including 1 week and younger than 1 day was lower with late parenteral nutrition than with early parenteral nutrition (adjusted odds ratios [OR] 0·36, 95% CI 0·15-0·83, p=0·017; and 0·10, 0·01-0·64, p=0·015, respectively). For neonates aged up to and including 1 week, the likelihood of an earlier live discharge from the ICU was higher with late parenteral nutrition (adjusted HR 1·69, 95% CI 1·16-2·46; p=0·0063). For neonates younger than 1 day, adjusted HR was 1·95 (95% CI 0·93-4·12; p=0·078). Mortality at all studied timepoints was similar between the groups for all ages; however, in neonates aged up to and including 4 weeks and aged up to and including 1 week, the risk of hypoglycaemia was higher with late parenteral nutrition (23% vs 14%; adjusted OR 3·05, 95% CI 1·27-7·35, p=0·013; and 24% vs 14%; 3·57, 1·23-10·45, p=0·019, respectively.

INTERPRETATION

In critically ill, term neonates, withholding parenteral nutrition for 1 week was clinically superior to standard care of initiating parenteral nutrition within 24 h for short-term outcomes. However, withholding parenteral nutrition for 1 week significantly increased the risk of developing hypoglycaemia, which necessitates long-term follow-up of these children before late parenteral nutrition can be confidently recommended for this vulnerable patient group.

FUNDING

Flemish Agency for Innovation through Science and Technology, Methusalem-Programme Flemish Government, European Research Council, Fonds NutsOhra, Stichting Agis-Zorginnovatie, and the Sophia Research-Foundation.

Significant Published Articles for Pharmacy Nutrition Support Practice in 2016

Purpose: To assist the pharmacist engaged in nutrition support therapy in staying current with pertinent literature. Methods: Several clinical pharmacists engaged in nutrition support therapy compiled a list of articles published in 2016 considered important to their clinical practice. The citation list was compiled into a single spreadsheet where the author participants were asked to assess whether the paper was considered important to nutrition support pharmacy practice. A culled list of publications was then identified whereby the majority of author participants (at least 5 out of 8) considered the paper to be important. Guideline and consensus papers from professional organizations, important to practice but not scored, were also included. Results: A total of 103 articles were identified; 10 from the primary literature were voted by the group to be of high importance. An additional 11 organizational guidelines, position, recommendation, or consensus papers were also identified. The top-ranked articles from the primary literature were reviewed. Conclusion: It is recommended that pharmacists, engaged in nutrition support therapy, be familiar with the majority of these articles as it pertains to their practice.

Timing of the initiation of parenteral nutrition in critically ill children

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the current literature evaluating clinical outcomes of early and delayed parenteral nutrition initiation among critically ill children.

RECENT FINDINGS

Nutritional management remains an important aspect of care among the critically ill, with enteral nutrition generally preferred. However, inability to advance enteral feeds to caloric goals and contraindications to enteral nutrition often leads to reliance on parenteral nutrition. The timing of parenteral nutrition initiation is varied among critically ill children, and derives from an assessment of nutritional status, energy requirements, and physiologic differences between adults and children, including higher nutrient needs and lower body reserves. A recent randomized control study among critically ill children suggests improved clinical outcomes with avoiding initiation of parenteral nutrition on day 1 of admission to the pediatric ICU.

SUMMARY

Although there is no consensus on the optimal timing of parenteral nutrition initiation among critically ill children, recent literature does not support the immediate initiation of parenteral nutrition on pediatric ICU admission. A common theme in the reviewed literature highlights the importance of accurate assessment of nutritional status and energy expenditure in deciding when to initiate parenteral nutrition. As with all medical interventions, the initiation of parenteral nutrition should be considered in light of the known benefits of judiciously provided nutritional support with the known risks of artificial, parenteral feeding.