Enteral vs. parenteral nutrition in septic shock: are they equivalent?

EFFECT OF STRATIFIED DOSE OF NOREPINEPHRINE ON CELLULAR IMMUNE RESPONSE IN PATIENTS WITH SEPTIC SHOCK AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PROGNOSTIC RISK MODEL

ABSTRACT

Objective: To explore the effect of a stratified dose of norepinephrine (NE) on cellular immune response in patients with septic shock, and to construct a prognostic model of septic shock. Methods: A total of 160 patients with septic shock (B group) and 58 patients with sepsis (A group) were given standard cluster therapy. Patients with septic shock were divided into four groups (B1-B4 groups: 0.01-0.2, 0.2-0.5, 0.5-1.0, and >1 μg/kg/min) according to the quartile method of the early (72 h) time-weighted average dose of NE and clinical application. The cellular immune indexes at 24 h (T0) and 4-7 days (T1) after admission were collected. The difference method was used to explore the effect of NE stratified dose on cellular immune effect in patients with septic shock. A multivariate COX proportional risk regression model was used to analyze the independent prognostic risk factors, and a prognostic risk model was constructed. Results: The differences of ΔIL-1β, ΔIL-6, ΔIL-10, absolute value difference of T lymphocyte (ΔCD3+/CD45+#) and Th helper T cell (ΔCD3+ CD4+/CD45+#), CD64 infection index difference, ΔmHLA-DR, regulatory T lymphocyte ratio difference (ΔTregs%) between group A, B1, B2, B3, and B4 were statistically significant ( P < 0.05). There was a nonlinear relation between the stratified dose of NE and ΔIL-6, ΔIL-10, ΔCD3+/CD45+#, ΔmHLA-DR%. The threshold periods of NE-induced proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory immune changes were 0.3-0.5 μg/kg/min. Multivariate COX model regression analysis showed that age, nutritional patterns, weighted average dose of norepinephrine, IL-6, absolute value of T lymphocytes, and mHLA-DR were independent risk factors affecting the prognosis of patients with septic shock ( P < 0.05). The prognostic risk model was constructed (AUC value = 0.813, 95% CI: 0.752-0.901). Conclusion: NE has a certain inhibitory effect on cellular immune function in patients with septic shock. A prognostic risk model was constructed with stronger prediction efficiency for the prognosis of patients with septic shock.

Hypothesis: Enhanced glucose availability and insulin resistance enhances an activated immune system and accounts for the obesity paradox

Many studies have demonstrated an 'obesity paradox' where people with obesity have reduced mortality in the context of acute critical illnesses compared to people of normal weight. In contrast, obesity is associated with reduced life expectancy in the population in general and is associated with an increased risk for type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease and other health problems. However, the absence of the metabolic syndrome is associated a lower mortality than when the metabolic syndrome is present regardless of body mass index status and the obesity paradox appears to only occur in association with the metabolic syndrome, but cardiorespiratory fitness modifies these outcomes. Enhanced glucose availability is important when the immune system is activated not only because it has an acute onset, a high consumption of glucose and is substantially an obligate glucose utilizer but also because it has priority over most other tissues and cells for the available glucose. Thus, for vulnerable populations, such as children with severe infections, this increases the risk of hypoglycaemia and death. The obesity paradox may be substantially a consequence of two features associated with obesity. One is endogenous glucose production (EGP). Obesity is associated with an increased capacity for EGP and thus is associated with enhanced glucose availability. Second is insulin resistance that reduces the amount of glucose metabolized by cells that are not obligate glucose utilizers and increases the release of fatty acids and glycerol from adipose stores that are alternative fuels for tissues and cells.

Parenteral nutrition in critical illness: total, supplemental or never?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The current review summarizes recent evolutions in knowledge and discusses the concept of whom and when parenteral nutrition should be considered in critically ill patients as a total form of nutrition, in a supplemental form, or never.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent developments in our understanding of the application of parenteral nutrition in critical care include the phases of illness, avoidance of overfeeding and the population in whom parenteral nutrition may be appropriate for. Importantly, one of the greatest lessons of recent times may be who not to provide parenteral nutrition to; however, a blanket approach of increased risk with parenteral nutrition is too simple for the modern context.

SUMMARY

When providing total or supplemental parenteral nutrition, avoidance of overfeeding with total calories and/or glucose alone is critical, as is consideration to the phase of illness the patient is in, the population in whom it is to be applied, premorbid nutrition status and the setting (including adequacy of line management and expertise in parenteral nutrition provision). The appropriateness of parenteral nutrition should be considered in those where death is imminent or who are well nourished, likely to commence oral and/or enteral nutrition imminently and have a short-stay in intensive care, or are in a high-risk setting.

Lessons Learned in Nutrition Therapy in Patients With Severe COVID-19

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic has reached worldwide, and until a vaccine is found, it will continue to cause significant morbidity and mortality. The clinical presentation of COVID‐19 ranges from that of being asymptomatic to developing a fatal illness characterized by multiple organ involvement. Approximately 20% of the patients will require hospitalization; one‐quarter of hospitalized patients will develop severe COVID‐19 requiring admission to the intensive care unit, most frequently, with acute respiratory failure. An ongoing effort is being made to identify the patients that will develop severe COVID‐19. Overall, patients present with 3 different phenotypes of nutrition risk: (1) the frail older patient, (2) the patient with severe ongoing chronic illness, and (3) the patient with severe and morbid obesity. These 3 phenotypes represent different nutrition risks and diverse nutrition interventions. This article explores the different potential approaches to nutrition intervention in patients with COVID‐19, evaluating, in this process, the challenges faced in the implementation of guidelines written by different societies.

Acute Hepatic Failure and Nutrition

Malnutrition is prevalent in patients with hepatic failure and remains an independent risk factor for morbidity and mortality in these patients. Factors that contribute to malnutrition in this patient population include altered metabolic rate, fat malabsorption, and impaired gastric emptying, all in the setting of an acute and potentially prolonged hospitalization. Acute liver failure (ALF), different from cirrhosis or chronic liver disease, is an uncommon but dramatic clinical syndrome that demonstrates severe and rapid decline in hepatic metabolic function. ALF has a significant risk of mortality. There are >10 cases per million persons per year in developed countries, but ALF presents with unique challenges in clinical management related to heterogeneity in severity and etiology. Patients with ALF by definition should not have a prior history of liver disease, and liver disease is subsequently defined by the onset of liver injury, the presence of hepatic encephalopathy (HE), and coagulopathy as defined by an international normalized ratio > 1.5. HE usually develops within 1-4 weeks of the onset of liver injury but may occur within 26 weeks of the initial presentation. Rates of survival from ALF have improved over recent years, but the rarity and severity of presentation have resulted in traditionally limited evidence to guide basic supportive care. Over time, advances in critical care management and the use of emergency liver transplantation have improved. In this article, we will review current nutrition considerations for patients with ALF.

Enteral Nutrition in Adult Crohn's Disease: Toward a Paradigm Shift

Medical and surgical treatments for Crohn's disease are associated with toxic effects. Medical therapy aims for mucosal healing and is achievable with biologics, immunosuppressive therapy, and specialised enteral nutrition, but not with corticosteroids. Sustained remission remains a therapeutic challenge. Enteral nutrition, containing macro- and micro-nutrients, is nutritionally complete, and is provided in powder or liquid form. Enteral nutrition is a low-risk and minimally invasive therapy. It is well-established and recommended as first line induction therapy in paediatric Crohn's disease with remission rates of up to 80%. Other than in Japan, enteral nutrition is not routinely used in the adult population among Western countries, mainly due to unpalatable formulations which lead to poor compliance. This study aims to offer a comprehensive review of available enteral nutrition formulations and the literature supporting the use and mechanisms of action of enteral nutrition in adult Crohn's disease patients, in order to support clinicians in real world decision-making when offering/accepting treatment. The mechanisms of actions of enteral feed, including their impact on the gut microbiome, were explored. Barriers to the use of enteral nutrition, such as compliance and the route of administration, were considered. All available enteral preparations have been comprehensively described as a practical guide for clinical use. Likewise, guidelines are reported and discussed.