Volume-Based Enteral Nutrition Support Regimen Improves Caloric Delivery but May Not Affect Clinical Outcomes in Critically Ill Patients

Increasing the Volume of Delivered Enteral Feeds Using a Volume-Based Feeding Protocol in a Neuroscience Intensive Care Unit

BACKGROUND

Iatrogenic malnutrition is a significant burden to patients, clinicians, and health care systems. Compared with well-nourished patients, underfed patients (those who receive less than 80% of their daily energy requirement) have more adverse outcomes related to nutritional status. Volume-based protocols allow for catch-up titrations, are consistently superior to rate-based protocols, and can be implemented in most settings.

LOCAL PROBLEM

This project was conducted in an 8-bed neuroscience intensive care unit in which up to 41% of patients who required enteral feeding were underfed.

METHODS

This quality improvement clinical practice change project used a before-and-after design to evaluate (1) the effect of implementing a volume-based feeding protocol on the delivery of enteral feeds and (2) the effect of a nutrition-based project on staff members' attitudes regarding nutrition in critical care. The effectiveness of a volume-based feeding titration protocol was compared with that of a rate-based feeding protocol for achieving delivery of at least 80% of prescribed nutrition per 24-hour period. Staff members' attitudes were assessed using a survey before and after the project.

RESULTS

During 241 enteral feeding days (n = 40 patients), the percentage of delivered enteral feeding volume and the percentage of days patients received at least 80% of the prescribed volume increased after volume-based feeding was implemented. After project implementation, 74 staff members reported increased emphasis on nutrition delivery in their practice and a higher level of agreement that nutrition is a priority when caring for critically ill patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Using a volume-based feeding protocol with supplemental staff education resulted in improved delivery of prescribed enteral feeding.

Nutritional Support in Critically Ill Trauma Patients

Enteral nutrition should be initiated within 24 to 48 hours of injury, starting at a trophic rate and increasing to goal rate after hemodynamic stability is achieved. The modified Nutritional Risk in the Critically Ill score can help identify patients who will benefit most from aggressive and early nutritional intervention. In the first week of critical illness, the patient should receive only 70% to 80% of estimated calories and protein should be targeted to 1.5 to 2 g/kg. Parenteral nutrition can be provided safely without increased adverse events. Peri-operative (and intra-operative) feeding has been shown to be safe in selected patients.

Optimizing enteral nutrition delivery by implementing volume-based feeding protocol for critically ill patients: an updated meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

This study aims to provide an updated assessment of the efficacy of optimized enteral nutrition (EN) delivery by implementing the volume-based feeding (VBF) protocol in critically ill patients.

METHODS

We updated our previous literature retrieval with no language restrictions. The inclusion criteria were:1) Participants: Critically ill patients (Patients who was admitted in ICU; 2) Intervention: The VBF protocol was adopted for EN administration; 3) Comparison: The rate-based feeding (RBF) protocol was adopted for EN administration; 4) Major outcomes: EN nutrition delivery. The exclusion criteria included participants aged < 18 years, duplicated literature, animal and cellular experiments, and studies lacking any of the outcomes mentioned in the inclusion criteria. The databases included MEDLINE (through PubMed), Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Chinese Biomedical Literature Service System (SinoMed), Wanfang Data Knowledge Service Platform, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure.

RESULT

Sixteen studies involving a total of 2896 critically ill patients are included in the updated meta-analysis. Compared with the previous meta-analysis, nine new studies were added that included 2205 more patients. The VBF protocol significantly improved energy (MD = 15.41%, 95% CI: [10.68, 20.14], p < 0.00001) and protein (MD = 22.05%, 95% CI: [10.89, 33.22], p = 0.0001) delivery. The patients in the VBF group stayed in the ICU for a shorter time (MD = 0.78, 95% CI: [0.01, 1.56], p = 0.05). The VBF protocol did not increase the risk of death (RR = 1.03, 95% CI: [0.85, 1.24], p = 0.76) or prolong the mechanical ventilation duration (MD = 0.81, 95% CI: [-0.30,1.92], p = 0.15). In addition, the VBF protocol did not affect EN complications, such as diarrhea (RR = 0.91, 95% CI: [0.73, 1.15], p = 0.43), emesis (RR = 1.23, 95% CI: [0.76, 1.99], p = 0.41), feeding intolerance (RR = 1.14, 95% CI: [0.63, 2.09], p = 0.66), and gastric retention (RR = 0.45, 95% CI: [0.16, 1.30], p = 0.14).

CONCLUSION

Our study revealed that the VBF protocol significantly improved calorie and protein delivery in critically ill patients with no additional risk.

When is enteral nutrition indicated?

Enteral nutrition (EN) is a vital component of nutrition around the world. EN allows for delivery of nutrients to those who cannot maintain adequate nutrition by oral intake alone. Common questions regarding EN are when to initiate and in what scenarios it is safe. The answers to these questions are often complex and require an evidence-based approach. The Board of Directors of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN) established an Enteral Nutrition Committtee to address the important questions surrounding the indications for EN. Consensus recommendations were established based on eight extremely clinically relevant questions regarding EN indications as deemed by the Enteral Nutrition Committee. These consensus recommendations may act as a guide for clinicians and stakeholders on difficult questions pertaining to indications for EN. This paper was approved by the ASPEN Board of Directors.

Implementing Volume-Based Feeding to Optimize Delivery of Enteral Nutrition

BACKGROUND

At least 80% of ordered enteral nutrition should be delivered to improve outcomes in critical care patients. However, these patients typically receive 60% to 70% of ordered enteral nutrition volume. In a practice review within a 28-bed medical-surgical adult intensive care unit, patients received a median of 67.5% of ordered enteral nutrition with standard rate-based feeding. Volume-based feeding is recommended to deliver adequate enteral nutrition to critically ill patients.

OBJECTIVE

To use a quality improvement project to increase the volume of enteral nutrition delivered in the medical-surgical intensive care unit.

METHODS

Percentages of target volume achieved were monitored in 73 patients. Comparisons between the rate-based and volume-based feeding groups used nonparametric quality of medians test or the χ2 test. A customized volume-based feeding protocol and order set were created according to published protocols and then implemented. Standardized education included lecture, demonstration, written material, and active personal involvement, followed by a scenario-based test to apply learning.

RESULTS

Immediately after implementation of this practice change, delivered enteral nutrition volume increased, resulting in a median delivery of 99.8% of ordered volume (P = .003). Delivery of a mean of 98% ordered volume was sustained over the 15 months following implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of volume-based feeding optimized enteral nutrition delivery to critically ill patients in this medical-surgical intensive care unit. This success can be attributed to a comprehensive, individualized, and proactive process design and educational approach. The process can be adapted to quality improvement initiatives with other patient populations and units.

Forty-Fourth ASPEN Presidential Address: The 2020 Overture-A New Tune for the Future

The provision of safe nutrition care to patients is the fundamental vision of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN). Yet we are facing important challenges in our field and society, requiring us to reflect, rethink, and adjust to make new breakthroughs to meet the needs for the future. In developing new plans to address these challenges, we must focus on 2 critical elements: people and the scientific process. Government and organizations cannot carry on their missions without people. But with the challenges of healthcare finance, biotechnology disruption, the desire to facilitate knowledge transfer and now the impact of the global pandemic, we need to develop a forward-thinking and sustainable approach to connect people and foster continued learning. Burnout is a recognized occupational problem that affects providers and researchers across all disciplines. The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has amplified the challenges associated with burnout. Supporting the needs and promoting the well-being of people, therefore, are critical to move forward successfully. At the same time, the scientific advances in our field rely on sound scientific principles and integrity. Information overload, pressure to produce immediate outcomes (such as cost-saving initiatives), and misinformation can compromise the scientific process and research evidence. The two common missteps that affect researchers, clinicians, and administrators include premature factulation and binary thinking. We will discuss how these missteps can occur and the approaches to minimize their influence in making sound decisions and policies to meet the future's needs.

Volume-Based Feeding Enhances Enteral Delivery by Maximizing the Optimal Rate of Enteral Feeding (FEED MORE)

BACKGROUND

The importance of enteral nutrition (EN) in critically ill patients is well documented. However, actual administration of EN frequently does not amount to prescribed nutrition goals. Persistent underfeeding may lead to impaired immune response, increased mortality, and higher costs. Traditionally, EN uses a rate-based approach, utilizing slow titration to goal and a final fixed hourly rate, regardless of interruptions in feeding. Volume-based feeding (VBF) establishes a 24-hour EN goal volume, and the rate varies to achieve this daily goal when interruptions occur.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective, single-center, quasi-experimental study comparing traditional rate-based feeding (RBF) to VBF in adult patients admitted to the medical and neurosurgical intensive care units (ICUs). The primary outcome was mean percentage of total goal energy received after EN initiation until 7 days, transfer from ICU, removal of feeding tube, or oral diet order placed. Secondary outcomes included mean percentage of total goal protein received, percentage of patients meeting 80% of nutrition goals, incidence of gastric residual volumes >400 mL, and incidence of moderate hyperglycemia (>250 mg/dL).

RESULTS

The study enrolled 189 patients. Mean percentage of goal energy delivered (75% RBF, 102% VBF; P < .001) and goal protein delivered (68% RBF, 87% VBF; P < .001) was significantly higher with VBF compared with RBF.

CONCLUSION

VBF demonstrated a significant increase in energy and protein delivery with no major safety or tolerability issues. VBF should be considered for use in ICU patients to optimize nutrition delivery.

A Volume-Based Feeding Protocol Improves Nutrient Delivery and Glycemic Control in a Surgical Trauma Intensive Care Unit

BACKGROUND

Inadequate delivery of nutrition in critically ill patients has been shown to have adverse outcomes. A surgical trauma intensive care unit provides unique challenges to enteral feeds. Although volume-based feeding protocols, like Enhanced Protein-Energy Provision via the Enteral Route Feeding Protocol (PEP uP), have been successfully used in medical intensive care patients, data are sparse on its safety and efficacy in a surgical intensive care unit population.

METHODS

A PEP uP protocol was recently initiated at our American College of Surgeons Level 1 verified trauma center. Medical records of 197 patients before this change (pre-PEP uP) were compared with 295 patients after this change (post-PEP uP).

RESULTS

The post-PEP uP group met/exceeded energy goals (defined as 80% of target) more often (57.0% compared with 26.9%, P-value < .001), with an adjusted odds ratio (OR) of 4.98 (95% CI 3.49-7.10), and more often met/exceeded protein goals (57.4% compared with 18.6%, P-value < .001), with an adjusted OR of 11.84 (95% CI 7.94-17.64). There was no significant difference in emesis during this time. Additionally, patients in the post-PEP uP arm had less episodes of hyperglycemia (9% compared with 14.4%, P-value < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Volume-based feeding protocols like PEP uP are safe in critically ill trauma patients and are more effective at delivering energy and protein while limiting hyperglycemic episodes when compared with a traditional delivery method.

Volume based feeding versus rate based feeding in the critically ill: A UK study

Background

Underfeeding in intensive care patients on enteral nutrition is commonplace and multifactorial. This can be exacerbated by interruptions caused by routine fasting for procedures and investigations. Our study aims to demonstrate that a volume based feeding protocol can overcome the barriers of underfeeding and safely increase energy and protein delivery in UK intensive care patients, potentially improving clinical outcomes.

Methods

In this single centre cohort study, data were collected from adult mechanically ventilated patients. We compared the standard care of rate based feeding, from an International Nutrition Survey (2014/15) to the new intervention of volume based feeding, in a mixed medical and surgical intensive care unit. The primary outcomes were the proportion of energy and protein daily targets delivered. Secondary outcomes compared the effects on gastrointestinal tolerance, glycaemic control, mortality, mechanical ventilation days, length of stay in intensive care unit and hospital.

Results

From a total of 82 patients (rate based feeding = 27, volume based feeding = 55), volume based feeding patients received significantly more prescribed energy (52% versus 81%; p < 0.001) and protein (40% versus 74%; p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in gastrointestinal symptoms such as gastric residual volumes (p = 0.62), glycaemic control (p = 0.94) or insulin usage (p = 0.75). Although there was an improvement in energy and protein delivery, there were no differences in mechanical ventilation days (p = 0.12), mortality (p = 0.06), length of stay in intensive care unit (p = 0.93) and hospital (p = 0.72) between the groups.

Conclusion

Compared to rate based feeding, volume based feeding significantly improved energy and protein provision with no adverse effects on glycaemic control or gastrointestinal tolerance, clinical outcomes were not affected.

Safety and efficacy of volume-based feeding in critically ill, mechanically ventilated adults using the 'Protein & Energy Requirements Fed for Every Critically ill patient every Time' (PERFECT) protocol: a before-and-after study

BACKGROUND

Underfeeding in critical illness is common and associated with poor outcomes. According to large prospective hospital studies, volume-based feeding (VBF) safely and effectively improves energy and protein delivery to critically ill patients compared to traditional rate-based feeding (RBF) and might improve patient outcomes. A before-and-after study was designed to evaluate the safety, efficacy and clinical outcomes associated with VBF compared to RBF in a single intensive care unit (ICU).

METHODS

The sample included consecutively admitted critically ill adults, mechanically ventilated for at least 72 h and fed enterally for a minimum of 48 h. The first cohort (n = 46) was fed using RBF, the second (n = 46) using VBF, and observed for 7 days, or until extubation or death. Statistical comparison of percentage feed volume, energy and protein delivered, plus indices of feed intolerance, were the primary outcomes of interest. Secondary observations included ventilation period, mortality, and length of ICU stay (LOICUS).

RESULTS

Groups were comparable in baseline clinical and demographic characteristics and nutrition practices. Volume delivered to the VBF group increased significantly by 11.2% (p ≤ 0.001), energy by 13.4% (p ≤ 0.001) and protein by 8.4% (p = 0.02), compared to the RBF group. In the VBF group, patients meeting > 90% of energy requirements increased significantly from 47.8 to 84.8% (p ≤ 0.001); those meeting > 90% of protein requirements changed from 56.5 to 73.9% (p = 0.134). VBF did not increase symptoms of feed intolerance. Adjusted binomial logistic regression found each additional 1% of prescribed feed delivered decreased the odds of vomiting by 0.942 (5.8%), 95% CI [0.900-0.985], p = 0.010. No differences in mortality or LOICUS were identified. Kaplan-Meier found a significantly increased extubation rate in patients receiving > 90% of protein requirements compared to those meeting < 80%, (p = 0.006). Adjusted Cox regression found the daily probability of being extubated tripled in patients receiving > 90% of their protein needs compared to the group receiving < 80%, hazard ratio 3.473, p = 0.021, 95% CI [1.205-10.014].

CONCLUSION

VBF safely and effectively increased the delivery of energy and protein to critically ill patients. Increased protein delivery may improve extubation rate which has positive patient-centred and financial implications, warranting larger confirmatory trials. This investigation adds weight to the ICU literature supporting VBF, and the growing evidence which advocates for enhanced protein delivery to improve patient outcomes.

PEP uP (Enhanced Protein-Energy Provision via the Enteral Route Feeding Protocol) in Surgical Patients-A Multicenter Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

The Enhanced Protein-Energy Provision via the Enteral Route Feeding Protocol (PEP uP) has been shown to be feasible, safe, and effective in delivering significantly more energy/protein, though it has not been well studied in surgical/trauma patients. We hypothesized that PEP uP will effectively increase energy/protein delivery to critically ill surgical/trauma patients.

METHODS

This multicenter, prospective, randomized pilot study included adult patients admitted to surgical service who were expected to require mechanical ventilation for >24 hours and intensive care unit (ICU) care for >72 hours. Subjects were randomized to PEP uP or standard care. The PEP uP protocol includes initiation at goal rate, semi-elemental formula, prophylactic prokinetic agents, 24-hour volume-based goals, and modular protein supplementation. The primary outcome was nutrition adequacy over the first 12 ICU days.

RESULTS

Thirty-six subjects were enrolled. Slow recruitment resulted in early trial termination by the sponsor. There were no baseline differences between groups. PEP uP patients received more protein (106.8 ± 37.0 vs 78.5 ± 30.3 g/d, P = 0.02). Energy delivery was not significantly different (1400.0 ± 409.5 vs 1237.9 ± 459.1 kcal, P = 0.25). Vomiting was more common in the PEP uP patients (32% vs 12%, P = 0.03). PEP uP protocol violations included 2 patients (15.4%) not receiving pro-motility medications, 3 (23.1%) not receiving volume-based feeds as ordered, and 4 (30.8%) not receiving supplemental protein.

CONCLUSIONS

In surgical/trauma patients, PEPuP seemed to improve protein delivery but was difficult to implement successfully and may increase vomiting rates.

Jejunostomy with Enteroenterostomy for Enteral Nutrition in Critically Ill Trauma Patients. A Novel Technique

Purpose The aim of the current study was to report the surgical outcome and complications of jejunostomy with enteroenterostomy for enteral nutrition (EN) in critically ill trauma patients with prolonged nasogastric (NG) nutrition. Methods This cross-sectional study was carried out in a level I trauma center in Shiraz, southern Iran during a one-year period from 2016 to 2017. We included a total number of 30 patients with severe trauma admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with more than three months NG nutrition and bowel atrophy. We performed a novel jejunostomy with an enteroenterostomy procedure for providing a route for enteral nutrition in all 30 patients. The rate of complications, such as dislodgement, clogging, obstruction, leakage, mucosal bleeding, and infection, were recorded and reported. We also recorded the hospital and ICU length of stay (LOS). Results We included a total number of 30 patients with a mean age of 35.64 ± 8.91 years, and there were 23 (76.6%) men and seven (23.4%) women among the patients. Overall, 14 (46.6%) patients experienced complications related to the jejunostomy with enteroenterostomy. The most common complication was nausea and vomiting (33.3%) and distention (33.3%), followed by surgical site infection (30.0%). The mean ICU LOS and hospital LOS was found to be 16.8 ± 3.7 and 24.3 ± 4.1 days, respectively. The overall mortality rate was 17 (56.6%), which was secondary to the primary injury and was not related to the procedure. Conclusion Jejunostomy with enteroenterostomy is a safe and feasible method for providing a route for EN in critically ill trauma patients with prolonged NG nutrition and bowel atrophy.

Volume-Based vs Rate-Based Enteral Nutrition in the Intensive Care Unit: Impact on Nutrition Delivery and Glycemic Control

BACKGROUND

Underfeeding with enteral nutrition (EN) is prevalent in intensive care units (ICUs) and associated with negative outcomes. This study evaluated the impact of volume-based EN (VBEN) vs rate-based EN (RBEN) on delivery of prescribed energy and protein, and glycemic control (GC).

METHODS

This retrospective study included adult patients who require mechanical ventilation within 48 hours of ICU admission and with an RBEN (n = 85) or VBEN (n = 86) order for ≥3 consecutive days during the first 12 ICU days.

RESULTS

Patients receiving VBEN, vs RBEN, received more prescribed energy (RBEN, 67.6%; VBEN, 79.6%; P < .001) and protein (RBEN, 68.6%; VBEN, 79.3%; P < .001). Multiple linear regression analyses confirmed VBEN was significantly associated with an 8.9% increase in energy (P = .002) and 7.7% increase in protein (P = .004) received, after adjusting for age, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score, duration of and initiation day for EN, and ICU admission location. Presence of hyperglycemia (P = .40) and glycemic variability (GV) (P = .99) were not different between the 2 groups. After adjusting for age, body mass index, diabetes history, primary diagnosis, and percent of days receiving corticosteroids, GC outcomes (presence of hyperglycemia, P = .27; GV, P = .67) remained unrelated to EN order type in multivariable regression models.

CONCLUSION

VBEN, compared with RBEN, was associated with increased energy and protein delivery without adversely affecting GC. These results suggest VBEN is an effective, safe strategy to enhance EN delivery in the ICU.

Nutritional and Bioenergetic Considerations in Critically Ill Patients with Acute Neurological Injury

The brain, due to intensive cellular processes and maintenance of electrochemical gradients, is heavily dependent on a constant supply of energy. Brain injury, and critical illness in general, induces a state of increased metabolism and catabolism, which has been proven to lead to poor outcomes. Of all the biochemical interventions undertaken in the ICU, providing nutritional support is perhaps one of the most undervalued, but potentially among the safest, and most effective interventions. Adequate provisions of calories and protein have been shown to improve patient outcomes, and guidelines for the nutritional support of the critically ill patient are reviewed. However, there are no such specific guidelines for the critically ill patient with neurological injury. Patients with primary or secondary neurological disorders are frequently undernourished, while data suggest this population would benefit from early and adequate nutritional support, although comprehensive clinical evidence is lacking. We review the joint recommendations from the Society for Critical Care Medicine and the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, as they pertain to neurocritical care, and assess the recommendations for addressing nutrition in this patient population.

Volume-based feeding improves nutritional adequacy in surgical patients

BACKGROUND

Critically ill surgical patients often receive inadequate enteral nutrition using traditional rate-based feeding methods. An alternative strategy is volume-based feeding, in which feeding rates are adjusted to deliver a goal volume per day.

METHODS

This prospective quality improvement study in a single surgical, trauma, and burn ICU compared volume-based feeding to rate-based feeding in a before-and-after design. Outcomes included calories and protein delivered, length of stay, infection, and mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 50 patients received volume-based feeding and 49 rate-based feeding. The volume-based group received a higher proportion of goal calories (84.5% vs. 73.4%; p = 0.005) and protein (86.2% vs. 77.4%; p = 0.01), as well as increased total daily calories (1604 vs. 1356 kcal; p = 0.02). There was no difference in length of stay, mortality, aspiration, or gastrointestinal intolerance.

CONCLUSIONS

Volume-based feeding improved nutritional intake in critically ill surgical patients, although this study was underpowered to determine differences in clinical outcomes.

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.

Nutrition: A Primary Therapy in Pediatric Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Appropriate nutrition is an essential component of intensive care management of children with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and is linked to patient outcomes. One out of every two children in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) will develop malnutrition or have worsening of baseline malnutrition and present with specific micronutrient deficiencies. Early and adequate enteral nutrition (EN) is associated with improved 60-day survival after pediatric critical illness, and, yet, despite early EN guidelines, critically ill children receive on average only 55% of goal calories by PICU day 10. Inadequate delivery of EN is due to perceived feeding intolerance, reluctance to enterally feed children with hemodynamic instability, and fluid restriction. Underlying each of these factors is large practice variation between providers and across institutions for initiation, advancement, and maintenance of EN. Strategies to improve early initiation and advancement and to maintain delivery of EN are needed to improve morbidity and mortality from pediatric ARDS. Both, over and underfeeding, prolong duration of mechanical ventilation in children and worsen other organ function such that precise calorie goals are needed. The gut is thought to act as a "motor" of organ dysfunction, and emerging data regarding the role of intestinal barrier functions and the intestinal microbiome on organ dysfunction and outcomes of critical illness present exciting opportunities to improve patient outcomes. Nutrition should be considered a primary rather than supportive therapy for pediatric ARDS. Precise nutritional therapies, which are titrated and targeted to preservation of intestinal barrier function, prevention of intestinal dysbiosis, preservation of lean body mass, and blunting of the systemic inflammatory response, offer great potential for improving outcomes of pediatric ARDS. In this review, we examine the current evidence regarding dose, route, and timing of nutrition, current recommendations for provision of nutrition to children with ARDS, and the current literature for immune-modulating diets for pediatric ARDS. We will examine emerging data regarding the role of the intestinal microbiome in modulating the response to critical illness.