Enteral feeding in the critically ill: comparison between the supine and prone positions: a prospective crossover study in mechanically ventilated patients

Efficacy and safety of enteral nutrition in prone position among critically ill ventilated patients: a meta-analysis

Introduction

Prone positioning in critical care units may reduce mortality in specific patients who have been admitted with severe conditions.

Aim

The current meta-analysis aims to assess the impact of prone compared to supine position besides the safety and tolerability of different enteral feeding techniques in critically ill patients regarding mortality, pneumonia, aspiration, and vomiting.

Material and methods

A systematic literature search found 25 relevant trials involving 1984 participants at the start of the study. Statistical analysis using the dichotomous analysis methods was used within the fixed model to calculate the odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results

In comparison with the post-pyloric nutrition group, gastric feeding had no significant impact on the mortality rate (OR = 1; 95% CI: 0.76-1.32). While the findings showed a significantly higher incidence of pneumonia with gastric feeding compared with post-pyloric nutrition (OR = 1.92; 95% CI: 1.43--2.57), there was no significant difference regarding pulmonary aspiration and vomiting (OR = 1.41; 95% CI: 0.75-2.65 and OR = 0.92; 95% CI:, 0.66-1.27, respectively). Reflux gastric content was significantly higher with gastric nutrition (OR = 8.23; 95% CI: 2.43-27.89).

Conclusions

From reduced gastrointestinal events to significantly higher vomiting rates, prone position during enteral feeding showed mixed effects. Post-pyloric feeding is more tolerated and safer compared with gastric feeding. The mortality rate is not significantly different between techniques.

Enteral feeding tolerance during pharmacologic neuromuscular blockade

A common misperception is that critically ill patients who receive paralytic therapy will not tolerate enteral nutrition. As a result, some clinicians empirically withhold enteral feedings for critically ill patients who receive neuromuscular blocker pharmacotherapy (NMB). The intent of this review is to examine the evidence regarding enteral feeding tolerance for critically ill patients given NMB. Studies evaluating enteral feeding during paralytic therapy are provided and critiqued. Evidence examining enteral feeding tolerance during NMB is limited. Enteral feeding intolerance is more likely attributable to the underlying illnesses and concurrent opioid analgesia, sedation, and vasopressor therapies. Most critically ill patients can be successfully fed during NMB. Prokinetic pharmacotherapy may be warranted in some patients.

Nutrition intake in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19): A nationwide, multicentre, observational study in Argentina

INTRODUCTION

In 2020 the pandemic caused by SARS-COV-2 demanded an enormous number of healthcare resources in order to guarantee adequate treatment and support for those patients. This study aims to assess caloric and protein intake and evaluate its associations with relevant clinical outcomes in critically ill with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients.

METHODS

A nationwide, multicentre prospective observational study including twelve Argentinian intensive care units (ICUs,) was conducted between March and October 2020.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Adult ICU patients>18 years admitted to the ICU with COVID-19 diagnosis and mechanical ventilation for at least 48h. Statistical analysis was carried out using IBM-SPSS© 24 programme.

RESULTS

One hundred and eighty-five patients were included in the study. Those who died had lower protein intake (0.73g/kg/day (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70-0.75 vs 0.97g/kg/day (CI 0.95-0.99), P<0.001), and lower caloric intake than those who survived (12.94kcal/kg/day (CI 12.48-13.39) vs 16.47kcal/kg/day (CI 16.09-16.8), P<0.001). A model was built, and logistic regression showed that factors associated with the probability of achieving caloric and protein intake, were the early start of nutritional support, modified NUTRIC score higher than five points, and undernutrition (Subjective Global Assessment B or C). The patients that underwent mechanical ventilation in a prone position present less caloric and protein intake, similar to those with APACHE II>18.

CONCLUSIONS

Critically ill patients with COVID-19 associated respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation who died in ICU had less caloric and protein intake than those who survived. Early start on nutritional support and undernutrition increased the opportunity to achieve protein and caloric goals, whereas the severity of disease and mechanical ventilation in the prone position decreased the chance to reach caloric and protein targets.

Gastric Cross-Sectional Area to Predict Gastric Intolerance in Critically Ill Patients: The Sono-ICU Prospective Observational Bicenter Study

To evaluate the correlation between gastric cross-sectional area (GCSA) and the occurrence of gastric intolerance in critically ill patients within 24 hours of the measurement.

DESIGN

Two-center prospective observational study.

SETTING

Two academic ICUs in France between June 2020 and August 2021.

PATIENTS

All surgical intubated ICU patients greater than or equal to 18 years old receiving enteral feeding for greater than 12 hours.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Forty-four patients were included, 11 (25%) of whom presented digestive intolerance. Primary outcome was assessment of the association between GCSA and the occurrence of gastric intolerance within 24 hours of the measurement. GCSA value was significantly higher in patients with upper digestive intolerance compared to those without (553 mm² [interquartile range (IQR), 500-649 mm²] vs 970 mm² [IQR, 777-1,047]; p < 0.001, respectively). The optimal threshold for predicting upper digestive intolerance was 720 mm² (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.86; positive predictive value 62.5%; negative predictive value 96.4%; sensibility 0.91; and specificity 0.81). Multivariate analysis (weighted by propensity score), including known risk factors, showed that GCSA above the 720 mm² threshold was independently associated with the occurrence of upper digestive intolerance (odds ratio, 1.85; 1.37-2.49; p < 0.0002). Measurement quality was "good" (i.e., liver, aorta, superior mesenteric vein, and pancreas were all visualized) in 81% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Measurement of GCSA by ultrasound would allow prediction of gastric intolerance in critically ill patients. This should be confirmed by a prospective score validation and interventional trials.

[Nutrition Intake in Critically Ill Patients with Coronavirus Disease (Covid-19): A Nationwide, Multicentre, Observational Study in Argentina]

INTRODUCTION

In 2020 the pandemic caused by SARS-COV-2 demanded an enormous number of healthcare resources in order to guarantee adequate treatment and support for those patients. This study aims to assess caloric and protein intake and evaluate its associations with relevant clinical outcomes in critically ill with Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) patients.

METHODS

A nationwide, multicentre prospective observational study including twelve Argentinian intensive care units (ICUs,) was conducted between March-October 2020.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Adult ICU patients >18 years admitted to the ICU with COVID-19 diagnosis and mechanical ventilation for at least 48hs. Statistical analysis was carried out using IBM-SPSS© 24 program.

RESULTS

One hundred and eighty-five patients were included in the study. Those who died had lower protein intake (0.73 g/kg/day (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70-0.75 vs 0.97 g/kg/day (CI 0.95-0.99), P <0.001), and lower caloric intake than those who survived (12.94 kcal/kg/day (CI 12.48-13.39) vs 16.47 kcal/kg/day (CI 16.09-16.8), P <0.001).A model was built, and logistic regression showed that factors associated with the probability of achieving caloric and protein intake, were the early start of nutritional support, modified NUTRIC score higher than five points, and undernutrition (Subjective Global Assessment B or C). The patients that underwent mechanical ventilation in a prone position present less caloric and protein intake, similar to those with APACHE II >18.

CONCLUSIONS

Critically ill patients with COVID-19 associated respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation who died in ICU had less caloric and protein intake than those who survived. Early start on nutritional support and undernutrition increased the opportunity to achieve protein and caloric goals, whereas the severity of disease and mechanical ventilation in the prone position decreased the chance to reach caloric and protein targets.[[[es]]]RESUMENIntroducción: En 2020, la pandemia provocada por el SARS-COV-2, demandó una enorme cantidad de recursos sanitarios para garantizar el tratamiento y apoyo adecuado a estos pacientes. Este estudio tiene como objetivo evaluar la ingesta de calorías/proteínas y evaluar sus asociaciones con resultados clínicos relevantes en pacientes críticamente enfermos con enfermedad por coronavirus (COVID-19).Métodos: Se realizó un estudio observacional prospectivo multicéntrico a nivel nacional que incluyó 12 unidades de cuidados intensivos (UCI) argentinas entre marzo y octubre de 2020. Criterios de inclusión: pacientes adultos de la UCI > 18 años ingresados en la UCI con diagnóstico de COVID-19 y ventilación mecánica durante al menos 48 horas. El análisis estadístico se realizó mediante el programa IBM-SPSS© 24.

RESULTADOS

En el presente estudio se incluyeron 185 pacientes. Entre los que fallecieron se observó un aporte proteico más bajo (0,73 g/kg/día (intervalo de confianza (IC) del 95 % 0,70-0,75 frente a 0,97 g/kg/día (IC 0,95-0,99), P < 0,001), y menor aporte calórico que los que sobrevivieron (12,94 kcal/kg/día (IC 12,48-13,39) vs 16,47 kcal/kg/día (IC 16,09-16,8), P < 0,001).Se construyó un modelo de regresión logística para analizar qué factores estaban asociados con la probabilidad de lograrlos objetivos calóricos/proteicos. Se observo una mayor probabilidad de lograr dichos objetivos cuando el inicio del soporte nutricional era precoz, el puntaje NUTRIC modificado era superior a 5 puntos y el paciente tenía diagnóstico de desnutrición mediante la Evaluación Global Subjetiva(B o C). Por otra parte, en los pacientes que necesitaron ventilación mecánica en decúbito prono se observó menor aporte calórico y proteico, situación similar en aquellos con APACHE II > 18.

CONCLUSIONES

Los pacientes críticos con insuficiencia respiratoria asociada a la enfermedad por COVID-19 que requerían ventilación mecánica y que fallecieron en la UCI tuvieron una ingesta calórica y proteica menor que los que sobrevivieron. El inicio temprano del soporte nutricional y la desnutrición aumentaron la posibilidad de alcanzar los objetivos calóricos y proteicos, mientras que la gravedad de la enfermedad y la ventilación mecánica en decúbito prono disminuyeron la posibilidad de alcanzar los objetivos calóricos y proteicos.

Challenges to Provision of Adequate Medical Nutrition Therapy in a Critically Ill COVID-19 Patient Fed in the Prone Position

Adults with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) may experience enteral nutrition (EN) intolerance. They often require mechanical ventilation and other specialized management including prone positioning. There is a controversy as to whether patients fed in prone position experience more EN intolerance than when they are in supine position. This narrative review synthesizes the literature published between 2001 and 2021 in adults with ARDS who are fed EN while in the prone position to determine safety and tolerance. A case of an adult patient with Down syndrome who developed ARDS due to COVID-19 and required EN while in prone position is presented.

Enteral Nutrition Overview

Enteral nutrition (EN) provides critical macro and micronutrients to individuals who cannot maintain sufficient oral intake to meet their nutritional needs. EN is most commonly required for neurological conditions that impair swallow function, such as stroke, amytrophic lateral sclerosis, and Parkinson’s disease. An inability to swallow due to mechanical ventilation and altered mental status are also common conditions that necessitate the use of EN. EN can be short or long term and delivered gastrically or post-pylorically. The expected duration and site of feeding determine the type of feeding tube used. Many commercial EN formulas are available. In addition to standard formulations, disease specific, peptide-based, and blenderized formulas are also available. Several other factors should be considered when providing EN, including timing and rate of initiation, advancement regimen, feeding modality, and risk of complications. Careful and comprehensive assessment of the patient will help to ensure that nutritionally complete and clinically appropriate EN is delivered safely.

Enteral nutritional support for patients hospitalized with COVID-19: Results from the first wave in a public hospital

Objectives

Nutrition has become an important component in treating individuals during the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, which is increasingly affecting the world population and causing a collapse in health services. Prolonged hospitalization, including immobilization and catabolism, induces a decrease in body weight and muscle mass that may result in sarcopenia, a condition that impairs respiratory and cardiac function and worsens the prognosis. The present study aimed to analyze enteral nutritional support and the clinical evolution of patients admitted with COVID-19 in Brazil.

Methods

This was a retrospective study, conducted from March to May 2020, of patients admitted to a referral hospital in cardiology and pulmonology in Fortaleza-Ce/Brazil. Two hundred patients infected with COVID-19 were selected for the study. Sociodemographic, clinical, and nutritional data were collected from electronic medical records, and associations between outcomes and the use of the prone body position with nutritional variables were analyzed by linear regression. Odds ratio and 95% confidence interval estimates for the death outcome were analyzed by logistic regression.

Results

Of the 112 patients who were fed by enterally, the majority were male (n = 61; 54.5%), elderly (n = 88; 78.6%), and with no current smoking habit (n = 81; 72.3%). The median hospital stay was 14 d, mostly in intensive care units (median: 9 d). Prone body positioning impacted the nutritional therapy. In general, patients who maintained a prone body position tested lower for kcal/kg of body weight, protein/kg of body weight, percentage of diet adequacy, and total caloric value. In addition, patients who died had a lower mean maximum kcal/kg body weight, protein/kg body weight, percentage of diet adequacy, and total caloric value compared with surviving patients.

Conclusions

An association between inadequacies in protein and energy supply with mortality was confirmed, suggesting that nutritional support optimization should be prescribed in such situations.

X-ray checks of NG tube position: a case for guided tube placement

OBJECTIVES

Checking nasogastric (NG) tube position by X-ray is too late to prevent 1.5% of blind tube placements entering the lung and results in delays to feeding and drugs. We audit the safety of the tube position and delay incurred by X-ray.

METHODS

From Radiology reports, we determined whether tube position was safe for feeding, factors associated with an X-ray request and the time delay from X-ray request to that report. For tubes misplaced into the lung, the distance from the carina to tube tip was measured and compared with that from published records of guided tube placement.

RESULTS

From 1 July 2019 to 30 June 2020, 1934 X-rays were done to check NG tube position in 891 patients. Gastric placement was confirmed in 85% but, because of tube proximity to the oesophagus, only 73% were deemed safe to feed. The 2.2% of tubes reported to be in the lung were a median of 18 cm beyond the carina compared to 12 cm and 0 cm for electromagnetic and direct vision methods of guided placement. X-ray checks delayed feed and drug treatment by >2 h in 51% of placements and 33% of patients required >3 X-rays during their enteral episode.

CONCLUSION

X-ray checks are common and detect a high percentage of unsafe tube placements, leading to repeated X-ray and delayed delivery of drugs and nutrition. Interpretation can be difficult even when following standard national criteria and post-placement X-ray cannot prevent deep lung placement. Guided or combined methods of confirming tube placement should be investigated.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

Reports included 27.5% of placements as unsafe, 2.2% in the lung at a median depth of 18 cm beyond the carina and too late to prevent 7 pneumothoraces. X-rays were repeated >3 times in 33% of patients over their enteral course and we are associated with clinically significant delays to drug treatment (and nutrition) in 51%; combined methods of tube confirmation or guided placement may be safer and more efficient.

A Quick Review on the Multisystem Effects of Prone Position in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) Including COVID-19

Objective:

The purpose of this review is to highlight the multisystem effects of prone position in ARDS patients with a focus on current findings regarding its use in COVID-19 patients.

Methods:

Two reviewers comprehensively searched PubMed database for literature regarding pathophysiology and efficacy of prone position in ARDS patients as well as specific data regarding this approach in COVID-19 patients.

Conclusion:

Prone positioning is well-documented to improve oxygenation and cardiac function in ARDS patients and might confer increased survival, with benefits that outweigh risks such as facial edema, endotracheal tube displacement, and intraabdominal organ dysfunction in obese patients. Severe COVID-19 pneumonia, while meeting ARDS criteria, differs from typical ARDS in several ways. Data would suggest that advantages of prone position would become limited after significant disease progression and fibrosis. The use of this technique in COVID-19 requires prolonged sessions that are unprecedented in the treatment of ARDS patients. New data regarding COVID-19 pathophysiology and patients continues to evolve daily. More frequently, patients are proned while maintaining spontaneous breathing—the results of this intervention are an area for future studies. There is more to learn about the appropriate use of prone position in COVID-19 patients. The multisystem risks and benefits require clinicians to adopt a patient centered decision-making algorithm when employing this technique in COVID-19 patients.

Level of evidence:

NA

Fluoroscopic placement of nasojejunal feeding tubes in COVID-19 patients in the prone position

Background

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) has caused an increase in patients requiring enteral feeding access while undergoing proning for severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We investigated the safety and feasibility of fluoroscopy‐guided nasojejunal (NJ) feeding tube placement in the prone position.

Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study of all patients who underwent fluoroscopic placement of NJ feeding tubes at a single institution between March 2020 and December 2020. Primary end points were success rate and number of attempts. Chi‐squared and Fischer exact tests were used to compare prone and supine groups.

Results

A total of 210 patients were included in the study: 53 patients received NJ feeding tubes while prone and 157 while supine. All but one patient in the prone group had ARDS secondary to COVID‐19, whereas 47 (30.3%) had COVID‐19 in the supine group. The rate of successful placement was 94.3% in the prone group and 100% in the supine group. Mean number of attempts was 1.1 (SD, ±0.4) in the prone and 1.0 (SD, ±0.1) in the supine group (P = .14). Prone patients had a longer median fluoroscopy time (69 s, interquartile range [IQR] = 92; vs 48 s, IQR = 43; P < .001) and received a higher radiation dose during the procedure (47 mGy, IQR = 50; vs 25 mGy, IQR = 33; P = .004). No procedural complications were reported.

Conclusion

Fluoroscopy‐guided NJ feeding tube placement in prone patients is feasible and safe. Patient positioning should not delay obtaining postpyloric feeding access.

The Effect of Semirecumbent and Right Lateral Positions on the Gastric Residual Volume of Mechanically Ventilated, Critically Ill Patients

BACKGROUND

Delay in stomach discharge is a challenge for patients who are tube fed and may result in serious side effects such as pneumonia and malnutrition.

PURPOSE

This study was designed to determine the respective effects of the semirecumbent (SR) supine and right lateral (RL) with a flatbed positions on the gastric residual volume (GRV) of mechanically ventilated, critically ill adult patients.

METHODS

A randomized, crossover clinical trial design was used to investigate GRV in 36 critically ill, ventilated adult patients who were hospitalized in the intensive care unit. GRV was measured at 3 hours after three consecutive feedings. GRV was first measured in all of the participants in the supine position; after which, participants were randomly assigned into one of two therapeutic positioning groups (Group A: assessment in the SR position and then the RL position; Group B: assessment in the RL position and then the SR position).

RESULTS

GRV was significantly lower in both the SR and RL positions than in the supine position. GRV in the SR and RL positions did not vary significantly. The in-group measurements for GRV did not significantly differ for any of the three positions. In Group A, GRV was significantly lower at each subsequent measurement point.

CONCLUSION/IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Positioning patients in the RL and SR positions rather than in the supine position is an effective strategy to reduce GRV. Furthermore, placing patients in either the RL or SR position is an effective intervention to promote faster digestion and feedings.

[The XI SENPE Jesús Culebras Lecture. Enteral nutrition in critically ill patients. History of an evolution]

Introduction

Enteral nutrition is part of the treatment plan designed for a great number of critically ill patients. After a first description in ancient Egypt, enteral nutrition was only rapidly developed during the last century. Advances in indications, tube feeding methods, enteral formula selection, diagnosis and treatment of gastrointestinal-related complications, efficacy monitorization, and use of protocols for enteral nutrition administration in clinical practice make this nutritional technique more feasible and secure for critically ill patients. Nevertheless, several issues in this field need more investigation to increase enteral nutrition development, efficacy, and safety in these patients.

Enteral Nutrition Safety With Advanced Treatments: Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation, Prone Positioning, and Infusion of Neuromuscular Blockers

This review aims at assessing the safety and efficacy of enteral nutrition in critically ill patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, prone positioning, and infusion of neuromuscular blockers. Existing data from randomized controlled trials demonstrate the survival benefit of early enteral nutrition in critically ill patients. Observational data have demonstrated that enteral nutrition in patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, prone positioning, and infusion of neuromuscular blockers is generally safe. However, these patients are at increased risk for gastrointestinal complications from enteral nutrition because of critical illness-induced gastrointestinal dysfunction; associated shock; the concomitant use of vasopressor agents, sedatives, and narcotics; possibly mesenteric circulatory compromise; and regurgitation associated with prone positioning. Therefore, early enteral nutrition is generally recommended in these patients in the absence of severe gastrointestinal dysfunction or shock. To reduce the complications, early nutrition should be advanced gradually (trophic feeding or permissive underfeeding), the bed should be tilted to a maximum of 30°, and concentrated nutritional formulae and the use of prokinetics may be considered to treat enteral feeding intolerance. Physicians should be vigilant about monitoring for early signs of acute mesenteric ischemia, which should lead to holding enteral feeding. Parenteral nutrition may be utilized in patients who cannot receive enteral nutrition or are unable to reach their nutrition goals by the end of the first week.

Nutrition Support During Prone Positioning: An Old Technique Reawakened by COVID-19

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a complex disease characterized by inflammation, resulting in diffuse alveolar damage, proliferation, and fibrosis, and carries a high mortality rate. Recently, the novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has overwhelmed healthcare systems worldwide, as many patients have required hospitalization for the management of respiratory failure similar in nature to ARDS. In addition to lung-protective ventilation strategies aimed to maintain an oxygen saturation >90%, a ratio of partial pressure of oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen >200, a pH of 7.25-7.40, and a plateau pressure <35 cm H₂ O, prone positioning has emerged as an effective treatment strategy for severe ARDS by improving oxygenation and secretion clearance. Although early nutrition assessment and intervention are recommended for acutely and critically ill patients, rotational therapy may present challenges in providing this care. Here, we will describe the pathophysiology of ARDS and the rationale for use of prone positioning and review the considerations and challenges of providing nutrition therapy for patients in the prone position.

Relevant Nutrition Therapy in COVID-19 and the Constraints on Its Delivery by a Unique Disease Process

Worldwide, as of July 2020, >13.2 million people have been infected by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus. The spectrum of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) ranges from mild illness to critical illness in 5% of cases. The population infected with SARS-CoV-2 requiring an intensive care unit admission often requires nutrition therapy as part of supportive care. Although the various societal guidelines for critical care nutrition meet most needs for the patient with COVID-19, numerous factors, which impact the application of those guideline recommendations, need to be considered. Since the SARS-CoV-2 virus is highly contagious, several key principles should be considered when caring for all patients with COVID-19 to ensure the safety of all healthcare personnel involved. Management strategies should cluster care, making all attempts to bundle patient care to limit exposure. Healthcare providers should be protected, and the spread of SARS-CoV-2 should be limited by minimizing procedures and other interventions that lead to aerosolization, avoiding droplet exposure through hand hygiene and use of personal protective equipment (PPE). PPE should be preserved by decreasing the number of individuals providing direct patient care and by limiting the number of patient interactions. Enteral nutrition (EN) is tolerated by the majority of patients with COVID-19, but a relatively low threshold for conversion to parenteral nutrition should be maintained if increased exposure to the virus is required to continue EN. This article offers relevant and practical recommendations on how to optimize nutrition therapy in critically ill patients with COVID-19.

Nursing issues in enteral nutrition during prone position in critically ill patients: A systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Early enteral nutrition (EN) and prone position may both improve the outcome of patients affected by moderate to severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome. Recent guidelines suggest to administer early EN also during prone position. However, EN intolerance, such as high residual gastric volumes, regurgitation or vomiting, may occur during pronation.

AIM

This systematic review aims to assess the occurrence of high residual gastric volume, regurgitation or vomiting episodes, that can be encountered in patients receiving EN during prone position.

METHODS

We have conducted a systematic review. We queried three scientific databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL) from inception until November 19, 2019 without language restrictions, using keywords and related MeSH terms. All relevant articles enrolling adult patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation and evaluating the use of early EN during prone position were included.

RESULTS

From 111 records obtained, we included six studies. All studies but one reported no differences with respect to gastric residual volumes between supine and prone positions. A 24-hours EN administration protocol seems to be better, as compared to an 18-hours feeding protocol. The need to stop EN and vomiting episodes were higher during prone position, although the rate of high gastric volume was similar between supine and prone positions. Ventilator associated pneumonia, lengths of stay and mortalities were similar between supine and prone positions. Only one study reported lower mortality in patients receiving EN throughout the entire day, as compared to an 18-hours administration protocol.

CONCLUSION

Protocols should be followed by healthcare providers in order to increase the enteral feeding volume, while avoiding EN intolerance (such as EN stops, high residual volume, regurgitation and vomiting).

Nutrition Therapy in Critically Ill Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019

In the midst of a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, a paucity of data precludes derivation of COVID-19-specific recommendations for nutrition therapy. Until more data are available, focus must be centered on principles of critical care nutrition modified for the constraints of this disease process, ie, COVID-19-relevant recommendations. Delivery of nutrition therapy must include strategies to reduce exposure and spread of disease by providing clustered care, adequate protection of healthcare providers, and preservation of personal protective equipment. Enteral nutrition (EN) should be initiated early after admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) using a standard isosmolar polymeric formula, starting at trophic doses and advancing as tolerated, while monitoring for gastrointestinal intolerance, hemodynamic instability, and metabolic derangements. Intragastric EN may be provided safely, even with use of prone-positioning and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Clinicians should have a lower threshold for switching to parenteral nutrition in cases of intolerance, high risk of aspiration, or escalating vasopressor support. Although data extrapolated from experience in acute respiratory distress syndrome warrants use of fiber additives and probiotic organisms, the lack of benefit precludes a recommendation for micronutrient supplementation. Practices that increase exposure or contamination of equipment, such as monitoring gastric residual volumes, indirect calorimetry to calculate requirements, endoscopy or fluoroscopy to achieve enteral access, or transport out of the ICU for additional imaging, should be avoided. At all times, strategies for nutrition therapy need to be assessed on a risk/benefit basis, paying attention to risk for both the patient and the healthcare provider.

Donning a New Approach to the Practice of Gastroenterology: Perspectives From the COVID-19 Pandemic Epicenter

The COVID-19 pandemic seemingly is peaking now in New York City and has triggered significant changes to the standard management of gastrointestinal diseases. Priorities such as minimizing viral transmission, preserving personal protective equipment, and freeing hospital beds have driven unconventional approaches to managing gastroenterology (GI) patients. Conversion of endoscopy units to COVID units and redeployment of GI fellows and faculty has profoundly changed the profile of most GI services. Meanwhile, consult and procedural volumes have been reduced drastically. In this review, we share our collective experiences regarding how we have changed our practice of medicine in response to the COVID surge. Although we review our management of specific consults and conditions, the overarching theme focuses primarily on noninvasive measures and maximizing medical therapies. Endoscopic procedures have been reserved for those timely interventions that are most likely to be therapeutic. The role of multidisciplinary discussion, although always important, now has become critical. The support of our faculty and trainees remains essential. Local leadership can encourage well-being by frequent team check-ins and by fostering trainee development through remote learning. Advancing a clear vision and a transparent process for how to organize and triage care in the recovery phase will allow for a smooth transition to our new normal.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: Guidelines on the Management of Critically Ill Adults with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

BACKGROUND

The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of a rapidly spreading illness, Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), affecting thousands of people around the world. Urgent guidance for clinicians caring for the sickest of these patients is needed.

METHODS

We formed a panel of 36 experts from 12 countries. All panel members completed the World Health Organization conflict of interest disclosure form. The panel proposed 53 questions that are relevant to the management of COVID-19 in the ICU. We searched the literature for direct and indirect evidence on the management of COVID-19 in critically ill patients in the ICU. We identified relevant and recent systematic reviews on most questions relating to supportive care. We assessed the certainty in the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, then generated recommendations based on the balance between benefit and harm, resource and cost implications, equity, and feasibility. Recommendations were either strong or weak, or in the form of best practice recommendations.

RESULTS

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign COVID-19 panel issued 54 statements, of which four are best practice statements, nine are strong recommendations, and 35 are weak recommendations. No recommendation was provided for six questions. The topics were: 1) infection control, 2) laboratory diagnosis and specimens, 3) hemodynamic support, 4) ventilatory support, and 5) COVID-19 therapy.

CONCLUSION

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign COVID-19 panel issued several recommendations to help support healthcare workers caring for critically ill ICU patients with COVID-19. When available, we will provide new evidence in further releases of these guidelines.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: guidelines on the management of critically ill adults with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

BACKGROUND

The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of a rapidly spreading illness, Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), affecting thousands of people around the world. Urgent guidance for clinicians caring for the sickest of these patients is needed.

METHODS

We formed a panel of 36 experts from 12 countries. All panel members completed the World Health Organization conflict of interest disclosure form. The panel proposed 53 questions that are relevant to the management of COVID-19 in the ICU. We searched the literature for direct and indirect evidence on the management of COVID-19 in critically ill patients in the ICU. We identified relevant and recent systematic reviews on most questions relating to supportive care. We assessed the certainty in the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, then generated recommendations based on the balance between benefit and harm, resource and cost implications, equity, and feasibility. Recommendations were either strong or weak, or in the form of best practice recommendations.

RESULTS

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign COVID-19 panel issued 54 statements, of which 4 are best practice statements, 9 are strong recommendations, and 35 are weak recommendations. No recommendation was provided for 6 questions. The topics were: (1) infection control, (2) laboratory diagnosis and specimens, (3) hemodynamic support, (4) ventilatory support, and (5) COVID-19 therapy.

CONCLUSION

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign COVID-19 panel issued several recommendations to help support healthcare workers caring for critically ill ICU patients with COVID-19. When available, we will provide new recommendations in further releases of these guidelines.

Administration of enteral nutrition in the prone position, gastric residual volume and other clinical outcomes in critically ill patients: a systematic review

This systematic review of longitudinal studies aimed to evaluate the effect of enteral feeding of critically ill adult and pediatric patients in the prone position on gastric residual volume and other clinical outcomes. A literature search was conducted in the databases PubMed, Scopus and Embase using terms related to population and intervention. Two independent reviewers analyzed the titles and abstracts, and data collection was performed using a standardized form. Discrepancies were resolved by a third reviewer. The methodological quality of the studies was evaluated considering the potential for systematic errors, and the data were qualitatively analyzed. Four studies with adult patients and one with preterm patients were included. The gastric residual volume was evaluated as the main outcome: three studies did not show differences in the gastric residual volume between the prone and supine positions (p > 0.05), while one study showed a higher gastric residual volume during enteral feeding in the prone position (27.6mL versus 10.6mL; p < 0.05), and another group observed a greater gastric residual volume in the supine position (reduction of the gastric residual volume by 23.3% in the supine position versus 43.9% in the prone position; p < 0.01). Two studies evaluated the frequency of vomiting; one study found that it was higher in the prone position (30 versus 26 episodes; p < 0.001), while the other study found no significant difference (p > 0.05). The incidence of aspiration pneumonia and death were evaluated in one study, with no difference between groups (p > 0.05). The literature on the administration of enteral feeding in the prone position in critically ill patients is sparse and of limited quality, and the results regarding gastric residual volume are contradictory. Observational studies with appropriate sample sizes should be conducted to support conclusions on the subject.

Dispelling Myths and Unfounded Practices About Enteral Nutrition

Many protocols and steps in the process of enteral nutrition (EN) use are not overly supported with strong research and have been done the same way over many years without questioning the use of best-practices evidence. This article reports many of the myths and unfounded practices surrounding EN and attempts to refute those myths with current evidence. These practices include those about enteral access devices, formulas, enteral administration, and complications.

Feasibility, tolerance and effectiveness of enteral feeding in critically ill patients in prone position

Aim

To assess the feasibility, tolerance and effectiveness of enteral nutrition in critically ill patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation in the prone position for severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS).

Methods

Prospective observational study conducted in a multidisciplinary critical care unit of a tertiary care hospital from January 2013 until July 2015. All patients with ARDS who received invasive mechanical ventilation in prone position during the study period were included. Patients' demographics, severity of illness (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II) score), baseline markers of nutritional status (subjective global assessment (SGA) and body mass index), details of nutrition delivery during prone and supine hours and outcomes (Length of stay and discharge status) were recorded.

Results

Fifty-one patients met inclusion criteria out of whom four patients were excluded from analysis since they did not receive any enteral nutrition due to severe hemodynamic instability. The mean age of patients was 46.4 ± 12.9 years, with male:female ratio of 7:3. On admission, SGA revealed moderate malnutrition in 51% of patients and the mean APACHE II score was 26.8 ± 9.2. The average duration of prone ventilation per patient was 60.2 ± 30.7 h. All patients received continuous nasogastric/orogastric feeds. The mean calories (kcal/kg/day) and protein (g/kg/day) prescribed in the supine position were 24.5 ± 3.8 and 1.1 ± 0.2 while the mean calories and protein prescribed in prone position were 23.5 ± 3.6 and 1.1 ± 0.2, respectively. Percentage of prescribed calories received by patients in supine position was similar to that in prone position (83.2% vs. 79.6%; P = 0.12). Patients received a higher percentage of prescribed protein in supine compared to prone position (80.8% vs. 75%, P = 0.02). The proportion of patients who received at least 75% of the caloric and protein goals was 37 (78.7%) and 37 (78.7%) in supine and 32 (68.1%) and 21 (44.6%) in prone position.

Conclusion

In critically ill patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation in the prone position, enteral nutrition with nasogastric/orogastric feeding is feasible and well tolerated. Nutritional delivery of calories and proteins in prone position is comparable to that in supine position.

Clinical Nutrition in Critical Care Medicine - Guideline of the German Society for Nutritional Medicine (DGEM)

PURPOSE

Enteral and parenteral nutrition of adult critically ill patients varies in terms of the route of nutrient delivery, the amount and composition of macro- and micronutrients, and the choice of specific, immune-modulating substrates. Variations of clinical nutrition may affect clinical outcomes. The present guideline provides clinicians with updated consensus-based recommendations for clinical nutrition in adult critically ill patients who suffer from at least one acute organ dysfunction requiring specific drug therapy and/or a mechanical support device (e.g., mechanical ventilation) to maintain organ function.

METHODS

The former guidelines of the German Society for Nutritional Medicine (DGEM) were updated according to the current instructions of the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF) valid for a S2k-guideline. According to the S2k-guideline classification, no systematic review of the available evidence was required to make recommendations, which, therefore, do not state evidence- or recommendation grades. Nevertheless, we considered and commented the evidence from randomized-controlled trials, meta-analyses and observational studies with adequate sample size and high methodological quality (until May 2018) as well as from currently valid guidelines of other societies. The liability of each recommendation was described linguistically. Each recommendation was finally validated and consented through a Delphi process.

RESULTS

In the introduction the guideline describes a) the pathophysiological consequences of critical illness possibly affecting metabolism and nutrition of critically ill patients, b) potential definitions for different disease phases during the course of illness, and c) methodological shortcomings of clinical trials on nutrition. Then, we make 69 consented recommendations for essential, practice-relevant elements of clinical nutrition in critically ill patients. Among others, recommendations include the assessment of nutrition status, the indication for clinical nutrition, the timing and route of nutrient delivery, and the amount and composition of substrates (macro- and micronutrients); furthermore, we discuss distinctive aspects of nutrition therapy in obese critically ill patients and those treated with extracorporeal support devices.

CONCLUSION

The current guideline provides clinicians with up-to-date recommendations for enteral and parenteral nutrition of adult critically ill patients who suffer from at least one acute organ dysfunction requiring specific drug therapy and/or a mechanical support device (e.g., mechanical ventilation) to maintain organ function. The period of validity of the guideline is approximately fixed at five years (2018-2023).

Enteral Nutrition in the Mechanically Ventilated Patient

Mechanically ventilated patients are unable to take food orally and therefore are dependent on enteral nutrition for provision of both energy and protein requirements. Enteral nutrition is supportive therapy and may impact patient outcomes in the intensive care unit. Early enteral nutrition has been shown to decrease complications and hospital length of stay and improve the prognosis at discharge. Nutrition support is unique for patients on mechanical ventilation and, as recently published literature shows, should be tailored to the individuals' underlying pathology. This review will discuss the most current literature and recommendations for enteral nutrition in patients receiving mechanical ventilation.

"Do not do" recommendations of the working groups of the Spanish Society of Intensive and Critical Care Medicine and Coronary Units (SEMICYUC) for the management of critically ill patients

The project "Commitment to Quality of Scientific Societies", promoted since 2013 by the Spanish Ministry of Health, seeks to reduce unnecessary health interventions that have not proven effective, have little or doubtful effectiveness, or are not cost-effective. The objective is to establish the "do not do" recommendations for the management of critically ill patients. A panel of experts from the 13 working groups (WGs) of the Spanish Society of Intensive and Critical Care Medicine and Coronary Units (SEMICYUC) was selected and nominated by virtue of clinical expertise and/or scientific experience to carry out the recommendations. Available scientific literature in the management of adult critically ill patients from 2000 to 2017 was extracted. The clinical evidence was discussed and summarized by the experts in the course of consensus finding of each WG, and was finally approved by the WGs after an extensive internal review process carried out during the first semester of 2017. A total of 65 recommendations were developed, of which 5 corresponded to each of the 13 WGs. These recommendations are based on the opinion of experts and scientific knowledge, and aim to reduce those treatments or procedures that do not add value to the care process; avoid the exposure of critical patients to potential risks; and improve the adequacy of health resources.

Early enteral nutrition in critically ill patients: ESICM clinical practice guidelines

Purpose

To provide evidence-based guidelines for early enteral nutrition (EEN) during critical illness.

Methods

We aimed to compare EEN vs. early parenteral nutrition (PN) and vs. delayed EN. We defined “early” EN as EN started within 48 h independent of type or amount. We listed, a priori, conditions in which EN is often delayed, and performed systematic reviews in 24 such subtopics. If sufficient evidence was available, we performed meta-analyses; if not, we qualitatively summarized the evidence and based our recommendations on expert opinion. We used the GRADE approach for guideline development. The final recommendations were compiled via Delphi rounds.

Results

We formulated 17 recommendations favouring initiation of EEN and seven recommendations favouring delaying EN. We performed five meta-analyses: in unselected critically ill patients, and specifically in traumatic brain injury, severe acute pancreatitis, gastrointestinal (GI) surgery and abdominal trauma. EEN reduced infectious complications in unselected critically ill patients, in patients with severe acute pancreatitis, and after GI surgery. We did not detect any evidence of superiority for early PN or delayed EN over EEN. All recommendations are weak because of the low quality of evidence, with several based only on expert opinion.

Conclusions

We suggest using EEN in the majority of critically ill under certain precautions. In the absence of evidence, we suggest delaying EN in critically ill patients with uncontrolled shock, uncontrolled hypoxaemia and acidosis, uncontrolled upper GI bleeding, gastric aspirate >500 ml/6 h, bowel ischaemia, bowel obstruction, abdominal compartment syndrome, and high-output fistula without distal feeding access.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00134-016-4665-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Aspiration and the Risk of Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a major concern in the intensive care unit. It is estimated that the risk of developing VAP may be as high as 1% per ventilated day, and the attributable mortality approaches 50% in some series. A growing body of evidence implicates the role of microaspiration of contaminated oropharyngeal and perhaps gastroesophageal secretions into the airways as an integral step in the pathogenesis of VAP. In patients who have been intubated and mechanically ventilated for >72 hours, the majority of VAP is caused by enteric gram-negative organisms, presumably of gastrointestinal origin. As a result, strategies designed to minimize the risk of these contaminated secretions into the normally sterile airways are of paramount importance in terms of VAP prevention. This review highlights the important etiological role of the gut in the development of VAP and also discusses the evidence behind interventions that may modulate the risk of both aspiration and subsequent VAP.

Effect of Feeding-Tube Properties on Residual Volume Measurements in Tube-Fed Patients

BACKGROUND

The effect of feeding tube size and port configuration on the ability to measure gastric residual volume (GRV) is poorly understood. In addition, there is confusion about the need to measure GRVs during feedings into the small bowel. This study sought to (1) compare the volume of gastric contents obtained from small-diameter feeding tubes and large-diameter sump tubes concurrently positioned in the stomach and (2) describe the distribution of GRVs during small-bowel feedings.

METHODS

For the first objective, GRV measurements were made from 10-Fr tubes (n = 645) and 14-Fr or 18-Fr sump tubes (n = 645) concurrently present in 62 critically ill patients. Sixty-milliliter syringes were used to measure GRVs from the 10-Fr tubes; the fluid was returned to the stomach and measurements were repeated from the large-diameter sump tubes. To address the second research objective, 890 GRV measurements were made from 14-Fr or 18-Fr gastric sump tubes (not connected to suction) in 75 critically ill patients who were receiving small-bowel feedings.

RESULTS

When GRVs were >50 mL, a linear regression equation indicated that volumes obtained from the large-diameter sump tubes were about 1.5 times greater than those obtained from the small-diameter tubes concurrently present in the stomach, p < .001. Gastric volumes > or =100 mL were found in 11.6% of the 890 measurements made in patients receiving small-bowel feedings; volumes > or =150 mL were found in 5.4% of the measurements.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that GRVs obtained from large-diameter sump tubes are about 1.5 times greater than those obtained from 10-Fr tubes. Large GRVs occur in at least 5% of patients receiving postpyloric feedings.

Good practices for prone positioning at the bedside: Construction of a care protocol

Last year, interest in prone positioning to treat acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) resurfaced with the demonstration of a reduction in mortality by a large randomized clinical trial. Reports in the literature suggest that the incidence of adverse events is significantly reduced with a team trained and experienced in the process. The objective of this review is to revisit the current evidence in the literature, discuss and propose the construction of a protocol of care for these patients. A search was performed on the main electronic databases: Medline, Lilacs and Cochrane Library. Prone positioning is increasingly used in daily practice, with properly trained staff and a well established care protocol are essencial.

S2e guideline: positioning and early mobilisation in prophylaxis or therapy of pulmonary disorders : Revision 2015: S2e guideline of the German Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (DGAI)

The German Society of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (DGAI) commissioneda revision of the S2 guidelines on "positioning therapy for prophylaxis or therapy of pulmonary function disorders" from 2008. Because of the increasing clinical and scientificrelevance the guidelines were extended to include the issue of "early mobilization"and the following main topics are therefore included: use of positioning therapy and earlymobilization for prophylaxis and therapy of pulmonary function disorders, undesired effects and complications of positioning therapy and early mobilization as well as practical aspects of the use of positioning therapy and early mobilization. These guidelines are the result of a systematic literature search and the subsequent critical evaluation of the evidence with scientific methods. The methodological approach for the process of development of the guidelines followed the requirements of evidence-based medicine, as defined as the standard by the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany. Recently published articles after 2005 were examined with respect to positioning therapy and the recently accepted aspect of early mobilization incorporates all literature published up to June 2014.

Enteral nutrition intolerance in critically ill septic burn patients

The purpose of this study was to investigate the frequency of enteral feeding intolerance in critically ill septic burn patients, the effect of enteral feeding intolerance on the efficacy of feeding, the correlation between the infection marker (procalcitonin [PCT]) and the nutrition status marker (prealbumin) and the impact of feeding intolerance on the outcome of septic burn patients. From January 2009 to December 2012 the data of all burn patients with the diagnosis of sepsis who were placed on enteral nutrition were analyzed. Septic patients were divided into two groups: group A, septic patients who developed feeding intolerance; group B, septic patients who did not develop feeding intolerance. Demographic and clinical characteristics of patients were analyzed and compared. The diagnosis of sepsis was applied to 29% of all patients. Of these patients 35% developed intolerance to enteral feeding throughout the septic period. A statistically significant increase in mean PCT level and a decrease in prealbumin level was observed during the sepsis period. Group A patients had statistically significant lower mean caloric intake, higher PCT:prealbumin ratio, higher pneumonia incidence, higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Maximum Score, a longer duration of mechanical ventilation, and a higher mortality rate in comparison with the septic patients without gastric feeding intolerance. The authors concluded that a high percentage of septic burn patients developed enteral feeding intolerance. Enteral feeding intolerance seems to have a negative impact on the patients' nutritional status, morbidity, and mortality.

Enteral Nutrition in Patients Receiving Mechanical Ventilation in a Prone Position

BACKGROUND

Patients treated with mechanical ventilation in the prone position (PP) could have an increased risk for feeding intolerance. However, the available evidence supporting this hypothesis is limited and contradictory.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the feasibility and efficacy of enteral nutrition (EN) support and its associated complications in patients receiving mechanical ventilation in PP.

METHODS

Prospective observational study including 34 mechanically ventilated intensive care patients who were turned to the prone position over a 3-year period. End points related to efficacy and safety of EN support were studied.

RESULTS

In total, more than 1200 patients were admitted to the intensive care unit over a period of 3 years. Of these, 34 received mechanical ventilation in PP. The mean days under EN were 24.7 ± 12.3. Mean days under EN in the supine position were significantly higher than in PP (21.1 vs 3.6; P < .001), but there were no significant differences in gastric residual volume adjusted per day of EN (126.6 vs 189.2; P = .054) as well as diet volume ratio (94.1% vs 92.8%; P = .21). No significant differences in high gastric residual events per day of EN (0.06 vs 0.09; P = .39), vomiting per day of EN (0.016 vs 0.03; P = .53), or diet regurgitation per day of EN (0 vs 0.04; P = .051) were found.

CONCLUSIONS

EN in critically ill patients with severe hypoxemia receiving mechanical ventilation in PP is feasible, safe, and not associated with an increased risk of gastrointestinal complications. Larger studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Definition, prevalence, and outcome of feeding intolerance in intensive care: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Clinicians and researchers frequently use the phrase 'feeding intolerance' (FI) as a descriptive term in enterally fed critically ill patients. We aimed to: (1) determine what is the most accepted definition of FI; (2) estimate the prevalence of FI; and (3) evaluate whether FI is associated with important outcomes. Systematic searches of peer-reviewed publications using PubMed, MEDLINE, and Web of Science were performed with studies reporting FI extracted. We identified 72 studies defining FI. In 33 studies, the definition was based on large gastric residual volumes (GRVs) together with other gastrointestinal symptoms, while 30 studies relied solely on large GRVs, six studies used inadequate delivery of enteral nutrition (EN) as a threshold, and three studies gastrointestinal symptoms without reference to GRV. The median volume used to define a 'large' GRV was 250 ml (ranges from 75 to 500 ml). The pooled proportion (n = 31 studies) of FI was 38.3% (95% CI 30.7-46.2). Five studies reported outcomes, all of them observed adverse outcome in FI patients. In three studies, respectively, FI was associated with increased mortality and ICU length-of-stay. In summary, FI is inconsistently defined but appears to occur frequently. There are preliminary data indicating that FI is associated with adverse outcomes. A standard definition of FI is required to determine the accuracy of these preliminary data.

A practical approach to the use of prone therapy in acute respiratory distress syndrome

In this article we propose a practical approach to the use of prone therapy for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We have attempted to provide information to improve the understanding and implementation of prone therapy based on the literature available and our own experience. We review the basic physiology behind ARDS and the theoretical mechanism by which prone therapy can be of benefit. The findings of the most significant studies regarding prone therapy in ARDS as they pertain to its implementation are summarized. Also provided is a discussion of the nuances of utilizing prone therapy, including potential pitfalls, complications, and contraindications. The specific considerations of prone therapy in open abdomens and traumatic brain injuries are discussed as well. Finally, we supply suggested protocols for the implementation of prone therapy discussing criteria for initiation and cessation of therapy as well as addressing issues such as the use of neuromuscular blockade and nutritional supplementation.

Positioning after feedings: what is the evidence to reduce feeding intolerances?

Nursing’s goal is to be the least invasive as the patient's condition allows. As a NICU nurse, each feeding for our patients is a priority for them to grow and develop with the idea to speed discharge to home. When infants develop reflux or have increased gastric aspirates, we are concerned that their weight will taper and their length of stay will increase. Positioning provides nurses with a noninvasive option to care for these patients. The that the right-side position is best for infants to enhance digestion stems from theories of anatomy and physics. Research strengthens this supposition for those infants needing help with decreased gastric motility. Other research supports the left lateral and prone positions for those patients with GER. In practice, a patient does not necessarily have one or the other and in fact may have both GER and slowed gastric motility at any given time. The literature supports the right lateral position for enhancing gastric emptying or motility and left lateral position for GER in the uncomplicated patient with one gastrointestinal concern. The knowledge the research provides is encouraging to provide a solution, but it does not clarify the true issues of a complex patient who can have decreased gastric motility needing the right lateral position and also suffer from symptoms of GER requiring the left lateral position (see Table). For those more complicated infants, the solution might best be choosing the prone position. The prone position should not be forgotten as the findings of many studies, although not often the first choice (best results) showed it to be consistently the second best for digestive problems. In any case, the dominant positions appear to be the right or left lateral side with the prone position considered a reasonable compromise. Further research is needed to provide a clear choice for correct positioning in the NICU population. The reality for nurses is that neonatal patients are often fed every 3 hours and their lives depend on each feeding to provide nutrients for growth. It is ideal for these patients to receive every prescribed feeding and be comfortably placed in a variety of positions. Nurses' assumption that the right lateral position is best is considered, in most cases, to be a true statement for those infants with increased gastric aspirates. For those patients with GER, the left lateral position is more highly preferred. It is important for nurses to be aware of the literature but also guide their practice based on the patient assessment and presentation of symptoms. Future knowledge may provide nurses with the data needed to perfect positioning methods for infants with feeding intolerances.

Disparate response to metoclopramide therapy for gastric feeding intolerance in trauma patients with and without traumatic brain injury

Patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) have delayed gastric emptying and often require prokinetic drug therapy to improve enteral feeding tolerance. The authors hypothesized that metoclopramide was less efficacious for improving gastric feeding tolerance for trauma patients with TBI compared to trauma patients without TBI. A retrospective analysis was conducted of patients admitted to the trauma or neurosurgical intensive care unit who received gastric feeding from January 2006 to April 2008. Gastric feeding intolerance was defined by a gastric residual volume >200 mL or emesis with abdominal distension or discomfort. Patients with gastric feeding intolerance were given metoclopramide 10 mg intravenously every 6 hours, followed by a dose escalation to 20 mg, and then combination therapy with metoclopramide and erythromycin 250 mg intravenously every 6 hours if intolerance persisted. In total, 882 trauma patients (49% with TBI) were evaluated. TBI patients had a higher incidence of gastric feeding intolerance than those without TBI (18.6% vs 10.4%, P < or = .001). Efficacy rates for metoclopramide 10 mg, metoclopramide 20 mg, and metoclopramide-erythromycin were 55%, 62%, and 79%, respectively (P < or = .03). Metoclopramide failure occurred in 54% of patients with TBI compared to 35% of patients without TBI, respectively (P < or = .02), due to a greater prevalence of tachyphylaxis. Single-drug therapy with metoclopramide was less effective for TBI trauma patients compared to trauma patients without TBI. Combination therapy with erythromycin as first-line therapy for TBI trauma patients with gastric feeding intolerance is indicated if there are no contraindications or significant drug interactions.

To return or to discard? Randomised trial on gastric residual volume management

BACKGROUND

The control of gastric residual volume (GRV) is a common nursing intervention in intensive care; however the literature shows a wide variation in clinical practice regarding the management of GRV, potentially affecting patients' clinical outcomes. The aim of this study is to determine the effect of returning or discarding GRV, on gastric emptying delays and feeding, electrolyte and comfort outcomes in critically ill patients.

METHOD

A randomised, prospective, clinical trial design was used to study 125 critically ill patients, assigned to the return or the discard group. Main outcome measure was delayed gastric emptying. Feeding outcomes were determined measuring intolerance indicators, feeding delays and feeding potential complications. Fluid and electrolyte measures included serum potassium, glycaemia control and fluid balance. Discomfort was identified by significant changes in vital signs.

RESULTS

Patients in both groups presented similar mean GRV with no significant differences found (p=0.111), but participants in the intervention arm showed a lower incidence and severity of delayed gastric emptying episodes (p=0.001). No significant differences were found for the rest of outcome measurements, except for hyperglycaemia.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study support the recommendation to reintroduce gastric content aspirated to improve GRV management without increasing the risk for potential complications.