The importance of the refeeding syndrome

In this review we discuss the refeeding syndrome. This potentially lethal condition can be defined as severe electrolyte and fluid shifts associated with metabolic abnormalities in malnourished patients undergoing refeeding, whether orally, enterally, or parenterally. It can be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Clinical features are fluid-balance abnormalities, abnormal glucose metabolism, hypophosphatemia, hypomagnesemia, and hypokalemia. In addition, thiamine deficiency can occur. We describe which patient groups are more at risk for this syndrome and the clinical management of the condition.

Nutrition in clinical practice—the refeeding syndrome: illustrative cases and guidelines for prevention and treatment

The refeeding syndrome is a potentially lethal complication of refeeding in patients who are severely malnourished from whatever cause. Too rapid refeeding, particularly with carbohydrate may precipitate a number of metabolic and pathophysiological complications, which may adversely affect the cardiac, respiratory, haematological, hepatic and neuromuscular systems leading to clinical complications and even death. We aimed to review the development of the refeeding syndrome in a variety of situations and, from this and the literature, devise guidelines to prevent and treat the condition. We report seven cases illustrating different aspects of the refeeding syndrome and the measures used to treat it. The specific complications encountered, their physiological mechanisms, identification of patients at risk, and prevention and treatment are discussed. Each case developed one or more of the features of the refeeding syndrome including deficiencies and low plasma levels of potassium, phosphate, magnesium and thiamine combined with salt and water retention. These responded to specific interventions. In most cases, these abnormalities could have been anticipated and prevented. The main features of the refeeding syndrome are described with a protocol to anticipate, prevent and treat the condition in adults.

Clinical use of the respiratory quotient obtained from indirect calorimetry

BACKGROUND

The respiratory quotient (RQ) obtained from indirect calorimetry (IC), defined by the ratio carbon dioxide production (VCO2)/oxygen consumption (VO2), is affected by extremes of substrate use by the body. Underfeeding, which promotes use of endogenous fat stores, should cause decreases in the RQ, whereas overfeeding, which results in lipogenesis, should cause increases in the RQ. Marked increases in VCO2 (with subsequent increases in RQ) in response to overfeeding may cause respiratory compromise in patients with limited pulmonary reserve. Thus, variation in the RQ in response to the feeding regimen may indicate inappropriate feeding and serve as a marker for patient intolerance. This prospective, multicenter study was designed to determine the clinical use of RQ for monitoring adequacy and tolerance of nutrition support.

METHODS

Patients in any 1 of 30 long-term acute care Kindred hospitals made nil orally (NPO) and placed on total parenteral or enteral feeding were eligible for this study. Arterial blood gas, serum ketones, 24-hour collection of urine urea nitrogen, and IC measurements were obtained on all. Actual volume of enteral/parenteral feeding infused over the 24 hours before performance of IC was documented.

RESULTS

A total of 263 patients (mean age, 70.2 years, 57.4% male) were entered in the study. Of the 263 study patients, 88.6% required mechanical ventilation, and 92.0% received enteral tube feeding only. Overall, 41.5% of patients were overfed, receiving >110% of required calories, whereas 34.2% were underfed, receiving <90% of required calories. The ratio of calories provided/required correlated significantly with overall measured RQ (p < .0001; R2 = .16). Correcting for the metabolism of protein by calculating a nonprotein RQ (NPRQ) from a 24-hour urine urea nitrogen did not improve this correlation (p < .0001, R2 = .32). Using a measured NPRQ >1.0 to identify overfeeding had an acceptable specificity of 85.1% but a low sensitivity of 38.5%. Similarly, use of a NPRQ <0.85 to determine underfeeding had a specificity of 72.2% and a sensitivity of 55.8%. Comparing the measured NPRQ with a predicted reference RQ (based on percent infusion of carbohydrate/fat and the Lusk table) did not improve the overall use of RQ. In the majority of patients (67.7%), comparison of the measured NPRQ to the predicted value failed to differentiate appropriate (meeting 100% +/- 10% of requirements) from inappropriate feeding. Deviation of the measured NPRQ from predicted failed to identify factors unrelated to substrate use purported to affect the RQ (such as acid/base disturbances or hyper/hypoventilation). Increasing measured RQ did correlate significantly with increasing respiratory rate (p = .002, R2 = .04) and decreasing tidal volume (p = .002, R2 = .04), suggesting reduced tolerance with development of shallow rapid respirations and ventilatory compromise.

CONCLUSIONS

Although changes in the overall and nonprotein RQ correlate to percent calories provided/required, low sensitivity and specificity limit its efficacy as an indicator of over- or underfeeding. The RQ should not be used to finely adjust the nutrition support regimen. Elevation of overall measured RQ > or = 1.0 may be associated with reduced tolerance and mild respiratory compromise. The clinical use of RQ is limited to a marker of test validity (to confirm measured RQ values are in physiologic range) and a marker for respiratory tolerance of the nutrition support regimen.

Effect of nutritional support on clinical outcome in patients at nutritional risk

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Undernourished patients have an increased risk of complications and a prolonged hospital stay, compared to those who are not undernourished. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of nutritional intervention in a random sample of hospitalized patients at nutritional risk.

METHODS

A randomized, controlled trial of nutritional intervention in 212 patients. Intervention consisted of a specialized nutritional team (nurse and dietician) who attended patients and staff for motivation, detailed a nutritional plan, assured delivery of prescribed food and gave advice on enteral or parenteral nutrition when appropriate. The control group received the standard regime used in the department. The primary endpoint was the part of the length of stay (LOS) that was considered to be sensitive to nutritional support, designated LOSNDI. The nutritional discharge index (NDI) consists of three objective criteria: (1) the patient is able to manage toilet visits without assistance, reflecting mobilization; (2) the patient is without fever (tp < 38 degrees C), reflecting absence of infection; and (3) the patient has no intravenous access, reflecting absence of complications in general. On the day when all three criteria were fulfilled, hospital stay was no longer considered to be sensitive to nutritional support. Actual LOS is also reported. Incidence and severity of complications were recorded to explain LOSNDI findings. As a secondary endpoint, quality of life was evaluated by the Short Form 36 (SF-36) questionnaire.

RESULTS

Intervention led to an intake of > or = 75% of requirements in 62% of the intervention patients, as compared to 36% of the control patients. Rates of complications, mean LOSNDI and LOS were not significantly different between the two study groups. However, among patients with complications a difference in LOSNDI between intervention patients (14 +/- 2 days, mean +/- SE) and control patients (20 +/- 2 days) was statistically significant (P = 0.015). In the same patients, LOS was 17 +/- 2 days in the intervention group and 22 +/- 2 days in the control group (P = 0.028). The SF-36 questionnaire did not show a significant effect of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Protein and energy intake of nutritionally at-risk patients was increased which resulted in shortening of the part of the length of stay that was considered to be sensitive to nutritional support (LOSNDI) and shorter length of stay (LOS) among patients with complications.

Frequency of under- and overfeeding in mechanically ventilated ICU patients: causes and possible consequences

INTRODUCTION

In critically ill patients enteral nutrition (EN) is frequently associated with underfeeding and intolerance, whilst parenteral nutrition (PN) has been associated with a greater risk of infectious complications and overfeeding.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The adequacy of nutritional support provided to critically ill patients was prospectively recorded and compared with estimated requirements. The incidence of, and practices contributing to, under- (<80% of energy requirements) and overfeeding (>110% of energy requirements) were identified.

RESULTS

Overall patients received approximately 81% and 76% of prescribed energy and protein intakes respectively. Underfeeding occurred on 50.3% of days. Reasons for patients failing to achieve adequate intakes included, fasting for airway management procedures (21%) and gastrointestinal intolerance (14%). Overfeeding, although less common (18.6% of days), was more likely to occur in patients with a tracheostomy requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation (>16 days). The combination of oral and nasogastric feeding or use of nutrient-dense feeds were most frequently associated with overfeeding. Discussion The overall adequacy of nutritional intakes in the present study was similar to those reported elsewhere. However, the incidence of overfeeding was greater than anticipated and occurred in patients already experiencing delayed weaning from mechanical ventilation.

Review of the refeeding syndrome

Refeeding syndrome describes a constellation of metabolic disturbances that occur as a result of reinstitution of nutrition to patients who are starved or severely malnourished. Patients can develop fluid and electrolyte disorders, especially hypophosphatemia, along with neurologic, pulmonary, cardiac, neuromuscular, and hematologic complications. We reviewed literature on refeeding syndrome and the associated electrolyte abnormalities, fluid disturbances, and associated complications. In addition to assessing scientific literature, we also considered clinical experience and judgment in developing recommendations for prevention and treatment of refeeding syndrome. The most important steps are to identify patients at risk for developing refeeding syndrome, institute nutrition support cautiously, and correct and supplement electrolyte and vitamin deficiencies to avoid refeeding syndrome. We provide suggestions for the prevention of refeeding syndrome and suggestions for treatment of electrolyte disturbances and complications in patients who develop refeeding syndrome, according to evidence in the literature, the pathophysiology of refeeding syndrome, and clinical experience and judgment.

Nutrition in the hospitalized patient

Almost 50% of patients are malnourished on admission; many others develop malnutrition during admission. Malnutrition contributes to hospital morbidity, mortality, costs, and readmissions. The Joint Commission requires malnutrition risk screening on admission. If screening identifies malnutrition risk, a nutrition assessment is required to create a nutrition care plan. The plan should be initiated early in the hospital course, as even patients with normal nutrition become malnourished quickly when acutely ill. While the Harris-Benedict equation is the most commonly used method to estimate calories, its accuracy may not be optimal in all patients. Calculating the caloric needs of acutely ill obese patients is particularly problematic. In general, a patient's caloric intake should be slightly less than calculated needs to avoid the metabolic risks of overfeeding. However, most patients do not receive their goal calories or receive parenteral nutrition due to erroneous practices of awaiting return of bowel sounds or holding feeding for gastric residual volumes. Patients with inadequate intake over time may develop potentially fatal refeeding syndrome. The hospitalist must be able to recognize the risk factors for malnutrition, patients at risk of refeeding syndrome, and the optimal route for nutrition support. Finally, education of patients and their caregivers about nutrition support must begin before discharge, and include coordination of care with outpatient facilities. As with all other aspects of discharge, it is the hospitalist's role to assure smooth transition of the nutrition care plan to an outpatient setting.

Early Interdisciplinary Supportive Care in Patients With Previously Untreated Metastatic Esophagogastric Cancer: A Phase III Randomized Controlled Trial

PURPOSE

Effective interventions to improve prognosis in metastatic esophagogastric cancer (EGC) are urgently needed. We assessed the effect of the early integration of interdisciplinary supportive care for patients with metastatic EGC on overall survival (OS).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

An open-label, phase III, randomized, controlled trial was conducted at Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute. Patients with previously untreated metastatic EGC were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to either early interdisciplinary supportive care (ESC) integrated into standard oncologic care or standard care (SC). ESC was provided by a team of GI medical oncologists, oncology nurse specialists, dietitians, and psychologists; patients in the SC group received standard oncologic care alone. The primary end point was OS in the intention-to-treat population.

RESULTS

Between April 16, 2015, and December 29, 2017, 328 patients were enrolled: 214 in the ESC group and 114 in the SC group. At the data cutoff date of January 26, 2019, 15 (5%) patients were lost to follow-up. The median number of cycles of first-line chemotherapy was five (interquartile range [IQR], 4-7) in the ESC group and four (IQR, 2-6) in the SC group. The median OS was 14.8 months (95% CI, 13.3 to 16.3) in the ESC group and 11.9 months (95% CI, 9.6 to 13.6) in the SC group (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.9; P = .021).

CONCLUSION

The early integration of interdisciplinary supportive care is an effective intervention with survival benefits for patients with metastatic EGC. Further optimization and standardization are warranted.

The refeeding syndrome and hypophosphatemia

The refeeding syndrome is an underappreciated entity characterized by acute electrolyte derangements--notably hypophosphatemia--that occur during nutritional repletion of patients with significant suboptimal caloric intake. Adverse effects of hypophosphatemia include cardiac failure, muscle weakness, immune dysfunction, and death. Hypokalemia and hypomagnesemia commonly complicate refeeding syndrome as well; however, this report briefly reviews the clinical manifestations of refeeding-induced hypophosphatemia.

Nutritional supplementation for hip fracture aftercare in older people

BACKGROUND

Older people with hip fractures are often malnourished at the time of fracture, and subsequently have poor food intake. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2000, and previously updated in 2010.

OBJECTIVES

To review the effects (benefits and harms) of nutritional interventions in older people recovering from hip fracture.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Embase, CAB Abstracts, CINAHL, trial registers and reference lists. The search was last run in November 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of nutritional interventions for people aged over 65 years with hip fracture where the interventions were started within the first month after hip fracture.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Where possible, we pooled data for primary outcomes which were: all cause mortality; morbidity; postoperative complications (e.g. wound infections, pressure sores, deep venous thromboses, respiratory and urinary infections, cardiovascular events); and 'unfavourable outcome' defined as the number of trial participants who died plus the number of survivors with complications. We also pooled data for adverse events such as diarrhoea.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 41 trials involving 3881 participants. Outcome data were limited and risk of bias assessment showed that trials were often methodologically flawed, with less than half of trials at low risk of bias for allocation concealment, incomplete outcome data, or selective reporting of outcomes. The available evidence was judged of either low or very low quality indicating that we were uncertain or very uncertain about the estimates.Eighteen trials evaluated oral multinutrient feeds that provided non-protein energy, protein, vitamins and minerals. There was low-quality evidence that oral feeds had little effect on mortality (24/486 versus 31/481; risk ratio (RR) 0.81 favouring supplementation, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49 to 1.32; 15 trials). Thirteen trials evaluated the effect of oral multinutrient feeds on complications (e.g. pressure sore, infection, venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, confusion). There was low-quality evidence that the number of participants with complications may be reduced with oral multinutrient feeds (123/370 versus 157/367; RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.86; 11 trials). Based on very low-quality evidence from six studies (334 participants), oral supplements may result in lower numbers with 'unfavourable outcome' (death or complications): RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.89. There was very low-quality evidence for six studies (442 participants) that oral supplementation did not result in an increased incidence of vomiting and diarrhoea (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.05).Only very low-quality evidence was available from the four trials examining nasogastric multinutrient feeding. Pooled data from three heterogeneous trials showed no evidence of an effect of supplementation on mortality (14/142 versus 14/138; RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.97). One trial (18 participants) found no difference in complications. None reported on unfavourable outcome. Nasogastric feeding was poorly tolerated. One study reported no cases of aspiration pneumonia.There is very low-quality evidence from one trial (57 participants, mainly men) of no evidence for an effect of tube feeding followed by oral supplementation on mortality or complications. Tube feeding, however, was poorly tolerated.There is very low-quality evidence from one trial (80 participants) that a combination of intravenous feeding and oral supplements may not affect mortality but could reduce complications. However, this expensive intervention is usually reserved for people with non-functioning gastrointestinal tracts, which is unlikely in this trial.Four trials tested increasing protein intake in an oral feed. These provided low-quality evidence for no clear effect of increased protein intake on mortality (30/181 versus 21/180; RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.85 to 2.37; 4 trials) or number of participants with complications but very low-quality and contradictory evidence of a reduction in unfavourable outcomes (66/113 versus 82/110; RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.95; 2 trials). There was no evidence of an effect on adverse events such as diarrhoea.Trials testing intravenous vitamin B1 and other water soluble vitamins, oral 1-alpha-hydroxycholecalciferol (vitamin D), high dose bolus vitamin D, different oral doses or sources of vitamin D, intravenous or oral iron, ornithine alpha-ketoglutarate versus an isonitrogenous peptide supplement, taurine versus placebo, and a supplement with vitamins, minerals and amino acids, provided low- or very low-quality evidence of no clear effect on mortality or complications, where reported.Based on low-quality evidence, one trial evaluating the use of dietetic assistants to help with feeding indicated that this intervention may reduce mortality (19/145 versus 36/157; RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.95) but not the number of participants with complications (79/130 versus 84/125).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is low-quality evidence that oral multinutrient supplements started before or soon after surgery may prevent complications within the first 12 months after hip fracture, but that they have no clear effect on mortality. There is very low-quality evidence that oral supplements may reduce 'unfavourable outcome' (death or complications) and that they do not result in an increased incidence of vomiting and diarrhoea. Adequately sized randomised trials with robust methodology are required. In particular, the role of dietetic assistants, and peripheral venous feeding or nasogastric feeding in very malnourished people require further evaluation.

Refeeding syndrome is associated with increased mortality in malnourished medical inpatients: Secondary analysis of a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Whether the occurrence of refeeding syndrome (RFS), a metabolic condition characterized by electrolyte shifts after initiation of nutritional therapy, has a negative impact on clinical outcomes remains ill-defined. We prospectively investigated a subgroup of patients included in a multicentre, nutritional trial (EFFORT) for the occurrence of RFS.

METHODS

In this secondary analysis of a randomized-controlled trial investigating the effects of nutritional support in malnourished medical inpatients, we prospectively screened patients for RFS and classified them as "RFS confirmed" and "RFS not confirmed" based on predefined criteria (i.e. electrolyte shifts, clinical symptoms, clinical context, and patient history). We assessed associations of RFS and mortality within 180 days (primary endpoint) and other secondary endpoints using multivariable regression analysis.

RESULTS

Among 967 included patients, RFS was confirmed in 141 (14.6%) patients. Compared to patients with no evidence for RFS, patients with confirmed RFS had significantly increased 180-days mortality rates (42/141 (29.8%) vs 181/826 (21.9%), adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.53 (95% CI 1.02 to 2.29), P < .05). Patients with RFS also had an increased risk for ICU admission (6/141 (4.3%) vs 13/826 (1.6%), adjusted OR 2.71 (95% CI 1.01 to 7.27), P < .05) and longer mean length of hospital stays (10.5 ± 6.9 vs 9.0 ± 6.6 days, adjusted difference 1.57 days (95% CI 0.38-2.75), P = .01).

CONCLUSION

A relevant proportion of medical inpatients with malnutrition develop features of RFS upon hospital admission, which is associated with long-term mortality and other adverse clinical outcomes. Further studies are needed to develop preventive strategies for RFS in this patient population.

The metabolic response to spinal cord injury

The metabolic response to trauma, including neurotrauma in general, has been studied extensively, but the acute metabolic response to spinal cord injury (SCI) has not. Therefore, 12 patients with SCI are presented in whom intensive nutrition assessment and management were instituted immediately after injury. Nitrogen balance (NB), predicted energy expenditure (PEE), and actual energy expenditure (MEE) were calculated or measured in each patient. A persistent negative NB was observed in all but one of the 12 patients. The single patient who did not exhibit persistent negative NB (no positive NB from week 2 to week 4 in the face of appropriate feeding) had an incomplete myelopathy, thus implying that the degree of motor dysfunction correlates with the obligatory nature of the negative NB. The negative NB observed in several of the patients did not occur until the second or third post-injury week. In addition, calculations of PEE by successively multiplying the Harris-Benedict equation by an activity factor of 1.2 and then by a stress factor of 1.6, resulted in excessive feeding (as assessed by metabolic cart measurements; ie indirect calorimetry) in the majority of the patients. In all of the 11 patients with persistent negative NBs, protein administration in the amount of 2 g/k of ideal body weight and aggressive caloric delivery did not alter the negative pattern of the NBs. Therefore, it is concluded that the negative NB following SCI is obligatory. Furthermore, the extent of SCI (extent of myelopathy or of neurological injury) correlates with the obligatory nature of the negative NB. In addition, the results from using the above method for estimating caloric requirements and the delayed manifestation of the negative NB may cause an additional tendency to acutely overfeed SCI patients. Therefore, eliminating the activity factor of 1.2 (due to the diminished activity arising from paralysis) and a diminution of the stress factor is recommended for initial PEE calculations. Serial metabolic cart (indirect calorimetry) measurements are recommended to accurately assess the patient's subsequent metabolic requirements.

Nutrition Support Teams: An Evidence-Based Practice

With the development of specialized nutrition support, an interdisciplinary approach was essential to translating this medical breakthrough from the laboratory to the bedside. As this new innovation was adopted, interdisciplinary nutrition support teams were created to optimize the effectiveness and safety of this therapy. The impact of standardization and the use of an interdisciplinary team to provide specialized nutrition support have been shown to improve outcomes and safety and to have a positive financial impact on healthcare institutions. Yet many hospitals do not have nutrition support teams, and the numbers that do may have decreased. To be effective, nutrition support teams need to practice at an evidence-based level and measure their performance. Nutrition support teams include many of the components of the healthcare delivery system that are advocated for the future, and nutrition support teams should be encouraged as the preferred system of providing specialized nutrition support.

Nutrition in the Intensive Care Unit-A Narrative Review

Background: While consent exists, that nutritional status has prognostic impact in the critically ill, the optimal feeding strategy has been a matter of debate. Methods: Narrative review of the recent evidence and international guideline recommendations focusing on basic principles of nutrition in the ICU and the treatment of specific patient groups. Covered topics are: the importance and diagnosis of malnutrition in the ICU, the optimal timing and route of nutrition, energy and protein requirements, the supplementation of specific nutrients, as well as monitoring and complications of a Medical Nutrition Therapy (MNT). Furthermore, this review summarizes the available evidence to optimize the MNT of patients grouped by primarily affected organ system. Results: Due to the considerable heterogeneity of the critically ill, MNT should be carefully adapted to the individual patient with special focus on phase of critical illness, metabolic tolerance, leading symptoms, and comorbidities. Conclusion: MNT in the ICU is complex and requiring an interdisciplinary approach and frequent reevaluation. The impact of personalized and disease-specific MNT on patient-centered clinical outcomes remains to be elucidated.

Biomarkers in critical care nutrition

The goal of nutrition support is to provide the substrates required to match the bioenergetic needs of the patient and promote the net synthesis of macromolecules required for the preservation of lean mass, organ function, and immunity. Contemporary observational studies have exposed the pervasive undernutrition of critically ill patients and its association with adverse clinical outcomes. The intuitive hypothesis is that optimization of nutrition delivery should improve ICU clinical outcomes. It is therefore surprising that multiple large randomized controlled trials have failed to demonstrate the clinical benefit of restoring or maximizing nutrient intake. This may be in part due to the absence of biological markers that identify patients who are most likely to benefit from nutrition interventions and that monitor the effects of nutrition support. Here, we discuss the need for practical risk stratification tools in critical care nutrition, a proposed rationale for targeted biomarker development, and potential approaches that can be adopted for biomarker identification and validation in the field.

Refeeding in the ICU: an adult and pediatric problem

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To describe the etiology and complications of the refeeding syndrome.

RECENT FINDINGS

Complications of the refeeding syndrome can include electrolyte abnormalities, heart failure, respiratory failure, and death. This syndrome is of particular importance to critically ill patients, who can be moved from the starved state to the fed state rapidly via enteral or parenteral nutrition. There are a variety of risk factors for the development of the refeeding syndrome. All of these risk factors are tied together by starvation physiology. Case reports and case series continue to be reported, suggesting that this entity continues to exist in critically ill patients. Initiation of enteral nutrition to patients with starvation physiology should be gradual and careful monitoring of electrolytes and organ function is critical during the early stages of refeeding.

SUMMARY

The refeeding syndrome remains a significant issue in critically ill patients. Knowledge of the risk factors and the clinical signs of the refeeding syndrome is important to optimize outcomes.

Supportive nutrition on recovery of metabolism, nutritional state, health-related quality of life, and exercise capacity after major surgery: a randomized study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The aim of this study was to investigate whether specialized supportive enteral and parenteral feeding have superior effects compared to oral nutrition on recovery during long-term postoperative treatment of cancer patients with preoperative weight loss and reduced maximum exercise capacity.

METHODS

One hundred twenty-six patients referred for resection of the esophagus (n = 48), stomach (n = 28), or pancreas (n = 50) were considered to be included before operation. Included patients (n = 80) received supportive enteral or parenteral nutrition postoperatively at home corresponding to 1000 kcal/d until the patients did not wish to continue with artificial nutrition for any reason. Patients randomized to oral nutrition only served as control subjects. Caloric intake, body composition (dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry), and respiratory gas exchanges at rest and during exercise were measured including health-related quality of life.

RESULTS

Survival and hospital stay did not differ among the groups, whereas overall complications were higher on artificial nutrition (P < .05). Changes in resting energy expenditure and biochemical tests did not differ during follow-up among the groups. Body weight and whole body fat declined similarly over time in all groups (P < .005), whereas lean body mass was unchanged during follow-up compared to preoperative values. Maximum exercise capacity and maximum oxygen consumption were normalized within 6 months postoperatively in all groups. There was no difference in recovery of food intake among the groups. Parenteral feeding was associated with the highest rate of nutrition-related complications, whereas enteral feeding reduced quality of life most extensively.

CONCLUSION

After major surgery, specialized supportive enteral and parenteral nutrition are not superior to oral nutrition only when guided by a dietitian.

Nutrition support in hospitalised adults at nutritional risk

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of disease-related malnutrition in Western European hospitals is estimated to be about 30%. There is no consensus whether poor nutritional status causes poorer clinical outcome or if it is merely associated with it. The intention with all forms of nutrition support is to increase uptake of essential nutrients and improve clinical outcome. Previous reviews have shown conflicting results with regard to the effects of nutrition support.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of nutrition support versus no intervention, treatment as usual, or placebo in hospitalised adults at nutritional risk.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (Ovid SP), Embase (Ovid SP), LILACS (BIREME), and Science Citation Index Expanded (Web of Science). We also searched the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (www.who.int/ictrp); ClinicalTrials.gov; Turning Research Into Practice (TRIP); Google Scholar; and BIOSIS, as well as relevant bibliographies of review articles and personal files. All searches are current to February 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We include randomised clinical trials, irrespective of publication type, publication date, and language, comparing nutrition support versus control in hospitalised adults at nutritional risk. We exclude trials assessing non-standard nutrition support.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane and the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group. We used trial domains to assess the risks of systematic error (bias). We conducted Trial Sequential Analyses to control for the risks of random errors. We considered a P value of 0.025 or less as statistically significant. We used GRADE methodology. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, and health-related quality of life.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 244 randomised clinical trials with 28,619 participants that met our inclusion criteria. We considered all trials to be at high risk of bias. Two trials accounted for one-third of all included participants. The included participants were heterogenous with regard to disease (20 different medical specialties). The experimental interventions were parenteral nutrition (86 trials); enteral nutrition (tube-feeding) (80 trials); oral nutrition support (55 trials); mixed experimental intervention (12 trials); general nutrition support (9 trials); and fortified food (2 trials). The control interventions were treatment as usual (122 trials); no intervention (107 trials); and placebo (15 trials). In 204/244 trials, the intervention lasted three days or more.We found no evidence of a difference between nutrition support and control for short-term mortality (end of intervention). The absolute risk was 8.3% across the control groups compared with 7.8% (7.1% to 8.5%) in the intervention groups, based on the risk ratio (RR) of 0.94 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.86 to 1.03, P = 0.16, 21,758 participants, 114 trials, low quality of evidence). We found no evidence of a difference between nutrition support and control for long-term mortality (maximum follow-up). The absolute risk was 13.2% in the control group compared with 12.2% (11.6% to 13%) following nutritional interventions based on a RR of 0.93 (95% CI 0.88 to 0.99, P = 0.03, 23,170 participants, 127 trials, low quality of evidence). Trial Sequential Analysis showed we only had enough information to assess a risk ratio reduction of approximately 10% or more. A risk ratio reduction of 10% or more could be rejected.We found no evidence of a difference between nutrition support and control for short-term serious adverse events. The absolute risk was 9.9% in the control groups versus 9.2% (8.5% to 10%), with nutrition based on the RR of 0.93 (95% CI 0.86 to 1.01, P = 0.07, 22,087 participants, 123 trials, low quality of evidence). At long-term follow-up, the reduction in the risk of serious adverse events was 1.5%, from 15.2% in control groups to 13.8% (12.9% to 14.7%) following nutritional support (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.85 to 0.97, P = 0.004, 23,413 participants, 137 trials, low quality of evidence). However, the Trial Sequential Analysis showed we only had enough information to assess a risk ratio reduction of approximately 10% or more. A risk ratio reduction of 10% or more could be rejected.Trial Sequential Analysis of enteral nutrition alone showed that enteral nutrition might reduce serious adverse events at maximum follow-up in people with different diseases. We could find no beneficial effect of oral nutrition support or parenteral nutrition support on all-cause mortality and serious adverse events in any subgroup.Only 16 trials assessed health-related quality of life. We performed a meta-analysis of two trials reporting EuroQoL utility score at long-term follow-up and found very low quality of evidence for effects of nutritional support on quality of life (mean difference (MD) -0.01, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.01; 3961 participants, two trials). Trial Sequential Analyses showed that we did not have enough information to confirm or reject clinically relevant intervention effects on quality of life.Nutrition support may increase weight at short-term follow-up (MD 1.32 kg, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.00, 5445 participants, 68 trials, very low quality of evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is low-quality evidence for the effects of nutrition support on mortality and serious adverse events. Based on the results of our review, it does not appear to lead to a risk ratio reduction of approximately 10% or more in either all-cause mortality or serious adverse events at short-term and long-term follow-up.There is very low-quality evidence for an increase in weight with nutrition support at the end of treatment in hospitalised adults determined to be at nutritional risk. The effects of nutrition support on all remaining outcomes are unclear.Despite the clinically heterogenous population and the high risk of bias of all included trials, our analyses showed limited signs of statistical heterogeneity. Further trials may be warranted, assessing enteral nutrition (tube-feeding) for different patient groups. Future trials ought to be conducted with low risks of systematic errors and low risks of random errors, and they also ought to assess health-related quality of life.

Risks and benefits of nutritional support during critical illness

Critically ill patients who depend on intensive care for more than a few days reveal profound erosion of lean body mass, which is thought to contribute to high morbidity and mortality. Despite a shortfall of evidence that supplemental feeding actually alters clinical outcome of these life-threatening disease states, this observation evoked an almost universal, albeit often inappropriate, use of nutritional support (NS) in the critically ill, administered via the parenteral or the enteral route. Lack of knowledge and overenthusiasm subsequently resulted in complications associated with both parenteral nutrition (PN) and enteral nutrition (EN), which led to the standing controversy over which should be preferred. With time, however, it became clear that EN and PN are not mutually exclusive and that critically ill patients requiring NS should be fed according to the functional status of the gastrointestinal tract. In addition, tight blood glucose control with insulin is advised in fed critically ill patients because overall metabolic control appears to surpass any outcome benefit attributed to the route of feeding. Recently, various special nutritional formulas have been suggested to prevent or treat multiorgan failure in the critically ill, among other pathways via modulation of immune function. Although special nutritional formulas may be promising in a variety of clinical settings, based on currently available data, these cannot be recommended for routine use in critically ill patients.

Nutritional Support and Physical Modalities for People with Osteoporosis: Current Opinion

Osteoporosis is a vital healthcare issue among elderly people. During the aging process, a gradual loss of bone mass results in osteopenia and osteoporosis. Heritable factors account for 60%-80% of optimal bone mineralization, whereas modifiable factors such as nutrition, weight-bearing exercise, body mass, and hormonal milieu affect the development of osteopenia and osteoporosis in adulthood. Osteoporosis substantially increases the risk of skeletal fractures and further morbidity and mortality. The effective prevention of fractures by reducing the loss of bone mass is the primary goal for physicians treating people with osteoporosis. Other than pharmacologic agents, lifestyle adjustment, nutritional support, fall prevention strategies, exercise, and physical modalities can be used to treat osteoporosis or prevent further osteoporotic fracture. Each of these factors, alone or in combination, can be of benefit to people with osteoporosis and should be implemented following a detailed discussion with patients. This review comprises a systematic survey of the current literature on osteoporosis and its nonpharmacologic and nonsurgical treatment. It provides clinicians and healthcare workers with evidence-based information on the assessment and management of osteoporosis. However, numerous issues regarding osteoporosis and its treatment remain unexplored and warrant future investigation.

Nutrition support for patients in the intensive care unit

Enteral nutrition (EN) is the mainstay of nutrition delivery within intensive care seeking to capitalise on its benefits for the gastrointestinal tract and associated immune system, but this has brought new challenges in delivery to the sick. The hoped for benefit has led to the mistaken belief by some that parenteral nutrition (PN) is no longer required. However, a greater appreciation of the risks of EN delivery in the sick patient combined with improvements in PN formulation and use help explain why PN is not as risky as some have believed. Real outcome benefits have been described with the new glutamine containing PN formulations. PN remains important in the presence of gastrointestinal feed intolerance or failure.