-
Nutrients May 2022Enteral nutrition (EN) provides critical macro and micronutrients to individuals who cannot maintain sufficient oral intake to meet their nutritional needs. EN is most... (Review)
Review
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.
Topics: Clinical Protocols; Enteral Nutrition; Food, Formulated; Humans; Intubation, Gastrointestinal; Micronutrients
PubMed: 35683980
DOI: 10.3390/nu14112180 -
Intensive Care Medicine Mar 2017To provide evidence-based guidelines for early enteral nutrition (EEN) during critical illness. (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
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.
Topics: Cohort Studies; Critical Illness; Enteral Nutrition; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Time Factors
PubMed: 28168570
DOI: 10.1007/s00134-016-4665-0 -
World Journal of Gastroenterology Jun 2014Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is the preferred route of feeding and nutritional support in patients with a functional gastrointestinal system who require... (Review)
Review
Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is the preferred route of feeding and nutritional support in patients with a functional gastrointestinal system who require long-term enteral nutrition. Besides its well-known advantages over parenteral nutrition, PEG offers superior access to the gastrointestinal system over surgical methods. Considering that nowadays PEG tube placement is one of the most common endoscopic procedures performed worldwide, knowing its indications and contraindications is of paramount importance in current medicine. PEG tubes are sometimes placed inappropriately in patients unable to tolerate adequate oral intake because of incorrect and unrealistic understanding of their indications and what they can accomplish. Broadly, the two main indications of PEG tube placement are enteral feeding and stomach decompression. On the other hand, distal enteral obstruction, severe uncorrectable coagulopathy and hemodynamic instability constitute the main absolute contraindications for PEG tube placement in hospitalized patients. Although generally considered to be a safe procedure, there is the potential for both minor and major complications. Awareness of these potential complications, as well as understanding routine aftercare of the catheter, can improve the quality of care for patients with a PEG tube. These complications can generally be classified into three major categories: endoscopic technical difficulties, PEG procedure-related complications and late complications associated with PEG tube use and wound care. In this review we describe a variety of minor and major tube-related complications as well as strategies for their management and avoidance. Different methods of percutaneous PEG tube placement into the stomach have been described in the literature with the "pull" technique being the most common method. In the last section of this review, the reader is presented with a brief discussion of these procedures, techniques and related issues. Despite the mentioned PEG tube placement complications, this procedure has gained worldwide popularity as a safe enteral access for nutrition in patients with a functional gastrointestinal system.
Topics: Device Removal; Enteral Nutrition; Equipment Design; Gastroscopy; Gastrostomy; Humans; Postoperative Complications; Risk Factors; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 24976711
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i24.7739 -
World Journal of Gastroenterology Jul 2014Gastroenteric tube feeding plays a major role in the management of patients with poor voluntary intake, chronic neurological or mechanical dysphagia or gut dysfunction,... (Review)
Review
Gastroenteric tube feeding plays a major role in the management of patients with poor voluntary intake, chronic neurological or mechanical dysphagia or gut dysfunction, and patients who are critically ill. However, despite the benefits and widespread use of enteral tube feeding, some patients experience complications. This review aims to discuss and compare current knowledge regarding the clinical application of enteral tube feeding, together with associated complications and special aspects. We conducted an extensive literature search on PubMed, Embase and Medline using index terms relating to enteral access, enteral feeding/nutrition, tube feeding, percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy/jejunostomy, endoscopic nasoenteric tube, nasogastric tube, and refeeding syndrome. The literature showed common routes of enteral access to include nasoenteral tube, gastrostomy and jejunostomy, while complications fall into four major categories: mechanical, e.g., tube blockage or removal; gastrointestinal, e.g., diarrhea; infectious e.g., aspiration pneumonia, tube site infection; and metabolic, e.g., refeeding syndrome, hyperglycemia. Although the type and frequency of complications arising from tube feeding vary considerably according to the chosen access route, gastrointestinal complications are without doubt the most common. Complications associated with enteral tube feeding can be reduced by careful observance of guidelines, including those related to food composition, administration rate, portion size, food temperature and patient supervision.
Topics: Cooperative Behavior; Enteral Nutrition; Gastrointestinal Diseases; Humans; Lung Diseases; Metabolic Diseases; Nutritional Status; Patient Care Team; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 25024606
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i26.8505 -
Annals of Palliative Medicine Jan 2016In cancer patients, weight loss is an ominous sign suggesting disease progression and shortened survival time. As a result, providing nutrition support for cancer... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
In cancer patients, weight loss is an ominous sign suggesting disease progression and shortened survival time. As a result, providing nutrition support for cancer patients has been proposed as a logical approach for improving clinical outcomes. Nutrition support can be given to patients through enteral nutrition (EN) or parenteral nutrition (PN). The purpose of the review was to compare the outcomes of PN and EN in cancer patients.
METHODS
A literature search was conducted in Ovid MEDLINE and OLDMEDLINE, Embase Classic and Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Studies were included if over half of the patient population had cancer and reported on any of the following endpoints: the percentage of patients that experienced no infection, nutrition support complications, major complications or mortality. Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using Review Manager Version 5.3 were calculated. Primary endpoints were stratified according to type of EN for subgroup analysis, grouping studies into either tube feeding (TF) or standard care (SC). Additionally, another subgroup analysis was conducted comparing studies with protein-energy malnutrition (PEM) patients and studies without PEM patients.
RESULTS
The literature search yielded 674 articles of which 36 were included for the meta-analysis. There were no difference in the endpoints between the two study interventions except that PN resulted in more infection when compared with EN (RR =1.09, 95% CI: 1.01-1.18; P=0.03).
CONCLUSIONS
Other than increased incidence of infection, PN has not resulted in prolonging the survival, increasing nutrition support complications, or major complications when compared with EN in cancer patients.
Topics: Enteral Nutrition; Humans; Infection Control; Neoplasms; Nutritional Support; Parenteral Nutrition; Protein-Energy Malnutrition; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 26841813
DOI: 10.3978/j.issn.2224-5820.2016.01.01 -
Nutrients Feb 2013Nutritional support of surgical and critically ill patients has undergone significant advances since 1936 when Studley demonstrated a direct relationship between... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
Nutritional support of surgical and critically ill patients has undergone significant advances since 1936 when Studley demonstrated a direct relationship between pre-operative weight loss and operative mortality. The advent of total parenteral nutrition followed by the extraordinary progress in parenteral and enteral feedings, in addition to the increased knowledge of cellular biology and biochemistry, have allowed clinicians to treat malnutrition and improve surgical patient's outcomes. We reviewed the literature for the current status of perioperative nutrition comparing parenteral nutrition with enteral nutrition. In a surgical patient with established malnutrition, nutritional support should begin at least 7-10 days prior to surgery. Those patients in whom eating is not anticipated beyond the first five days following surgery should receive the benefits of early enteral or parenteral feeding depending on whether the gut can be used. Compared to parenteral nutrition, enteral nutrition is associated with fewer complications, a decrease in the length of hospital stay, and a favorable cost-benefit analysis. In addition, many patients may benefit from newer enteral formulations such as Immunonutrition as well as disease-specific formulations.
Topics: Cost-Benefit Analysis; Enteral Nutrition; Humans; Immunity; Length of Stay; Malnutrition; Nutrition Assessment; Nutritional Requirements; Parenteral Nutrition; Parenteral Nutrition, Total; Perioperative Care; Perioperative Period; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 23429491
DOI: 10.3390/nu5020608 -
JPEN. Journal of Parenteral and Enteral... May 2023Drug administration through feeding tubes presents many challenges to the healthcare provider. There is little information available on medications than can be delivered... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Drug administration through feeding tubes presents many challenges to the healthcare provider. There is little information available on medications than can be delivered safely when crushed and what efforts can be implemented to minimize clogging the feeding tube. Our institution requested a comprehensive examination of all oral medications for the feeding tube route.
METHODS
This report is a synopsis of the physical evaluation of 323 different oral medications for their appropriateness for feeding tube administration with distal site in either the stomach or jejunum. A worksheet was created for each medication. This document contained a review of the chemical and physical properties that would contribute to delivery of the medication. Each medication was then studied for the degree of disintegration, pH, osmolality, and potential to form clogs. For drugs that needed to be crushed, the volume of water needed to dissolve the drug, time for that process, and volume needed to rinse the tube after administration was also studied.
RESULTS
The results of this review are summarized in a table and based on a composite of the documents cited, tests conducted, and author's judgements based all the data collected. Thirty-six medications were identified as inappropriate for feeding tube administration, and an additional 46 medications were identified as inappropriate for direct jejunal administration.
CONCLUSION
The information produced by this study will enable clinicians to make informed choices in selecting, compounding, and rinsing medications through feeding tubes. Using the template provided, they will be able to evaluate a drug not studied here for potential issues in feeding tube administration.
Topics: Humans; Enteral Nutrition; Intubation, Gastrointestinal; Pharmaceutical Preparations; Osmolar Concentration; Health Personnel; Administration, Oral
PubMed: 36847617
DOI: 10.1002/jpen.2490 -
Nutrients Mar 2020Parenteral nutrition has evolved tremendously, with parenteral formulas now safer and more accessible than ever. "All-in-one" admixtures are now available, which... (Review)
Review
Parenteral nutrition has evolved tremendously, with parenteral formulas now safer and more accessible than ever. "All-in-one" admixtures are now available, which simplify parenteral nutrition usage and decrease line infection rates alongside other methods of infectious control. Recently published data on the benefits of parenteral nutrition versus enteral nutrition together with the widespread use of indirect calorimetry solve many safety issues that have emerged over the years. All these advances, alongside a better understanding of glycemic control and lipid and protein formulation improvements, make parenteral nutrition a safe alternative to enteral nutrition.
Topics: Calorimetry, Indirect; Enteral Nutrition; Food, Formulated; Humans; Nutritional Sciences; Parenteral Nutrition
PubMed: 32182654
DOI: 10.3390/nu12030717 -
BMJ Open Gastroenterology Jul 2022Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) was developed by Ponsky-Gauderer in the early 1980s. These tubes are placed through the abdominal wall mainly to administer... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) was developed by Ponsky-Gauderer in the early 1980s. These tubes are placed through the abdominal wall mainly to administer fluids, drugs and/or enteral nutrition but can also be used for drainage or decompression. The tubes consist of an internal and external retention device. It is a generally safe technique but major or minor complications may arise during and after tube placement.
METHOD
A narrative review of the literature investigating minor complications after PEG placement.
RESULTS
This review was written from a clinical viewpoint focusing on prevention and management of minor complications and documented with real cases from more than 21 years of clinical practice.
CONCLUSIONS
Depending on the literature the incidence of minor complications after gastrostomy placement can be high. To decrease associated morbidity, prevention, early recognition and popper management of these complications are important.
Topics: Enteral Nutrition; Gastrostomy
PubMed: 35851280
DOI: 10.1136/bmjgast-2022-000975 -
Clinics in Perinatology Sep 2023Establishing full enteral nutrition in critically ill preterm infants with immature gastrointestinal function is challenging. In this article, we will summarize emerging... (Review)
Review
Establishing full enteral nutrition in critically ill preterm infants with immature gastrointestinal function is challenging. In this article, we will summarize emerging clinical evidence from randomized clinical trials suggesting the feasibility and efficacy of feeding interventions targeting the early establishment of full enteral nutrition. We will also examine trial outcomes of higher volume feedings after the establishment of full enteral nutrition. Only data from randomized clinical trials will be discussed extensively. Future opportunities for clinical research will also be presented.
Topics: Humans; Infant, Newborn; Enteral Nutrition; Infant, Premature; Clinical Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37536767
DOI: 10.1016/j.clp.2023.04.005