-
Critical Care (London, England) Feb 2020Nutrition therapy during critical illness has been a focus of recent research, with a rapid increase in publications accompanied by two updated international clinical... (Review)
Review
Nutrition therapy during critical illness has been a focus of recent research, with a rapid increase in publications accompanied by two updated international clinical guidelines. However, the translation of evidence into practice is challenging due to the continually evolving, often conflicting trial findings and guideline recommendations. This narrative review aims to provide a comprehensive synthesis and interpretation of the adult critical care nutrition literature, with a particular focus on continuing practice gaps and areas with new data, to assist clinicians in making practical, yet evidence-based decisions regarding nutrition management during the different stages of critical illness.
Topics: Adult; Critical Care; Critical Illness; Enteral Nutrition; Humans; Nutritional Status; Nutritional Support; Parenteral Nutrition
PubMed: 32019607
DOI: 10.1186/s13054-020-2739-4 -
Nutrients Sep 2020Enteral nutrition (EN) is considered the first feeding route for critically ill patients. However, adverse effects such as gastrointestinal complications limit its... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
Effect of Supplemental Parenteral Nutrition Versus Enteral Nutrition Alone on Clinical Outcomes in Critically Ill Adult Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Enteral nutrition (EN) is considered the first feeding route for critically ill patients. However, adverse effects such as gastrointestinal complications limit its optimal provision, leading to inadequate energy and protein intake. We compared the clinical outcomes of supplemental parenteral nutrition added to EN (SPN + EN) and EN alone in critically ill adults. Electronic databases restricted to full-text randomized controlled trials available in the English language and published from January 1990 to January 2019 were searched. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Jadad scale, and the meta-analysis was conducted using the MedCalc software. A total of five studies were eligible for inclusion in the systematic review and meta-analysis. Compared to EN alone, SPN + EN decreased the risk of nosocomial infections (relative risk (RR) = 0.733, = 0.032) and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (RR = 0.569, = 0.030). No significant differences were observed between SPN + EN and EN in the length of hospital stay, hospital mortality, length of ICU stay, and duration of mechanical ventilation. In conclusion, when enteral feeding fails to fulfill the energy requirements in critically ill adult patients, SPN may be beneficial as it helps in decreasing nosocomial infections and ICU mortality, in addition to increasing energy and protein intakes with no negative effects on other clinical outcomes.
Topics: Adult; Combined Modality Therapy; Critical Care Outcomes; Critical Illness; Cross Infection; Dietary Supplements; Enteral Nutrition; Female; Hospital Mortality; Humans; Intensive Care Units; Length of Stay; Male; Parenteral Nutrition; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32998412
DOI: 10.3390/nu12102968 -
Annals of Palliative Medicine Oct 2021Nutritional support is very important in the treatment of severe acute pancreatitis, this study aimed to investigate the effect of total parenteral nutrition (TPN) and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Nutritional support is very important in the treatment of severe acute pancreatitis, this study aimed to investigate the effect of total parenteral nutrition (TPN) and enteral nutrition (TEN) on the prognosis of patients with acute pancreatitis.
METHODS
The databases of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Ovid were searched using the keywords acute pancreatitis, enteral nutrition, and parenteral nutrition to obtain the reports of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published after 2000. After screening the articles according to the inclusion criteria, risk of bias of the included literatures was evaluated using the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews. The software RevMan 5.3.5 was used for analysis and the creation of a forest plot and funnel plot.
RESULTS
A total of 488 literatures were preliminarily searched in this study, from which 10 articles were included into the final quantitative analysis, involving a total of 699 participants. A total of 6 literatures (n=329 participants) reported the infection rate indicators. The obtained statistic value [odds ratio (OR) =0.25, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.10 to 0.62] showed TEN had less infection rate that TPN (P=0.003). A total of 8 studies (654 participants) reported the incidence rate indicators of multiple organ failure rate indicator, the obtained statistic value (OR =0.50, 95% CI: 0.24 to 1.08) showed no statistical difference between TEN and TPN (P>0.05). A total of 7 studies (550 participants) reported the mortality indicators. The obtained statistic value (OR =0.59, 95% CI: 0.37 to 0.94) showed TEN had less mortality than TPN (P=0.03). A total of 3 studies reported the length of hospital stay indicators. The obtained statistic value [mean difference (MD) -4.18, 95% CI: -5.07 to -3.30] showed the length of hospital stay for TEN was shorter that TPN (P<0.001).
DISCUSSION
Compared with TPN, TEN can reduce the incidence of infection, reduce the development of multiple organ failure, reduce mortality, and shorten the length of hospital stay in patients with severe acute pancreatitis (SAP). However, attention should be paid to prevent the occurrence of complications during the implementation of nutritional intervention.
Topics: Enteral Nutrition; Humans; Pancreatitis; Parenteral Nutrition; Parenteral Nutrition, Total; Prognosis
PubMed: 34763439
DOI: 10.21037/apm-21-2469 -
Nutrients May 2023Short-bowel syndrome (SBS) in pediatric age is defined as a malabsorptive state, resulting from congenital malformations, significant small intestine surgical resection... (Review)
Review
Short-bowel syndrome (SBS) in pediatric age is defined as a malabsorptive state, resulting from congenital malformations, significant small intestine surgical resection or disease-associated loss of absorption. SBS is the leading cause of intestinal failure in children and the underlying cause in 50% of patients on home parental nutrition. It is a life-altering and life-threatening disease due to the inability of the residual intestinal function to maintain nutritional homeostasis of protein, fluid, electrolyte or micronutrient without parenteral or enteral supplementation. The use of parenteral nutrition (PN) has improved medical care in SBS, decreasing mortality and improving the overall prognosis. However, the long-term use of PN is associated with the incidence of many complications, including liver disease and catheter-associated malfunction and bloodstream infections (CRBSIs). This manuscript is a narrative review of the current available evidence on the management of SBS in the pediatric population, focusing on prognostic factors and outcome. The literature review showed that in recent years, the standardization of management has demonstrated to improve the quality of life in these complex patients. Moreover, the development of knowledge in clinical practice has led to a reduction in mortality and morbidity. Diagnostic and therapeutic decisions should be made by a multidisciplinary team that includes neonatologists, pediatric surgeons, gastroenterologists, pediatricians, nutritionists and nurses. A significant improvement in prognosis can occur through the careful monitoring of nutritional status, avoiding dependence on PN and favoring an early introduction of enteral nutrition, and through the prevention, diagnosis and aggressive treatment of CRSBIs and SIBO. Multicenter initiatives, such as research consortium or data registries, are mandatory in order to personalize the management of these patients, improve their quality of life and reduce the cost of care.
Topics: Child; Humans; Quality of Life; Short Bowel Syndrome; Intestine, Small; Intestines; Parenteral Nutrition; Multicenter Studies as Topic
PubMed: 37242224
DOI: 10.3390/nu15102341 -
Parenteral Nutrition: Current Use, Complications, and Nutrition Delivery in Critically Ill Patients.Nutrients Nov 2023Parenteral nutrition (PN) is needed to avoid the development of malnutrition when enteral nutrition (EN) is not possible. Our main aim was to assess the current use,... (Observational Study)
Observational Study
BACKGROUND
Parenteral nutrition (PN) is needed to avoid the development of malnutrition when enteral nutrition (EN) is not possible. Our main aim was to assess the current use, complications, and nutrition delivery associated with PN administration in adult critically ill patients, especially when used early and as the initial route. We also assessed the differences between patients who received only PN and those in whom EN was initiated after PN (PN-EN).
METHODS
A multicenter ( = 37) prospective observational study was performed. Patient clinical characteristics, outcomes, and nutrition-related variables were recorded. Statistical differences between subgroups were analyzed accordingly.
RESULTS
From the entire population ( = 629), 186 (29.6%) patients received PN as initial nutrition therapy. Of these, 74 patients (11.7%) also received EN during their ICU stay (i.e., PN-EN subgroup). PN was administered early (<48 h) in the majority of patients (75.3%; = 140) and the mean caloric (19.94 ± 6.72 Kcal/kg/day) and protein (1.01 ± 0.41 g/kg/day) delivery was similar to other contemporary studies. PN showed similar nutritional delivery when compared with the enteral route. No significant complications were associated with the use of PN. Thirty-two patients (43.3%) presented with EN-related complications in the PN-EN subgroup but received a higher mean protein delivery (0.95 ± 0.43 vs 1.17 ± 0.36 g/kg/day; = 0.03) compared with PN alone. Once adjusted for confounding factors, patients who received PN alone had a lower mean protein intake (hazard ratio (HR): 0.29; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.18-0.47; = 0.001), shorter ICU stay (HR: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.91-0.99; = 0.008), and fewer days on mechanical ventilation (HR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.81-0.89; = 0.001) compared with the PN-EN subgroup.
CONCLUSION
The parenteral route may be safe, even when administered early, and may provide adequate nutrition delivery. Additional EN, when possible, may optimize protein requirements, especially in more severe patients who received initial PN and are expected to have longer ICU stays. NCT Registry: 03634943.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Critical Illness; Intensive Care Units; Parenteral Nutrition; Nutritional Status; Nutritional Support
PubMed: 37960318
DOI: 10.3390/nu15214665 -
Cellular and Molecular Gastroenterology... 2022
Topics: AMP-Activated Protein Kinases; Humans; Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease; Parenteral Nutrition; Parenteral Nutrition, Total
PubMed: 35810785
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcmgh.2022.06.005 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2019Early enteral nutrition support (within 48 hours of admission or injury) is frequently recommended for the management of patients in intensive care units (ICU). Early... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Early enteral nutrition support (within 48 hours of admission or injury) is frequently recommended for the management of patients in intensive care units (ICU). Early enteral nutrition is recommended in many clinical practice guidelines, although there appears to be a lack of evidence for its use and benefit.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of early enteral nutrition (initiated within 48 hours of initial injury or ICU admission) versus delayed enteral nutrition (initiated later than 48 hours after initial injury or ICU admission), with or without supplemental parenteral nutrition, in critically ill adults.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL (2019, Issue 4), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to April 2019), Embase Ovid SP (1974 to April 2019), CINAHL EBSCO (1982 to April 2019), and ISI Web of Science (1945 to April 2019). We also searched Turning Research Into Practice (TRIP), trial registers (ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN registry), and scientific conference reports, including the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition and the European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism. We applied no restrictions by language or publication status.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared early versus delayed enteral nutrition, with or without supplemental parenteral nutrition, in adults who were in the ICU for longer than 72 hours. This included individuals admitted for medical, surgical, and trauma diagnoses, and who required any type of enteral nutrition.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors extracted study data and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies. We expressed results as risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous data, and as mean differences (MD) for continuous data, both with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included seven RCTs with a total of 345 participants. Outcome data were limited, and we judged many trials to have an unclear risk of bias in several domains. Early versus delayed enteral nutrition Six trials (318 participants) assessed early versus delayed enteral nutrition in general, medical, and trauma ICUs in the USA, Australia, Greece, India, and Russia. Primary outcomes Five studies (259 participants) measured mortality. It is uncertain whether early enteral nutrition affects the risk of mortality within 30 days (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.16 to 6.38; 1 study, 38 participants; very low-quality evidence). Four studies (221 participants) reported mortality without describing the timeframe; we did not pool these results. None of the studies reported a clear difference in mortality between groups. Three studies (156 participants) reported infectious complications. We were unable to pool the results due to unreported data and substantial clinical heterogeneity. The results were inconsistent across studies. One trial measured feed intolerance or gastrointestinal complications; it is uncertain whether early enteral nutrition affects this outcome (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.01; 59 participants; very low-quality evidence). Secondary outcomes One trial assessed hospital length of stay and reported a longer stay in the early enteral group (median 15 days (interquartile range (IQR) 9.5 to 20) versus 12 days (IQR 7.5 to15); P = 0.05; 59 participants; very low-quality evidence). Three studies (125 participants) reported the duration of mechanical ventilation. We did not pool the results due to clinical and statistical heterogeneity. The results were inconsistent across studies. It is uncertain whether early enteral nutrition affects the risk of pneumonia (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.06; 4 studies, 192 participants; very low-quality evidence). Early enteral nutrition with supplemental parenteral nutrition versus delayed enteral nutrition with supplemental parenteral nutrition We identified one trial in a burn ICU in the USA (27 participants). Primary outcomes It is uncertain whether early enteral nutrition with supplemental parenteral nutrition affects the risk of mortality (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.25 to 2.18; very low-quality evidence), or infectious complications (MD 0.00, 95% CI -1.94 to 1.94; very low-quality evidence). There were no data available for feed intolerance or gastrointestinal complications. Secondary outcomes It is uncertain whether early enteral nutrition with supplemental parenteral nutrition reduces the duration of mechanical ventilation (MD 9.00, 95% CI -10.99 to 28.99; very low-quality evidence). There were no data available for hospital length of stay or pneumonia.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Due to very low-quality evidence, we are uncertain whether early enteral nutrition, compared with delayed enteral nutrition, affects the risk of mortality within 30 days, feed intolerance or gastrointestinal complications, or pneumonia. Due to very low-quality evidence, we are uncertain if early enteral nutrition with supplemental parenteral nutrition compared with delayed enteral nutrition with supplemental parenteral nutrition reduces mortality, infectious complications, or duration of mechanical ventilation. There is currently insufficient evidence; there is a need for large, multicentred studies with rigorous methodology, which measure important clinical outcomes.
Topics: Combined Modality Therapy; Critical Illness; Enteral Nutrition; Humans; Intensive Care Units; Malnutrition; Parenteral Nutrition; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Time Factors
PubMed: 31684690
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012340.pub2 -
The Journal of Pediatrics Apr 2019
Topics: Cholestasis; Humans; Infant, Extremely Low Birth Weight; Infant, Newborn; Lipids; Parenteral Nutrition; Parenteral Nutrition, Total
PubMed: 30679054
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2018.12.044 -
Nutrition in Clinical Practice :... Jun 2015Parenteral nutrition (PN) is a life-sustaining therapy designed to deliver essential nutrients to patients unable to meet nutrition needs via the enteral route. PN may... (Review)
Review
Parenteral nutrition (PN) is a life-sustaining therapy designed to deliver essential nutrients to patients unable to meet nutrition needs via the enteral route. PN may be delivered via a 2-in-1 system (one solution containing amino acids, dextrose, electrolytes, vitamins, minerals, and fluids and one solution containing intravenous fat emulsions [IVFEs]) or via a 3-in-1 system (all nutrients mixed in one container). Although the use of 3-in-1 PN solutions is not necessarily therapeutically advantageous, certain benefits may exist such as the potential to reduce the risk of contamination due to decreased manipulations; ease of administration, particularly in the home care setting; possible cost savings; and reduced IVFE wastage. However, the incorporation of IVFE in 3-in-1 solutions also presents unique risks for the neonatal and pediatric population such as decreased stability, increased lipid globule size, decreased sterility and the potential for increased microbial growth/infectious complications, the need to use a larger filter size, precipitation and compatibility risks, and an increased chance of catheter occlusion. This review outlines the unique issues and challenges to be considered when formulating neonatal and pediatric 3-in-1 PN admixtures. While 3-in-1 PN solutions may be advantageous for certain pediatric populations, specifically those dependent on home PN, the risks do not outweigh the benefits in neonatal patients, and use should be avoided in this population.
Topics: Amino Acids; Child; Electrolytes; Fat Emulsions, Intravenous; Glucose; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Parenteral Nutrition; Pediatrics; Risk Assessment; Trace Elements; Vitamins
PubMed: 25857309
DOI: 10.1177/0884533615580596 -
Nutrients Feb 2022Necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) is the main gastrointestinal emergency of preterm infants for whom bowel rest and parenteral nutrition (PN) is essential. Despite the... (Review)
Review
Necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) is the main gastrointestinal emergency of preterm infants for whom bowel rest and parenteral nutrition (PN) is essential. Despite the improvements in neonatal care, the incidence of NEC remains high (11% in preterm newborns with a birth weight <1500 g) and up to 20−50% of cases still require surgery. In this narrative review, we report how to optimize PN in severe NEC requiring surgery. PN should begin as soon as possible in the acute phase: close fluid monitoring is advocated to maintain volemia, however fluid overload and electrolytes abnormalities should be prevented. Macronutrients intake (protein, glucose, and lipids) should be adequately guaranteed and is essential in each phase of the disease. Composite lipid emulsion should be the first choice to reduce the risk of parenteral nutrition associated liver disease (PNALD). Vitamin and trace elements deficiency or overload are frequent in long-term PN, therefore careful monitoring should be planned starting from the recovery phase to adjust their parenteral intake. Neonatologists must be aware of the role of nutrition especially in patients requiring long-term PN to sustain growth, limiting possible adverse effects and long-term deficiencies.
Topics: Enterocolitis, Necrotizing; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Premature; Micronutrients; Parenteral Nutrition; Parenteral Nutrition, Total; Preoperative Care
PubMed: 35267894
DOI: 10.3390/nu14050919