Early enteral immunonutrition vs. parenteral nutrition in critically ill patients without severe sepsis: a randomized clinical trial

The Japanese Critical Care Nutrition Guideline 2024

Nutrition therapy is important in the management of critically ill patients and is continuously evolving as new evidence emerges. The Japanese Critical Care Nutrition Guideline 2024 (JCCNG 2024) is specific to Japan and is the latest set of clinical practice guidelines for nutrition therapy in critical care that was revised from JCCNG 2016 by the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine. An English version of these guidelines was created based on the contents of the original Japanese version. These guidelines were developed to help health care providers understand and provide nutrition therapy that will improve the outcomes of children and adults admitted to intensive care units or requiring intensive care, regardless of the disease. The intended users of these guidelines are all healthcare professionals involved in intensive care, including those who are not familiar with nutrition therapy. JCCNG 2024 consists of 37 clinical questions and 24 recommendations, covering immunomodulation therapy, nutrition therapy for special conditions, and nutrition therapy for children. These guidelines were developed in accordance with the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system by experts from various healthcare professionals related to nutrition therapy and/or critical care. All GRADE-based recommendations, good practice statements (GPS), future research questions, and answers to background questions were finalized by consensus using the modified Delphi method. Strong recommendations for adults include early enteral nutrition (EN) within 48 h and the provision of pre/synbiotics. Weak recommendations for adults include the use of a nutrition protocol, EN rather than parenteral nutrition, the provision of higher protein doses, post-pyloric EN, continuous EN, omega-3 fatty acid-enriched EN, the provision of probiotics, and indirect calorimetry use. Weak recommendations for children include early EN within 48 h, bolus EN, and energy/protein-dense EN formulas. A nutritional assessment is recommended by GPS for both adults and children. JCCNG 2024 will be disseminated through educational activities mainly by the JCCNG Committee at various scientific meetings and seminars. Since studies on nutritional treatment for critically ill patients are being reported worldwide, these guidelines will be revised in 4 to 6 years. We hope that these guidelines will be used in clinical practice for critically ill patients and in future research.

Targeted nutritional strategies in postoperative care

Immunonutrition, which uses specific nutrients to modulate the immune response, has emerged as a vital adjunct to perioperative care. Surgery-induced stress triggers immune responses that can lead to complications, such as infections and delayed wound healing. Traditional nutritional support often overlooks the immunological needs of surgical patients. Immunonutrition addresses this oversight by providing key nutrients, such as arginine, omega-3 fatty acids, glutamine, nucleotides, and antioxidants (vitamins C and E) to enhance immune function and support tissue repair. This review examined the efficacy and safety of immunonutrition in surgical settings, guided by the recommendations of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition and the European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism. Both organizations recommend immunonutrition for high-risk or malnourished patients undergoing major surgery and support its use in reducing complications and improving recovery. The key nutrients in immunonutrition aim to improve immune cell function, reduce inflammation, and enhance wound healing. Clinical studies and meta-analyses have demonstrated that immunonutrition lowers the infection rate, shortens the length of hospital stay, and accelerates recovery. Challenges hindering the clinical application of immunonutrition include cost, logistics, and a lack of standardized and personalized protocols. Future studies should focus on biomarker-driven approaches, pharmacogenomics, and innovative nutrient formulations. Addressing these issues will help to integrate immunonutrition into clinical practice, ultimately improving surgical outcomes and patient recovery.

Comparison of Early Enteral Nutrition Versus Early Parenteral Nutrition in Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Nutritional support is crucial in critically ill patients to enhance recovery, reduce infections, and improve outcomes. This meta-analysis compared early enteral nutrition (EEN) and early parenteral nutrition (EPN) to evaluate their efficacy in adult critically ill patients.

METHODS

A systematic review of 14 studies involving 7618 patients was conducted, including randomized controlled trials, prospective cohorts, and retrospective analyses. The primary outcomes were mortality and infectious complications, while secondary outcomes included intensive care unit length of stay (ICU-LOS), hospital length of stay (H-LOS), mechanical ventilation days, and gastrointestinal (GI) complications.

RESULTS

The results showed no significant difference in mortality between EEN and EPN (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.93-1.14). EEN reduced bloodstream infections (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.57-0.93), ICU-LOS (MD -0.18 days, 95% CI -0.33 to -0.04), and H-LOS (MD -1.15 days, 95% CI -1.38 to -0.93). However, EEN was associated with higher GI complications, such as vomiting and diarrhea (OR 2.25, 95% CI 1.97-2.58), while mechanical ventilation days showed no significant difference.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings support prioritizing EEN in critically ill patients with functional gastrointestinal systems to improve infection control and recovery while emphasizing the importance of careful monitoring to mitigate gastrointestinal complications.

Enteral citrulline supplementation versus placebo on SOFA score on day 7 in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients: the IMMUNOCITRE randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Restoring plasma arginine levels through enteral administration of L-citrulline in critically ill patients may improve outcomes. We aimed to evaluate whether enteral L-citrulline administration reduced organ dysfunction based on the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score and affected selected immune parameters in mechanically ventilated medical intensive care unit (ICU) patients.

METHODS

A randomized, double-blind, multicenter clinical trial of enteral administration of L-citrulline versus placebo for critically ill adult patients under invasive mechanical ventilation without sepsis or septic shock was conducted in four ICUs in France between September 2016 and February 2019. Patients were randomly assigned to receive enteral L-citrulline (5 g) every 12 h for 5 days or isonitrogenous, isocaloric placebo. The primary outcome was the SOFA score on day 7. Secondary outcomes included SOFA score improvement (defined as a decrease in total SOFA score by 2 points or more between day 1 and day 7), secondary infection acquisition, ICU length of stay, plasma amino acid levels, and immune biomarkers on day 3 and day 7 (HLA-DR expression on monocytes and interleukin-6).

RESULTS

Of 120 randomized patients (mean age, 60 ± 17 years; 44 [36.7%] women; ICU stay 10 days [IQR, 7-16]; incidence of secondary infections 25 patients (20.8%)), 60 were allocated to L-citrulline and 60 were allocated to placebo. Overall, there was no significant difference in organ dysfunction as assessed by the SOFA score on day 7 after enrollment (4 [IQR, 2-6] in the L-citrulline group vs. 4 [IQR, 2-7] in the placebo group; Mann‒Whitney U test, p = 0.9). Plasma arginine was significantly increased on day 3 in the treatment group, while immune parameters remained unaffected.

CONCLUSION

Among mechanically ventilated ICU patients without sepsis or septic shock, enteral L-citrulline administration did not result in a significant difference in SOFA score on day 7 compared to placebo.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02864017 (date of registration: 11 August 2016).

Gastrin attenuates sepsis-induced myocardial dysfunction by down-regulation of TLR4 expression in macrophages

Myocardial dysfunction is the most serious complication of sepsis. Sepsis-induced myocardial dysfunction (SMD) is often associated with gastrointestinal dysfunction, but its pathophysiological significance remains unclear. The present study found that patients with SMD had higher plasma gastrin concentrations than those without SMD. In mice, knockdown of the gastrin receptor, cholecystokinin B receptor (Cckbr), aggravated lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced cardiac dysfunction and increased inflammation in the heart, whereas the intravenous administration of gastrin ameliorated SMD and cardiac injury. Macrophage infiltration plays a significant role in SMD because depletion of macrophages by the intravenous injection of clodronate liposomes, 48 h prior to LPS administration, alleviated LPS-induced cardiac injury in Cckbr-deficient mice. The intravenous injection of bone marrow macrophages (BMMs) overexpressing Cckbr reduced LPS-induced myocardial dysfunction. Furthermore, gastrin treatment inhibited toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) expression through the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor α (PPAR-α) signaling pathway in BMMs. Thus, our findings provide insights into the mechanism of the protective role of gastrin/CCKBR in SMD, which could be used to develop new treatment modalities for SMD.

Probiotic Supplementation Prevents the Development of Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia for Mechanically Ventilated ICU Patients: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is one of the common critical complications of nosocomial infection (NI) in invasive mechanically ventilated intensive care unit (ICU) patients. The efficacy of total parenteral nutrition (TPN), enteral nutrition and/or adjuvant peripheral parenteral nutrition (EPN) supplemented with or without probiotic, prebiotic, and synbiotic therapies in preventing VAP among these patients has been questioned. We aimed to systematically and comprehensively summarize all available studies to generate the best evidence of VAP prevention for invasive mechanically ventilated ICU patients.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for the administration of TPN, EPN, probiotics-supplemented EPN, prebiotics-supplemented EPN, and synbiotics-supplemented EPN for VAP prevention in invasive mechanically ventilated ICU patients were systematically retrieved from four electronic databases. The incidence of VAP was the primary outcome and was determined by the random-effects model of a Bayesian framework. The secondary outcomes were NI, ICU and hospital mortality, ICU and hospital length of stay, and mechanical ventilation duration. The registration number of Prospero is CRD42020195773.

Results

A total of 8339 patients from 31 RCTs were finally included in network meta-analysis. The primary outcome showed that probiotic-supplemented EPN had a higher correlation with the alleviation of VAP than EPN in critically invasive mechanically ventilated patients (odds ratio [OR] 0.75; 95% credible intervals [CrI] 0.58–0.95). Subgroup analyses showed that probiotic-supplemented EPN prevented VAP in trauma patients (OR 0.30; 95% CrI 0.13–0.83), mixed probiotic strain therapy was more effective in preventing VAP than EPN therapy (OR 0.55; 95% CrI 0.31–0.97), and low-dose probiotic therapy (less than 10¹⁰ CFU per day) was more associated with lowered incidence of VAP than EPN therapy (OR 0.16; 95% CrI 0.04–0.64). Secondary outcomes indicated that synbiotic-supplemented EPN therapy was more significantly related to decreased incidence of NI than EPN therapy (OR 0.34; 95% CrI 0.11–0.85). Prebiotic-supplemented EPN administration was the most effective in preventing diarrhea (OR 0.05; 95% CrI 0.00–0.71).

Conclusion

Probiotic supplementation shows promise in reducing the incidence of VAP in critically invasive mechanically ventilated patients. Currently, low quality of evidence reduces strong clinical recommendations. Further high-quality RCTs are needed to conclusively prove these findings.

Systamatic Review Registration

[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020195773], identifier [CRD42020195773].

Mortality and overall and specific infection complication rates in patients who receive parenteral nutrition: systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

Parenteral nutrition (PN) is an available option for nutritional therapy and is often required in the hospital setting to overcome malnutrition.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess whether PN is associated with an increased risk of mortality or infectious complications in all groups of hospitalized patients compared with those receiving other nutritional support strategies.

METHODS

For this systematic review and meta-analysis MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central, Scopus, clinicaltrials.gov, and Web of Science were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies with parallel groups that explored the effect of PN on mortality and infectious complications, published until March 2021. Two independent reviewers extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias. Fixed-effects meta-analysis was performed to compare the groups from RCTs. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was used to identify whether the results were sufficient to reach definitive conclusions.

RESULTS

Of the 83 included studies that compared patients receiving PN with those receiving other strategies, 67 RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. PN was not associated with a higher risk of mortality (RR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.95, 1.07). On the other hand, PN was associated with a higher risk of infectious events (RR: 1.23; 95% CI: 1.12, 1.36). PN was specifically associated with abdominal infection and catheter infection. The TSA showed that there were sufficient data to make numerical conclusions about mortality, any infectious event, and abdominal infectious complications.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that although PN is not associated with greater mortality in hospitalized patients, it is associated with infectious complications. Through TSA, definite conclusions about survival and infection rates could be made.This review was registered at www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ as CRD42018075599.

Beneficial Effect of Immune-Enhanced Enteral Nutrition on Immune Function in Patients With Severe Neurological Diseases: A Single-Center Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: Undernutrition is the main reason for the use of artificial nutrition in patients with severe neurological diseases. However, the clinical and immunological outcomes of enteral nutrition supplemented with immunomodulatory nutrients in these patients remain unclear.

Methods: In this single-center, randomized controlled study, 57 patients with severe neurological diseases were randomly divided into the following two groups according to the type of enteral nutrition they would receive: immune-enhancing (IE) (n = 27) and non-IE (NIE) (n = 30). The IE and NIE groups received enteral nutrition supplemented with immunomodulatory nutrients and standard enteral nutrition, respectively. We compared the nutritional status and the state of cellular immunity between the patients of the two groups. Clinical and immunological variables were evaluated following nutritional treatment.

Results: Feeding intolerance was lower in the IE than that in the NIE group (P = 0.04). However, there were no significant differences between the results of the two groups in terms of length of stay in the intensive care unit or hospital, extubation time, or body mass index (P > 0.05). The CD4+ T-lymphocyte count and CD4⁺/CD8+ ratio in the peripheral blood increased significantly in the IE group. The expression of CD28 activated cell surface markers was higher in the IE than in the NIE group. In addition, increased plasma interferon-γ levels were recorded in the IE group, whereas the levels of tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), interleukin (IL)-6, IL-8, and IL-10 decreased.

Conclusions: Immune-enhanced enteral nutrition could improve the immune status and feeding tolerance in patients with severe neurological diseases.

Trial Registration:www.chictr.org.cn/index.aspx, identifier: ChiCTR-IPR-17013909.

The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2020 (J-SSCG 2020)

The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2020 (J-SSCG 2020), a Japanese-specific set of clinical practice guidelines for sepsis and septic shock created as revised from J-SSCG 2016 jointly by the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine, was first released in September 2020 and published in February 2021. An English-language version of these guidelines was created based on the contents of the original Japanese-language version. The purpose of this guideline is to assist medical staff in making appropriate decisions to improve the prognosis of patients undergoing treatment for sepsis and septic shock. We aimed to provide high-quality guidelines that are easy to use and understand for specialists, general clinicians, and multidisciplinary medical professionals. J-SSCG 2016 took up new subjects that were not present in SSCG 2016 (e.g., ICU-acquired weakness [ICU-AW], post-intensive care syndrome [PICS], and body temperature management). The J-SSCG 2020 covered a total of 22 areas with four additional new areas (patient- and family-centered care, sepsis treatment system, neuro-intensive treatment, and stress ulcers). A total of 118 important clinical issues (clinical questions, CQs) were extracted regardless of the presence or absence of evidence. These CQs also include those that have been given particular focus within Japan. This is a large-scale guideline covering multiple fields; thus, in addition to the 25 committee members, we had the participation and support of a total of 226 members who are professionals (physicians, nurses, physiotherapists, clinical engineers, and pharmacists) and medical workers with a history of sepsis or critical illness. The GRADE method was adopted for making recommendations, and the modified Delphi method was used to determine recommendations by voting from all committee members.As a result, 79 GRADE-based recommendations, 5 Good Practice Statements (GPS), 18 expert consensuses, 27 answers to background questions (BQs), and summaries of definitions and diagnosis of sepsis were created as responses to 118 CQs. We also incorporated visual information for each CQ according to the time course of treatment, and we will also distribute this as an app. The J-SSCG 2020 is expected to be widely used as a useful bedside guideline in the field of sepsis treatment both in Japan and overseas involving multiple disciplines.

The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2020 (J-SSCG 2020)

The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2020 (J-SSCG 2020), a Japanese-specific set of clinical practice guidelines for sepsis and septic shock created as revised from J-SSCG 2016 jointly by the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine, was first released in September 2020 and published in February 2021. An English-language version of these guidelines was created based on the contents of the original Japanese-language version. The purpose of this guideline is to assist medical staff in making appropriate decisions to improve the prognosis of patients undergoing treatment for sepsis and septic shock. We aimed to provide high-quality guidelines that are easy to use and understand for specialists, general clinicians, and multidisciplinary medical professionals. J-SSCG 2016 took up new subjects that were not present in SSCG 2016 (e.g., ICU-acquired weakness [ICU-AW], post-intensive care syndrome [PICS], and body temperature management). The J-SSCG 2020 covered a total of 22 areas with four additional new areas (patient- and family-centered care, sepsis treatment system, neuro-intensive treatment, and stress ulcers). A total of 118 important clinical issues (clinical questions, CQs) were extracted regardless of the presence or absence of evidence. These CQs also include those that have been given particular focus within Japan. This is a large-scale guideline covering multiple fields; thus, in addition to the 25 committee members, we had the participation and support of a total of 226 members who are professionals (physicians, nurses, physiotherapists, clinical engineers, and pharmacists) and medical workers with a history of sepsis or critical illness. The GRADE method was adopted for making recommendations, and the modified Delphi method was used to determine recommendations by voting from all committee members. As a result, 79 GRADE-based recommendations, 5 Good Practice Statements (GPS), 18 expert consensuses, 27 answers to background questions (BQs), and summaries of definitions and diagnosis of sepsis were created as responses to 118 CQs. We also incorporated visual information for each CQ according to the time course of treatment, and we will also distribute this as an app. The J-SSCG 2020 is expected to be widely used as a useful bedside guideline in the field of sepsis treatment both in Japan and overseas involving multiple disciplines.

Diagnosis and Management of Intraabdominal Infection: Guidelines by the Chinese Society of Surgical Infection and Intensive Care and the Chinese College of Gastrointestinal Fistula Surgeons

The Chinese guidelines for IAI presented here were developed by a panel that included experts from the fields of surgery, critical care, microbiology, infection control, pharmacology, and evidence-based medicine. All questions were structured in population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes format, and evidence profiles were generated. Recommendations were generated following the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system or Best Practice Statement (BPS), when applicable. The final guidelines include 45 graded recommendations and 17 BPSs, including the classification of disease severity, diagnosis, source control, antimicrobial therapy, microbiologic evaluation, nutritional therapy, other supportive therapies, diagnosis and management of specific IAIs, and recognition and management of source control failure. Recommendations on fluid resuscitation and organ support therapy could not be formulated and thus were not included. Accordingly, additional high-quality clinical studies should be performed in the future to address the clinicians' concerns.

Cost-Effectiveness of Parenteral Nutrition Containing ω-3 Fatty Acids in Hospitalized Adult Patients From 5 European Countries and the US

Background

ω‐3 Fatty acid (FA)–containing parenteral nutrition (PN) is associated with improvements in patient outcomes and with reductions in hospital length of stay (HLOS) vs standard PN regimens (containing non–ω‐3 FA lipid emulsions). We present a cost‐effectiveness analysis of ω‐3 FA–containing PN vs standard PN in 5 European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, UK) and the US.

Methods

This pharmacoeconomic model was based on estimates of ω‐3 efficacy reported in a recent meta‐analysis and data from country‐specific sources. It utilized a probabilistic discrete event simulation model to compare ω‐3 FA–containing PN with standard PN in a population of critically ill and general ward patients. The influence of model parameters was evaluated using probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses.

Results

Overall costs were reduced with ω‐3 FA–containing PN in all 6 countries compared with standard PN, ranging from €1741 (±€1284) in Italy to €5576 (±€4193) in the US. Expenses for infections and HLOS were lower in all countries for ω‐3 FA–containing PN vs standard PN, with the largest cost differences for both in the US (infection: €825 ± €4001; HLOS: €4879 ± €1208) and the smallest savings in the UK for infections and in Spain for HLOS (€63 ± €426 and €1636 ± €372, respectively).

Conclusion

This cost‐effectiveness analysis in 6 countries demonstrates that the superior clinical efficacy of ω‐3 FA–containing PN translates into significant decreases in mean treatment cost, rendering it an attractive cost‐saving alternative to standard PN across different healthcare systems.

The effect of enteral versus parenteral nutrition for critically ill patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To analyze the effect of enteral nutrition compared with parenteral nutrition in critically ill patients.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

SETTING

Intensive care unit.

PATIENTS

23 trials containing 6478 patients met our inclusion criteria.

INTERVENTION

A systematical literature search was conducted to identify eligible trials in electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, Scopus, EBSCO and Cochrane Library. The primary outcome was mortality, the secondary outcomes were gastrointestinal complications, bloodstream infections, organ failures, length of stay in ICU and hospital. We performed a predefined subgroup analyses to explore the treatment effect by mean age, publication date and disease types.

MAIN RESULTS

The result showed no significant effect on overall mortality rate (OR 0.98, 95%CI 0.81 to 1.18, P = 0.83, I2 = 19%) and organ failure rate (OR 0.87, 95%CI 0.75 to 1.01, P = 0.06, I2 = 16%). The use of EN had more beneficial effects with fewer bloodstream infections when compared to PN (OR 0.59, 95%CI 0.43 to 0.82, P = 0.001, I2 = 27%) and this was more noteworthy in the subgroup analysis for critical surgical patients (OR 0.36, 95%CI 0.22 to 0.59, P < 0.0001, I2 = 0%). EN was associated with reduction in hospital LOS (MD -0.90, 95%CI -1.63 to -0.17, P = 0.21, I2 = 0%) but had an increase incidence of gastrointestinal complications (OR 2.00, 95%CI 1.76 to 2.27, P < 0.00001, I2 = 0%).

CONCLUSION

For critically ill patients, the two routes of nutrition support had no different effect on mortality rate. The use of EN could decrease the incidence of bloodstream infections and reduce hospital LOS but was associated with increased risk of gastrointestinal complications.

Enteral versus parenteral nutrition and enteral versus a combination of enteral and parenteral nutrition for adults in the intensive care unit

BACKGROUND

Critically ill people are at increased risk of malnutrition. Acute and chronic illness, trauma and inflammation induce stress-related catabolism, and drug-induced adverse effects may reduce appetite or increase nausea and vomiting. In addition, patient management in the intensive care unit (ICU) may also interrupt feeding routines. Methods to deliver nutritional requirements include provision of enteral nutrition (EN), or parenteral nutrition (PN), or a combination of both (EN and PN). However, each method is problematic. This review aimed to determine the route of delivery that optimizes uptake of nutrition.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of enteral versus parenteral methods of nutrition, and the effects of enteral versus a combination of enteral and parenteral methods of nutrition, among critically ill adults, in terms of mortality, number of ICU-free days up to day 28, and adverse events.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase on 3 October 2017. We searched clinical trials registries and grey literature, and handsearched reference lists of included studies and related reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled studies (RCTs) and quasi-randomized studies comparing EN given to adults in the ICU versus PN or versus EN and PN. We included participants that were trauma, emergency, and postsurgical patients in the ICU.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We assessed the certainty of evidence with GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 25 studies with 8816 participants; 23 studies were RCTs and two were quasi-randomized studies. All included participants were critically ill in the ICU with a wide range of diagnoses; mechanical ventilation status between study participants varied. We identified 11 studies awaiting classification for which we were unable to assess eligibility, and two ongoing studies.Seventeen studies compared EN versus PN, six compared EN versus EN and PN, two were multi-arm studies comparing EN versus PN versus EN and PN. Most studies reported randomization and allocation concealment inadequately. Most studies reported no methods to blind personnel or outcome assessors to nutrition groups; one study used adequate methods to reduce risk of performance bias.Enteral nutrition versus parenteral nutritionWe found that one feeding route rather than the other (EN or PN) may make little or no difference to mortality in hospital (risk ratio (RR) 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80 to 1.77; 361 participants; 6 studies; low-certainty evidence), or mortality within 30 days (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.13; 3148 participants; 11 studies; low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether one feeding route rather than the other reduces mortality within 90 days because the certainty of the evidence is very low (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.17; 2461 participants; 3 studies). One study reported mortality at one to four months and we did not combine this in the analysis; we reported this data as mortality within 180 days and it is uncertain whether EN or PN affects the number of deaths within 180 days because the certainty of the evidence is very low (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.97; 46 participants).No studies reported number of ICU-free days up to day 28, and one study reported number of ventilator-free days up to day 28 and it is uncertain whether one feeding route rather than the other reduces the number of ventilator-free days up to day 28 because the certainty of the evidence is very low (mean difference, inverse variance, 0.00, 95% CI -0.97 to 0.97; 2388 participants).We combined data for adverse events reported by more than one study. It is uncertain whether EN or PN affects aspiration because the certainty of the evidence is very low (RR 1.53, 95% CI 0.46 to 5.03; 2437 participants; 2 studies), and we found that one feeding route rather than the other may make little or no difference to pneumonia (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.48; 415 participants; 7 studies; low-certainty evidence). We found that EN may reduce sepsis (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.95; 361 participants; 7 studies; low-certainty evidence), and it is uncertain whether PN reduces vomiting because the certainty of the evidence is very low (RR 3.42, 95% CI 1.15 to 10.16; 2525 participants; 3 studies).Enteral nutrition versus enteral nutrition and parenteral nutritionWe found that one feeding regimen rather than another (EN or combined EN or PN) may make little or no difference to mortality in hospital (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.16; 5111 participants; 5 studies; low-certainty evidence), and at 90 days (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.18; 4760 participants; 2 studies; low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether combined EN and PN leads to fewer deaths at 30 days because the certainty of the evidence is very low (RR 1.64, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.54; 409 participants; 3 studies). It is uncertain whether one feeding regimen rather than another reduces mortality within 180 days because the certainty of the evidence is very low (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.55; 120 participants; 1 study).No studies reported number of ICU-free days or ventilator-free days up to day 28. It is uncertain whether either feeding method reduces pneumonia because the certainty of the evidence is very low (RR 1.40, 95% CI 0.91 to 2.15; 205 participants; 2 studies). No studies reported aspiration, sepsis, or vomiting.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found insufficient evidence to determine whether EN is better or worse than PN, or than combined EN and PN for mortality in hospital, at 90 days and at 180 days, and on the number of ventilator-free days and adverse events. We found fewer deaths at 30 days when studies gave combined EN and PN, and reduced sepsis for EN rather than PN. We found no studies that reported number of ICU-free days up to day 28. Certainty of the evidence for all outcomes is either low or very low. The 11 studies awaiting classification may alter the conclusions of the review once assessed.

Comparison of Complications Following Laparoscopic and Endoscopic Gastrostomy Placements

INTRODUCTION

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and laparoscopic gastrostomy (LG) placements provide enteral access to patients unable to tolerate oral feeds. Limited data comparing PEG and LG outcomes is available in adults. This study compares complications between PEG and LG placements.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective chart review was completed for patients undergoing PEG or LG placement at a single academic center between 2007 and 2014. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) were compared. Logistic regression was utilized to identify independent predictors for complication.

RESULTS

Two hundred and twenty-four patients (164 PEGs and 60 LGs) were evaluated. Patients undergoing LG had a higher incidence of prior surgery (42 vs 20%; P < 0.01) and age-adjusted CCI (5 vs 4; P = 0.01). Return to the OR was more common following PEG than LG (5.5 vs 0%) but did not achieve significance (P = 0.12). There were no differences in 30-day mortality; however, age-adjusted CCI was predictive of 30-day mortality (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.1-1.6).

CONCLUSION

Despite increased comorbidities, LG tubes are at least as safe as PEGs. Research should focus on identifying predictive factors associated with post-operative complications to identify which patients would have superior outcomes with LG placement.

A multicentre, randomised controlled trial comparing the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of early nutritional support via the parenteral versus the enteral route in critically ill patients (CALORIES)

BACKGROUND

Malnutrition is a common problem in critically ill patients in UK NHS critical care units. Early nutritional support is therefore recommended to address deficiencies in nutritional state and related disorders in metabolism. However, evidence is conflicting regarding the optimum route (parenteral or enteral) of delivery.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the effect of early nutritional support via the parenteral route compared with the enteral route on mortality at 30 days and on incremental cost-effectiveness at 1 year. Secondary objectives were to compare the route of early nutritional support on duration of organ support; infectious and non-infectious complications; critical care unit and acute hospital length of stay; all-cause mortality at critical care unit and acute hospital discharge, at 90 days and 1 year; survival to 90 days and 1 year; nutritional and health-related quality of life, resource use and costs at 90 days and 1 year; and estimated lifetime incremental cost-effectiveness.

DESIGN

A pragmatic, open, multicentre, parallel-group randomised controlled trial with an integrated economic evaluation.

SETTING

Adult general critical care units in 33 NHS hospitals in England.

PARTICIPANTS

2400 eligible patients.

INTERVENTIONS

Five days of early nutritional support delivered via the parenteral (n = 1200) and enteral (n = 1200) route.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

All-cause mortality at 30 days after randomisation and incremental net benefit (INB) (at £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year) at 1 year.

RESULTS

By 30 days, 393 of 1188 (33.1%) patients assigned to receive early nutritional support via the parenteral route and 409 of 1195 (34.2%) assigned to the enteral route had died [p = 0.57; absolute risk reduction 1.15%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.65 to 4.94; relative risk 0.97 (0.86 to 1.08)]. At 1 year, INB for the parenteral route compared with the enteral route was negative at -£1320 (95% CI -£3709 to £1069). The probability that early nutritional support via the parenteral route is more cost-effective - given the data - is < 20%. The proportion of patients in the parenteral group who experienced episodes of hypoglycaemia (p = 0.006) and of vomiting (p < 0.001) was significantly lower than in the enteral group. There were no significant differences in the 15 other secondary outcomes and no significant interactions with pre-specified subgroups.

LIMITATIONS

Blinding of nutritional support was deemed to be impractical and, although the primary outcome was objective, some secondary outcomes, although defined and objectively assessed, may have been more vulnerable to observer bias.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality at 30 days for early nutritional support via the parenteral route compared with the enteral route among adults admitted to critical care units in England. On average, costs were higher for the parenteral route, which, combined with similar survival and quality of life, resulted in negative INBs at 1 year.

FUTURE WORK

Nutritional support is a complex combination of timing, dose, duration, delivery and type, all of which may affect outcomes and costs. Conflicting evidence remains regarding optimum provision to critically ill patients. There is a need to utilise rigorous consensus methods to establish future priorities for basic and clinical research in this area.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN17386141.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 28. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Parenteral or Enteral Arginine Supplementation Safety and Efficacy

Arginine supplementation has the potential to improve the health of patients. Its use in hospitalized patients has been a controversial topic in the nutrition literature, especially concerning supplementation of septic patients. In this article, we review the relevant literature both for and against the use of arginine in critically ill, surgical, and hospitalized patients. The effect of critical illness on arginine metabolism is reviewed, as is its use in septic and critically ill patients. Although mounting evidence supports immunonutrition, there are only a few studies that suggest that this is safe in patients with severe sepsis. The use of arginine has been shown to benefit a variety of critically ill patients. It should be considered for inclusion in combinations of immunonutrients or commercial formulations for groups in whom its benefit has been reported consistently, such as those who have suffered trauma and those in acute surgical settings. The aims of this review are to discuss the role of arginine in health, the controversy surrounding arginine supplementation of septic patients, and the use of arginine in critically ill patients.

When Is It Appropriate to Use Arginine in Critical Illness?

In health, arginine is considered a nonessential amino acid but can become an essential amino acid (ie, conditionally essential amino acid) during periods of metabolic or traumatic stress as endogenous arginine supply is inadequate to meet physiologic demands. Arginine depletion in critical illness is associated with impairments in microcirculatory blood flow, impaired wound healing, and T-cell dysfunction. The purpose of this review is to (1) describe arginine metabolism and role in health and critical illness, (2) describe the relationship between arginine and asymmetric dimethylarginine, and (3) review studies of supplemental arginine in critically ill patients.

Event-rate and delta inflation when evaluating mortality as a primary outcome from randomized controlled trials of nutritional interventions during critical illness: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of high-quality evidence that proves that nutritional interventions during critical illness reduce mortality.

OBJECTIVES

We evaluated whether power calculations for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of nutritional interventions that used mortality as the primary outcome were realistic, and whether overestimation was systematic in the studies identified to determine whether this was due to overestimates of event rate or delta.

DESIGN

A systematic review of the literature between 2005 and 2015 was performed to identify RCTs of nutritional interventions administered to critically ill adults that had mortality as the primary outcome. Predicted event rate (predicted mortality during the control), predicted mortality during intervention, predicted delta (predicted difference between mortality during the control and intervention), actual event rate (observed mortality during control), observed mortality during intervention, and actual delta (difference between observed mortality during the control and intervention) were recorded. The event-rate gap (predicted event rate minus observed event rate), the delta gap (predicted delta minus observed delta), and the predicted number needed to treat were calculated. Data are shown as median (range).

RESULTS

Fourteen articles were extracted, with power calculations provided for 10 studies. The predicted event rate was 29.9% (20.0–52.4%), and the predicted delta was 7.9% (3.0–20.0%). If the study hypothesis was proven correct then, on the basis of the power calculations, the number needed to treat would have been 12.7 (5.0–33.3) patients. The actual event rate was 25.3% (6.1–50.0%), the observed mortality during the intervention was 24.4% (6.3–39.7%), and the actual delta was 0.5% (−10.2–10.3%), such that the event-rate gap was 2.6% (−3.9–23.7%) and delta gap was 7.5% (3.2–25.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Overestimates of delta occur frequently in RCTs of nutritional interventions in the critically ill that are powered to determine a mortality benefit. Delta inflation may explain the number of "negative" studies in this field of research.

Nutrition: A Primary Therapy in Pediatric Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

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

Infection control in the intensive care unit

It is critical for health care personnel to recognize and appreciate the detrimental impact of intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired infections. The economic, clinical, and social expenses to patients and hospitals are overwhelming. To limit the incidence of ICU-acquired infections, aggressive infection control measures must be implemented and enforced. Researchers and national committees have developed and continue to develop evidence-based guidelines to control ICU infections. A multifaceted approach, including infection prevention committees, antimicrobial stewardship programs, daily reassessments-intervention bundles, identifying and minimizing risk factors, and continuing staff education programs, is essential. Infection control in the ICU is an evolving area of critical care research.

Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2012

OBJECTIVE

To provide an update to the "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock," last published in 2008.

DESIGN

A consensus committee of 68 international experts representing 30 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict of interest policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guidelines process was conducted independent of any industry funding. A stand-alone meeting was held for all subgroup heads, co- and vice-chairs, and selected individuals. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development.

METHODS

The authors were advised to follow the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations as strong (1) or weak (2). The potential drawbacks of making strong recommendations in the presence of low-quality evidence were emphasized. Some recommendations were ungraded (UG). Recommendations were classified into three groups: 1) those directly targeting severe sepsis; 2) those targeting general care of the critically ill patient and considered high priority in severe sepsis; and 3) pediatric considerations.

RESULTS

Key recommendations and suggestions, listed by category, include: early quantitative resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 hrs after recognition (1C); blood cultures before antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm a potential source of infection (UG); administration of broad-spectrum antimicrobials therapy within 1 hr of recognition of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1C) as the goal of therapy; reassessment of antimicrobial therapy daily for de-escalation, when appropriate (1B); infection source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method within 12 hrs of diagnosis (1C); initial fluid resuscitation with crystalloid (1B) and consideration of the addition of albumin in patients who continue to require substantial amounts of crystalloid to maintain adequate mean arterial pressure (2C) and the avoidance of hetastarch formulations (1C); initial fluid challenge in patients with sepsis-induced tissue hypoperfusion and suspicion of hypovolemia to achieve a minimum of 30 mL/kg of crystalloids (more rapid administration and greater amounts of fluid may be needed in some patients) (1C); fluid challenge technique continued as long as hemodynamic improvement, as based on either dynamic or static variables (UG); norepinephrine as the first-choice vasopressor to maintain mean arterial pressure ≥ 65 mm Hg (1B); epinephrine when an additional agent is needed to maintain adequate blood pressure (2B); vasopressin (0.03 U/min) can be added to norepinephrine to either raise mean arterial pressure to target or to decrease norepinephrine dose but should not be used as the initial vasopressor (UG); dopamine is not recommended except in highly selected circumstances (2C); dobutamine infusion administered or added to vasopressor in the presence of a) myocardial dysfunction as suggested by elevated cardiac filling pressures and low cardiac output, or b) ongoing signs of hypoperfusion despite achieving adequate intravascular volume and adequate mean arterial pressure (1C); avoiding use of intravenous hydrocortisone in adult septic shock patients if adequate fluid resuscitation and vasopressor therapy are able to restore hemodynamic stability (2C); hemoglobin target of 7-9 g/dL in the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, ischemic coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage (1B); low tidal volume (1A) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure (1B) for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in ARDS (1B); higher rather than lower level of PEEP for patients with sepsis-induced moderate or severe ARDS (2C); recruitment maneuvers in sepsis patients with severe refractory hypoxemia due to ARDS (2C); prone positioning in sepsis-induced ARDS patients with a PaO2/FIO2 ratio of ≤ 100 mm Hg in facilities that have experience with such practices (2C); head-of-bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ARDS who do not have evidence of tissue hypoperfusion (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation (1A); minimizing use of either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation targeting specific titration endpoints (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers if possible in the septic patient without ARDS (1C); a short course of neuromuscular blocker (no longer than 48 hrs) for patients with early ARDS and a Pao2/Fio2 < 150 mm Hg (2C); a protocolized approach to blood glucose management commencing insulin dosing when two consecutive blood glucose levels are > 180 mg/dL, targeting an upper blood glucose ≤ 180 mg/dL (1A); equivalency of continuous veno-venous hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1B); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with bleeding risk factors (1B); oral or enteral (if necessary) feedings, as tolerated, rather than either complete fasting or provision of only intravenous glucose within the first 48 hrs after a diagnosis of severe sepsis/septic shock (2C); and addressing goals of care, including treatment plans and end-of-life planning (as appropriate) (1B), as early as feasible, but within 72 hrs of intensive care unit admission (2C). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include: therapy with face mask oxygen, high flow nasal cannula oxygen, or nasopharyngeal continuous PEEP in the presence of respiratory distress and hypoxemia (2C), use of physical examination therapeutic endpoints such as capillary refill (2C); for septic shock associated with hypovolemia, the use of crystalloids or albumin to deliver a bolus of 20 mL/kg of crystalloids (or albumin equivalent) over 5 to 10 mins (2C); more common use of inotropes and vasodilators for low cardiac output septic shock associated with elevated systemic vascular resistance (2C); and use of hydrocortisone only in children with suspected or proven "absolute"' adrenal insufficiency (2C).

CONCLUSIONS

Strong agreement existed among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best care of patients with severe sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients.

The safety and efficacy of parenteral nutrition among pediatric patients with burn injuries

OBJECTIVE

Although enteral nutrition is the ideal mode of nutritional support following burn injury, it is often interrupted during episodes of severe sepsis and hemodynamic instability, leading to significant energy and protein deficits. Parenteral nutrition is not commonly used in burn centers due to concerns that it will lead to hyperglycemia, infection, and increased mortality. However, parenteral nutrition is often utilized in our burn unit when goal rate enteral nutrition is not feasible.To determine the safety and efficacy of a standardized protein-sparing parenteral nutrition protocol in which glucose infusion is limited to 5-7 mg/kg/hour.

DESIGN

Retrospective observational study.

SETTING

Pediatric burn hospital.

PATIENTS

A retrospective medical record review of all children admitted to our hospital with burns ≥ 30% total body surface area was conducted. Only patients admitted within one week of injury and who survived > 24 hours after admission were included in this study.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Of the 105 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 96 (91%) received parenteral nutrition or a combination of parenteral nutrition and enteral nutrition at some point during their care. Nine patients received only enteral nutrition. Demographic data were similar between groups. Protein intake was significantly higher in the parenteral nutrition group. Incidence of catheter-related blood infections did not differ between groups. Use of parenteral nutrition was not associated with blood or respiratory infections. Overall mortality rate was low (4%), as most patients (96%) achieved wound closure and were discharged home.

CONCLUSIONS

Judicious use of parenteral nutrition is a safe and effective means of nutritional support when goal enteral nutrition cannot be achieved. A hypocaloric, high-nitrogen parenteral nutrition solution can reduce energy and protein deficits while minimizing complications commonly associated with parenteral nutrition usage.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock, 2012

OBJECTIVE

To provide an update to the "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock," last published in 2008.

DESIGN

A consensus committee of 68 international experts representing 30 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict of interest policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guidelines process was conducted independent of any industry funding. A stand-alone meeting was held for all subgroup heads, co- and vice-chairs, and selected individuals. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development.

METHODS

The authors were advised to follow the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations as strong (1) or weak (2). The potential drawbacks of making strong recommendations in the presence of low-quality evidence were emphasized. Recommendations were classified into three groups: (1) those directly targeting severe sepsis; (2) those targeting general care of the critically ill patient and considered high priority in severe sepsis; and (3) pediatric considerations.

RESULTS

Key recommendations and suggestions, listed by category, include: early quantitative resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 h after recognition (1C); blood cultures before antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm a potential source of infection (UG); administration of broad-spectrum antimicrobials therapy within 1 h of the recognition of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1C) as the goal of therapy; reassessment of antimicrobial therapy daily for de-escalation, when appropriate (1B); infection source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method within 12 h of diagnosis (1C); initial fluid resuscitation with crystalloid (1B) and consideration of the addition of albumin in patients who continue to require substantial amounts of crystalloid to maintain adequate mean arterial pressure (2C) and the avoidance of hetastarch formulations (1B); initial fluid challenge in patients with sepsis-induced tissue hypoperfusion and suspicion of hypovolemia to achieve a minimum of 30 mL/kg of crystalloids (more rapid administration and greater amounts of fluid may be needed in some patients (1C); fluid challenge technique continued as long as hemodynamic improvement is based on either dynamic or static variables (UG); norepinephrine as the first-choice vasopressor to maintain mean arterial pressure ≥65 mmHg (1B); epinephrine when an additional agent is needed to maintain adequate blood pressure (2B); vasopressin (0.03 U/min) can be added to norepinephrine to either raise mean arterial pressure to target or to decrease norepinephrine dose but should not be used as the initial vasopressor (UG); dopamine is not recommended except in highly selected circumstances (2C); dobutamine infusion administered or added to vasopressor in the presence of (a) myocardial dysfunction as suggested by elevated cardiac filling pressures and low cardiac output, or (b) ongoing signs of hypoperfusion despite achieving adequate intravascular volume and adequate mean arterial pressure (1C); avoiding use of intravenous hydrocortisone in adult septic shock patients if adequate fluid resuscitation and vasopressor therapy are able to restore hemodynamic stability (2C); hemoglobin target of 7-9 g/dL in the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, ischemic coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage (1B); low tidal volume (1A) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure (1B) for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in ARDS (1B); higher rather than lower level of PEEP for patients with sepsis-induced moderate or severe ARDS (2C); recruitment maneuvers in sepsis patients with severe refractory hypoxemia due to ARDS (2C); prone positioning in sepsis-induced ARDS patients with a PaO (2)/FiO (2) ratio of ≤100 mm Hg in facilities that have experience with such practices (2C); head-of-bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ARDS who do not have evidence of tissue hypoperfusion (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation (1A); minimizing use of either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation targeting specific titration endpoints (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers if possible in the septic patient without ARDS (1C); a short course of neuromuscular blocker (no longer than 48 h) for patients with early ARDS and a PaO (2)/FI O (2) <150 mm Hg (2C); a protocolized approach to blood glucose management commencing insulin dosing when two consecutive blood glucose levels are >180 mg/dL, targeting an upper blood glucose ≤180 mg/dL (1A); equivalency of continuous veno-venous hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1B); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with bleeding risk factors (1B); oral or enteral (if necessary) feedings, as tolerated, rather than either complete fasting or provision of only intravenous glucose within the first 48 h after a diagnosis of severe sepsis/septic shock (2C); and addressing goals of care, including treatment plans and end-of-life planning (as appropriate) (1B), as early as feasible, but within 72 h of intensive care unit admission (2C). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include: therapy with face mask oxygen, high flow nasal cannula oxygen, or nasopharyngeal continuous PEEP in the presence of respiratory distress and hypoxemia (2C), use of physical examination therapeutic endpoints such as capillary refill (2C); for septic shock associated with hypovolemia, the use of crystalloids or albumin to deliver a bolus of 20 mL/kg of crystalloids (or albumin equivalent) over 5-10 min (2C); more common use of inotropes and vasodilators for low cardiac output septic shock associated with elevated systemic vascular resistance (2C); and use of hydrocortisone only in children with suspected or proven "absolute"' adrenal insufficiency (2C).

CONCLUSIONS

Strong agreement existed among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best care of patients with severe sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients.

Endoscopically Assisted Nasojejunal Feeding Tube Placement: Technique and Results in Five Dogs

Interest in noninvasive feeding tube placement in companion animals led to the adaption of a human technique utilizing endoscopy to place nasojejunal feeding tubes. Data from medical records in which nasojejunal feeding tubes were attempted were reviewed. Feeding tubes were attempted and successfully placed in five dogs within a median of 35 min. Feeding tubes remained in place for approximately 7 days. Complications included facial irritation (5/5), sneezing (5/5), fractured facial sutures (4/5), vomiting (3/5), diarrhea (3/5), crimping of feeding tube (3/5), regurgitation (1/5), epistaxis (1/5), clogging of the feeding tube (2/5), and oral migration with premature removal of the feeding tube (1/5). The deployment technique used in this study was found to be cumbersome. Despite minor complications, endoscopy can be used to rapidly and accurately place nasoenteric feeding devices.

A clinical and economic evaluation of enteral nutrition

MOTIVATION

The American Society of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN) guidelines advise use of enteral nutrition (EN) for critically ill hospital patients requiring nutritional support, but no studies have comprehensively estimated economic benefits from adherence to this recommendation.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed studies comparing EN to alternative nutritional support therapies among adult, critically ill patients. We reviewed 1200 abstracts, selected 243 for further review, and included 48 studies in our analysis. Most retained studies compared EN and parenteral nutrition (PN). Using meta-analysis, we estimated the absolute impact of EN on adverse event risk and its impact on treatment duration and length of stay. These estimates were converted to population economic impacts by assuming 10% of PN patients are suitable candidates for EN.

RESULTS

Compared to PN, EN reduces the risk of major, potentially life-threatening infections (RR = 0.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.44 to 0.77), the risk of major, potentially life-threatening non-infection events (RR = 0.73, CI 0.59 to 0.91), and suggests a reduction in mortality, although this result did not achieve statistical significance (RR = 0.70, CI 0.45 to 1.09). EN also reduces inpatient length of stay, time in the ICU, and length of nutritional treatment. Compared to PN, EN savings from reduced adverse event risks average nearly $1500 per patient; savings from reduced hospital length of stay amount to nearly $2500 per patient. Shifting 10% of parenterally treated adult patients in the U.S. to EN would save $35 million annually due to reduced adverse events and another $57 million due to shorter hospital stays.

CONCLUSION

The evidence of both clinical and economic gains from EN is consistent with ASPEN guidelines recommending use of EN in critically ill hospital patients when possible.

A retrospective study about the influence of early nutritional support on mortality and nosocomial infection in the critical care setting

BACKGROUND & AIMS

To determine whether early nutritional support reduces mortality and the incidence of nosocomial infection, in critically ill patients in the current practice.

METHODS

A retrospective observational study was conducted in all critically ill patients who had been prescribed nutritional support, throughout one year, in an Intensive Care Unit. The time to start and the route of delivery of nutritional support were determined by the attending clinician's assessment of gastrointestinal function and hemodynamic stability. Age, gender, severity of illness, start time and route of nutritional support, prescribed and delivered daily caloric intake for the first 7 days, whether they were a medical or surgical patient, length of stay in ICU, incidence rate of nosocomial infections and ICU mortality were recorded. Patients were classified according to whether or not they received nutritional support within 48 h of their admission to ICU and Binary Logistic Regression was performed to assess the effect of early nutritional support on ICU mortality and ICU nosocomial infections after controlling for confounders.

RESULTS

Ninety-two consecutive patients were included in the study. Start time of nutritional support showed a mean of 3.1 ± 1.9 days. Patients in the early nutritional support group had a lower ICU mortality in an unadjusted analysis (20% vs. 40.4%, p = 0.033). Early nutritional support was found to be an independent predictor of mortality in the regression analysis model (OR 0,28; 95% confidence interval, 0.09 to 0,84; p = 0.023). Our study did not demonstrate any association between early nutritional support and the incidence of nosocomial infection (OR 0.77; 95%. confidence interval, 0.26 to 2,24; p = 0.63), which was related to the route of nutritional support and the caloric intake. The delayed nutritional support group showed a longer length of stay and nosocomial infections than the early group, although these differences were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that early nutrition support reduces ICU mortality in critically ill patients, although it does not demonstrate any influence over nosocomial infection in the current practice in intensive care.

Parenteral nutrition in critical illness: can it safely improve outcomes?

Total parenteral nutrition was developed in the 1960s and has since been implemented commonly in the intensive care unit (ICU). Studies published in the 1980s and early 1990s indicate that the use of total parenteral nutrition is associated with increased mortality and infectious morbidity. These detrimental effects were related to hyperglycemia and overnutrition at a period when parenteral nutrition was not administered according to the all-in-one principle. Because of its beneficial effects on the gastrointestinal tract, enteral nutrition alone replaced parenteral nutrition as the gold standard of nutritional care in the ICU in the 1980s. However, enteral nutrition alone is frequently associated with insufficient coverage of the energy requirements, and subsequent protein-energy deficit is correlated with a worse clinical outcome. Recent evidence suggests that all-in-one parenteral nutrition has no significant effect on mortality and infectious morbidity in patients in the ICU if a glycemic control is obtained and hyperalimentation avoided. Thus, the time has come to reconsider the use of parenteral nutrition in the ICU. Supplemental parenteral nutrition could prevent onset of nutritional deficiencies when enteral nutrition is insufficient in meeting energy requirements. Clinical studies are warranted to show that the combination of parenteral and enteral nutrition could improve the clinical outcome of patients in the ICU.

Prevention, diagnosis, therapy and follow-up care of sepsis: 1st revision of S-2k guidelines of the German Sepsis Society (Deutsche Sepsis-Gesellschaft e.V. (DSG)) and the German Interdisciplinary Association of Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine (Deutsche Interdisziplinäre Vereinigung für Intensiv- und Notfallmedizin (DIVI))

Practice guidelines are systematically developed statements and recommendations that assist the physicians and patients in making decisions about appropriate health care measures for specific clinical circumstances taking into account specific national health care structures. The 1^st revision of the S-2k guideline of the German Sepsis Society in collaboration with 17 German medical scientific societies and one self-help group provides state-of-the-art information (results of controlled clinical trials and expert knowledge) on the effective and appropriate medical care (prevention, diagnosis, therapy and follow-up care) of critically ill patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. The guideline had been developed according to the “German Instrument for Methodological Guideline Appraisal” of the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies (AWMF). In view of the inevitable advancements in scientific knowledge and technical expertise, revisions, updates and amendments must be periodically initiated. The guideline recommendations may not be applied under all circumstances. It rests with the clinician to decide whether a certain recommendation should be adopted or not, taking into consideration the unique set of clinical facts presented in connection with each individual patient as well as the available resources.

Interactions between ω3 polyunsaturated fatty acids and arginine on nutritional and immunological aspects in severe inflammation

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Immune-enhancing diets (IEDs) contain a mixture of nutrients claimed to have immunological properties. Therefore, it seemed relevant to determine the effect of each of their components. The aim of this study was to examine the role of arginine (Arg) and ω3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (ω3 PUFAs) in the effect of an IED (Crucial(®)) in a validated rat model of inflammation induced by turpentine (TI).

METHODS

Forty-two rats were randomized into five groups: AL (ad libitum), TI-EN (TI+standard enteral nutrition (EN): Sondalis(®)HP), TI-EN-Arg (TI+standard EN+Arg in equimolar concentration to Arg in the IED), TI-M-IED (TI+modified IED containing the same ω6/ω3 ratio as in standard EN) and TI-IED (TI+Crucial(®)). Blood was sampled to determine CD25 receptor density on lymphocytes. TNF-α, IL-6 and NO (production and expression) were evaluated on isolated macrophages. Mesenteric lymph nodes, spleen and liver were cultured for analysis of enterobacterial translocation and dissemination.

RESULTS

CD25 density was decreased after TI and was corrected in the TI-EN-Arg, TI-M-IED and TI-IED groups (p<0.05). TI induced an alteration of macrophage mRNA expression of IL-6, TNF-α and iNOS, corrected in the TI-EN-Arg and TI-M-IED groups (p<0.05), but not by the IED. Enterobacterial translocation was observed in all treated groups, nevertheless the amount tended (p=0.054) to be lower in the TI-EN-Arg group.

CONCLUSIONS

Arg and ω3 PUFAs make a major contribution to IED effects, but our study shows interaction between them on macrophage reactivity. This indicates that the individual properties of each pharmaconutrient are not additive in IEDs.

Jejunal feeding tubes can be efficiently and independently placed by intensive care unit teams

BACKGROUND

Nutrition support is an important therapeutic measure in critically ill patients. Several studies have shown that the enteral route is preferable to the parenteral route. Insertion of a feeding tube beyond the ligament of Treitz combined with continuous gastric drainage will reduce regurgitation and probably also the rate of nosocomial pneumonia. This study was conducted to assess the safety, success rate, and time required to establish jejunal nutrition by the fluoroscopy-guided technique in intensive care unit (ICU) patients.

METHODS

This was a prospective observational study in the ICUs of a 300-bed and a 600-bed community hospital. Indications were large gastric residuals during attempted gastric feeding, severe acute pancreatitis, or recurrent aspiration. Feeding tubes were introduced by the ICU staff at bedside under fluoroscopic guidance (a senior ICU physician and a resident or a registered ICU nurse). The correct jejunal position was documented by the application of a radiopaque contrast medium through the tube. After confirmation of the correct position, jejunal tube feeding was immediately started.

RESULTS

The insertion procedure in 38 patients lasted a median of 17 minutes. The median time from decision to place the tube until start of enteral feeding was 141 minutes. The success rate was 84.2%. No adverse events were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Fluoroscopic placement of a jejunal feeding tube at the bedside is fast, is safe, and has a high success rate when performed by well-trained ICU staff. Using this method makes the ICU team more self-sufficient when critically ill patients require enteral nutrition and no gastroenterologist is available.

Early nutritional therapy: the role of enteral and parenteral routes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Early nutrition is defined as the initiation of nutritional therapy within 48 h of either hospital admission or surgery. However, optimal timing for initiation of nutritional therapy through either enteral or parenteral routes remains poorly defined with the existing data. We reviewed the recent literature investigating the role of early enteral and parenteral nutrition in critical illness and perioperative care.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies in both trauma/surgical and nonsurgical patients support the superiority of early enteral over early parenteral nutrition. However, late commencement of enteral feeding should be avoided if the gastrointestinal tract is functional. Both prolonged hypocaloric enteral feeding and hypercaloric parenteral nutrition should be avoided, although the precise caloric target remains controversial.

SUMMARY

Early enteral nutrition remains the first option for the critically ill patient. However, there seems to be increased favor for combined enteral-parenteral therapy in cases of sustained hypocaloric enteral nutrition. The key issue is when the dual regimen should be initiated. Although more study is required to determine the optimal timing to initiate a combined enteral-parenteral approach, enteral nutrition should be initiated early and parenteral nutrition added if caloric-protein targets cannot be achieved after a few days.

Fish oil in critical illness

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this review is to discuss recent advances in the role of n-3 lipids derived from fish oil in clinical nutrition in an intensive care setting.

RECENT FINDINGS

Fish oil supplies n-3 fatty acids which compete with arachidonic acid (n-6) for the conversion to lipid mediators, influence lipid-bound second messenger generation and dependent cellular functions, and are a source for resolvins necessary for the resolution of inflammation. Enteral nutrition with n-3 fatty acids improved ventilation time in patients with acute lung injury and in one study reduced mortality in septic patients. Using a high-dose short-term infusion of fish oil-based lipid emulsion, rapid immunologic changes and effects on the endotoxin-induced stress response may be achieved. Inclusion of n-3 fatty acids in parenteral nutrition improved immunologic parameters and length of stay in surgical patients.

SUMMARY

Inclusion of fish oil in nutrition may influence the immune response and clinical outcomes by balancing the negative effects of n-6 fatty acids. Application as a part of enteral immunonutrition in surgical or acute respiratory distress syndrome patients and in lipid emulsions in surgical patients has beneficial effects. In septic patients, data on enteral use are highly controversial. Prospective data from randomized trials, however, are lacking.

Maximizing efficacy from parenteral nutrition in critical care: appropriate patient populations, supplemental parenteral nutrition, glucose control, parenteral glutamine, and alternative fat sources

The gastrointestinal tract is the preferred route for nutritional support in hospitalized patients. Patients with a functioning gastrointestinal tract, including those with pancreatitis or inflammatory bowel disease and those receiving chemotherapy, should be fed enterally. Parenteral nutrition (PN) should be limited to patients with gastrointestinal failure, including those with short gut syndrome, high-output fistula, prolonged ileus, or bowel obstruction. PN is associated with numerous complications, most notably increased risk of serious infection. Emerging data suggest that immunologic complications of PN may result from hyperglycemia and use of n-6 polyunsaturated fatty acids. Safety may be improved with a low-calorie formula and ensuring tight glycemic control with an insulin protocol. A lipid emulsion containing fish oil, olive oil, or both should replace soybean-containing emulsions. Supplemental glutamine, 0.2 g/kg/d to 0.5 g/kg/d, has been shown to reduce the risk of infection and to improve glycemic control.

Nasojejunal tube positioning with fluoroscopic guidance

Az enteralis táplálás indikációs köre egyre tágul, és az ily módon növekvő beteganyag ellátása egyre inkább a mindennapos gyakorlat részévé válik. Az enteralis táplálás előnyösebb az intravénásnál, ezen belül is a jejunális táplálás a legelfogadottabb, de ehhez nasojejunalis szondalevezetés szükséges. Ez lehetséges vakon, képerősítő, endoszkóp vagy ultrahang segítségével. A szerzők saját gyakorlatuk alapján a röntgenkép-erősítős technikát ismertetik, ez nem igényel speciális jártasságot, és bármely fekvőbeteg-intézményben elvégezhető. Gyors, olcsó, és kis megterhelést jelent a betegnek, nincs szükség képzett endoszkópos szakemberre, premedikációra. Hátránya, hogy kizárólag éber, kielégítő spontán légzésű, kooperáló betegnél alkalmazható, valamint röntgensugár-terheléssel jár. A szerzők az elmúlt 3 év alatt 34 esetben alkalmazták a módszert akut pancreatitises betegeiknél, súlyos szövődmények nélkül. A költséghatékonysági elveket is figyelembe véve, a fekvőbeteg-ellátás minden szintjén biztonságos módszerként ajánlják ezt az eljárást.

Effect of an immune-enhancing diet on lymphocyte in head-injured rats: What is the role of arginine?

OBJECTIVE

The benefit of immune-enhancing diets (IEDs) in the intensive care unit remains controversial. Considering their complexity, the role of each component, in particular arginine (Arg), in their properties is largely unknown. The aim of this study was to determine the role of arginine in the immunomodulatory effects of an IED (Crucial) in head-injured rats.

DESIGN

Thirty-four rats were randomized into five groups: AL (ad libitum), HI (head-injured), HI-STD (HI + standard enteral nutrition, EN), HI-STD-Arg (HI + standard EN + Arg in equimolar concentration to Arg in IED), and HI-IED (HI + IED). These isocaloric and isonitrogenous diets were administered over 4 days. After death, the thymus was removed and weighed. The density of CD25, CD4 and CD8 on lymphocytes from blood and from Peyer patches was evaluated. Mesenteric lymph nodes, liver and spleen were cultured for analysis of enterobacterial translocation and dissemination.

MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS

HI induced an atrophy of the thymus which was not corrected by the standard diet (HI 0.27 +/- 0.03, HI-STD 0.35 +/- 0.03 vs. AL 0.49 +/- 0.02 g; p < 0.05). However, the standard diet supplemented with arginine limited the thymic atrophy and the IED restored thymus weight. CD25 density and interleukin-2 production were increased only in the HI-STD-Arg and HI-IED groups (p < 0.05). Head injury induced enterobacterial translocation and dissemination which were blunted only in the HI-STD-Arg group (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In this rat HI model, arginine appears to be safe, contributes to a large extent to the immunomodulatory effects of the IED, and seems to limit enterobacterial translocation and dissemination more efficiently alone than in an IED.