A retrospective evaluation of nutrition support in relation to clinical outcomes in critically ill patients with an open abdomen

Manejo del abdomen abierto en el paciente crítico en un centro de nivel III de Popayán

Introducción. El abdomen abierto es un recurso útil para el tratamiento de pacientes con patología abdominal compleja, con potencial de complicaciones. El objetivo de este estudio fue adaptar la guía de World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) 2018, en un hospital de nivel III de atención de la ciudad de Popayán, Colombia, y comparar los resultados obtenidos con los previos a su implementación. Métodos. Estudio cuasi-experimental en dos mediciones de pacientes con abdomen abierto y estancia en cuidado crítico, durante los meses de abril a octubre de los años 2018 y 2019, antes y después de la adaptación con el personal asistencial de la guía de práctica clínica WSES 2018. Se utilizó estadística descriptiva, prueba de Chi cuadrado y se empleó el software SPSS V.25. Resultados. Se incluyeron 99 pacientes críticos, con una edad media de 53,2 años, con indicación de abdomen abierto por etiología traumática en el 28,3 %, infecciosa no traumática en el 32,3 % y no traumática ni infecciosa en el 37,4 %. La mortalidad global fue de 25,3 %, de los cuales, un 68 % se debieron a causas ajenas a la patología abdominal. Las complicaciones postoperatorias se presentaron en 10 pacientes con infección de sitio operatorio y 9 pacientes con fístula enterocutánea. El uso del doble Viaflex se implementó en un 63,6 %, logrando un cierre de la pared abdominal en el 79,8 % de los casos (p=0,038). Conclusión. El abdomen abierto requiere de un abordaje multidisciplinar. El uso de doble Viaflex es una herramienta simple y efectiva. La implementación de la guía disminuyó el porcentaje de mortalidad, los días de abdomen abierto y la estancia en cuidados intensivos.

Effect of protein composition of enteral formula on gastric content volume during continuous feeding: A randomized controlled cross-over study in healthy adults

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Enteral nutrition with polymeric intact protein formula is the preferred medical nutrition strategy in critically ill patients when oral intake is insufficient. Enteral nutrition formulas are often rich in casein protein, which has coagulating properties. Coagulation in the stomach impedes gastric emptying and might result in high gastric residual volumes which are a clinical sign of gastrointestinal intolerance and a major reason to decrease or to discontinue enteral feeding. In this study the impact of protein composition of enteral formula on gastric content volume (GCV) during and after continuous feeding was tested in healthy volunteers in whom gastrointestinal conditions of critically ill patients were mimicked.

METHODS

An enteral formula including 4 proteins (P4) with non-coagulating properties was compared to a casein-dominant formula (Cas) with coagulating properties. Esomeprazole and codeine were administered to mimic stress ulcer prophylaxis and induce gastroduodenal motor dysfunction, both being hallmarks of critically ill patients. GCV was measured with magnetic resonance imaging during and after continuous enteral feeding (100 mL/h for 4h) in a randomized single-center cross-over study. Results are provided as mean (SD). Significance level of p < 0.05 was applied.

RESULTS

Twenty subjects completed the study (14 women, 6 men, 25.8 (4.6) years old, BMI: 22.5 (1.5) kg/m²). The GCV as change from baseline at T = 240 (primary endpoint) did not differ between study products (P4: 124.3 (83.4) vs. Cas: 137.1 (102.0) mL, 95% CI: -57.4, 27.0, p = 0.457). During feeding and after cessation of feeding, the area under the GCV-curve (AUC_0-360 GCV) for P4 and Cas was 44631.1 (15546.1) and 52822.2 (19686.1) mL∗min, respectively (p = 0.061). During feeding the GCV was lower at T = 180 min (175.4 (64.8) vs. 205.2 (75.4) mL, p = 0.038) and after cessation of feeding at T = 300 min (81.3 (71.1) vs. 116.3 (84.3) mL, p = 0.004) and T = 330 min (39.9 (53.9) vs. 73.6 (81.1) mL, p = 0.031). With P4 it took less time to reach half of the GCV at T = 240 min compared to Cas (52.8 (27.6) vs. 65.4 (29.9) min, p = 0.020).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study in which healthy volunteers received esomeprazole and codeine to mimic gastrointestinal conditions of critically ill patients, observations of secondary endpoints suggest faster gastric emptying with P4 compared to Cas, and less gastric accumulation, possibly due to the non-coagulating properties of the P4 protein blend. Considering the small effect and the possible clinical relevance of reduced intragastric accumulation of enteral nutrition, the potential impact of protein coagulation should be further investigated in relevant study populations. Registered under Netherlands Trial Register identifier no. NTR6423.

Nutritional adequacy in critically ill patients: Result of PNSI study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Critically ill patients are provided with the intensive care medicine to prevent further complications, including malnutrition, disease progression, and even death. This study was intended to assess nutritional support and its' efficacy in the Intensive Care Units (ICUs) of Iran.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study assessed 50 ICU's patients out of 25 hospitals in the 10 major regions of Iran's health system and was performed using the multistage cluster sampling design. The data were collected from patient's medical records, ICU nursing sheets, patients or their relatives from 2017 to 2018. Nutritional status was investigated by modified NUTRIC score and food frequency checklist.

RESULTS

This study included 1321 ICU patients with the mean age of 54.8 ± 19.97 years, mean mNUTRIC score of 3.4 ± 2.14, and malnutrition rate of 32.6%. The mean time of first feeding was the second day and most of patients (66%) received nutrition support, mainly through enteral (57.2%) or oral (37%) route during ICU stay. The patients received 59.2 ± 37.78 percent of required calorie and 55.5 ± 30.04 percent of required protein. Adequate intake of energy and protein was provided for 16.2% and 10.7% of the patients, respectively. The result of regression analysis showed that the odds ratio of mNUTRIC score was 0.85 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.74-0.98) and APACHE II was 0.92 (95%CI = 0.89-0.95) for the prediction of energy deficiency. Nutrition intake was significantly different from patient's nutritional requirements both in terms of energy (p < 0.001) and protein (p < 0.001). Also, mean mNUTRIC score varied notably (p = 0.011) with changing in energy intake, defined as underfeeding, adequate feeding, and overfeeding.

CONCLUSION

The present findings shown that, provided nutritional care for ICU patients is not adequate for their requirements and nutritional status.

Nutritional status of patients hospitalized in the intensive care unit: A comprehensive report from Iranian hospitals, 2018

INTRODUCTION AND AIM

Malnutrition is a complication of hospitalization in critically ill patients. This event is occurred because of disease and therapeutic processes for curing the patients. Determination of nutritional status helps physicians and clinical nutritionists decide on the best regimen which should be prescribed for a patient. In the current study, we aimed to report the nutritional status ofpatientshospitalizedin the intensive care unit (ICU).

METHOD OF STUDY

We used three standard tolls, including Subjective global assessment (SGA), Nutrition Risk in the Critically Ill (NUTRIC) Score and nutrition risk screening (NRS) questionnaires via a multi-stage sampling for different ICU wards of 32 university hospitals in Iran. Frequencies and rates of nutritional scores, comparative studies, and determined agreement of scoring systems and nutritional status in any ward of hospitals were evaluated.

RESULTS

There were 771 males and 540 female Cancer and trauma patients had the best and worst nutritional scores, respectively. Using NRS and NUTRIC, the low-risk scores were more frequent than thehigh-riskscores among ICU patients. SGA showed that most patients were in grades A (well nutritional status) or B (moderate nutritional status), andfew caseswere in grade C (poor nutritional status).The high-risk nutritional score wasobtained for older patients. NUTRIC and NRS had better agreement for diagnosis and differentiation of malnutrition than NUTRIC-SGA or NRS-SGA pairs. However, there was no strong agreement between the mentioned pairs.

CONCLUSION

Nutritional status of patients hospitalized in ICU wards in Iran wassomewhat better than other countries that this could be due to the highly observed guidelines of patient's care in Iran. Anyway,it is suggested that a more precise tool of nutritional scoresto be validated for patients hospitalized in ICU·In addition, better medical care needs a well evaluation of nutritional insufficiencies and what is necessary for compensation using complementary regimens.