Electrolyte disorders during the initiation of nutrition therapy in the ICU

Assessment of drug-induced electrolyte disorders in intensive care units: a multicenter observational study

Objective

Electrolyte disorder (ED) is frequently encountered critically ill patients during admission or admission to the intensive care unit (ICU). This study aimed to determine the frequency of ED encountered in ICU patients to evaluate the relationship of ED with drugs.

Methods

This prospective, multicenter study was conducted in the medical and anesthesiology ICUs of two training and research hospitals and included patients with at least one ED during admission or hospitalization in the ICUs. The relationship between ED and the drug was evaluated by calculating the logistic probabilistic method scale (LPMS) and the expert panel's evaluation. The correlation between EDs and LPMS was determined using Kendal tau. A binary logistic regression model was preferred in the analysis of factors related to ED. Statistical significance was set as p < 0.05.

Results

A total of 117 patients were included in the study. A total of 165 EDs were detected, including at least one in 88 (75.2%) patients. According to the expert panel, 61 (21.7%) of EDs were drug-related, whereas according to the LPMS, 111 (39.6%) (p < 0.001). Mortality (50% vs. 13.7%) and mechanical ventilation rates (52.2% vs. 17.2%) were significantly higher in patients with ED (p < 0.001). Patients with ED had 8.352 times higher odds of exhibiting mortality (OR: 8.352, %95 CI: 1.598-43.648, p: 0.012) and need mechanical ventilation with higher odds of 3.229 (OR: 3.229 95% CI: 0.815-12.787 p: 0.045). Patient who required enteral or parenteral feeding were associated with an increased likelihood of exhibiting ED (respectively OR: 30.057, %95 CI: 2.265-398.892, p: 0.01, OR: 5.537, %95 CI: 1.406-21.800, p: 0.014).

Conclusion

EDs are very common in the ICU. Dysnatremia was detected more commonly in other EDs. It has also been found that patients with ED are more often under mechanical ventilation, have more prolonged hospitalizations, and have higher mortality rates than patients without ED. The suitability of LPMS for assessing ED-drug relationships in the ICU context is questioned.

Efficacy of Early Enteral Nutrition on Gastrointestinal Surgery Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Congenital anomalies, congenital malformations, or birth defects can be defined as any structural or functional anomalies that develop prenatally and could be identified before, at birth, or later in life. Approximately 6% of babies are born with a congenital anomaly, which results in 2.4 million newborn deaths worldwide. This systematic review and meta-analysis ascertained the quantitative studies published in PubMed, ClinicalKey, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar. Two authors independently screened and extracted the data from the primary studies that analyzed the efficacy of early enteral nutrition (EEN) on the postoperative outcome. This systematic review and meta-analysis adopted Cochrane Collaboration guidelines and reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. The methodological quality of trials was assessed by Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool. Six trials, representing 488 children, with age ranging from 10 days to 6.5 years, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. EEN has significantly shortened hospital stay, induced early fecal movement, and reduced postoperative wound infections in children with congenital gastrointestinal abnormalities undergoing gastrointestinal anastomosis compared with children who received late enteral nutrition. The review also found that the experimental group who received EEN had no significant impact on the anastomosis leakage, vomiting, and abdominal distension. EEN has some positive effects on postsurgery outcomes among children with congenital gastrointestinal anomalies undergoing gastrointestinal anastomosis.

Relationship of blood thiamine pyrophosphate to plasma phosphate and the response to enteral nutrition plus co-administration of intravenous thiamine during critical illness

BACKGROUND

Hypovitamin B1 occurs frequently during critical illness but is challenging to predict or rapidly diagnose. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether plasma phosphate concentrations predict hypovitamin B1, enteral nutrition prevents hypovitamin B1 and intravenous thiamine supplementation achieves supraphysiological concentrations in critically ill patients.

METHODS

Thirty-two enterally fed critically ill patients, with a plasma phosphate concentration ≤0.65 mmol/L, formed a nested cohort within a larger randomised clinical trial. Patients were assigned to receive intravenous thiamine (200 mg) twice daily, and controls were not administered intravenous thiamine. Thiamine pyrophosphate concentrations were measured at four time points (pre- and post-infusion and 4- and 6-h post-infusion) on days 1 and 3 in those allocated to thiamine and once in the control group.

RESULTS

Baseline thiamine pyrophosphate concentrations were similar (intervention 88 [67, 93] vs. control 89 [62, 110] nmol/L, p = 0.49). Eight (25%) patients had hypovitamin B1 (intervention 3 vs. control 5), with two patients in the control group remaining insufficient at day 3. There was no association between baseline phosphate and thiamine pyrophosphate concentrations. Intravenous thiamine achieved supraphysiological concentrations 6 h post first infusion, with concentrations increasing to day 3. In the control group, thiamine pyrophosphate concentrations were not statistically different between baseline and day 3 (mean change: 8.6 [-6.0, 23.1] nmol/L, p = 0.25).

CONCLUSIONS

Phosphate concentrations did not predict hypovitamin B1, which was observed in 25% of the participants. Enteral nutrition alone prevented the development of new hypovitamin B1. Administration of a single 200-mg dose of intravenous thiamine achieved supraphysiological concentrations of thiamine pyrophosphate, with repeated dosing sustaining this effect.

Enteral feeding, even when the gut does not feel very good?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize knowledge on the gut function in relation to enteral nutrition.

RECENT FINDINGS

The gut is certainly suffering during critical illness but our understanding of the exact mechanisms involved is limited. Physicians at bedside are lacking tools to identify how well or bad the gut is doing and whether the gut is responding adequately to critical illness. Sensing nutrition as a signal is important for the gut and microbiome. Enteral nutrition has beneficial effects for the gut perfusion and function. However, early full enteral nutrition in patients with shock was associated with an increased number of rare but serious complications.

SUMMARY

Whenever synthesizing knowledge in physiology and available evidence in critically ill, we suggest that enteral nutrition has beneficial effects but may turn harmful if provided too aggressively. Contraindications to enteral nutrition are listed in recent guidelines. For patients with gastrointestinal dysfunction but without these contraindications, we suggest considering early enteral nutrition as a signal to the gut and to the body rather than an energy and protein provision. With this rationale, we think that low dose of enteral nutrition could and probably should be provided also when the gut does not feel very good. Understanding the feedback from the gut in response to enteral nutrition would be important, however, monitoring tools are currently limited to clinical assessment only.

A guide to enteral nutrition in intensive care units: 10 expert tips for the daily practice

The preferential use of the oral/enteral route in critically ill patients over gut rest is uniformly recommended and applied. This article provides practical guidance on enteral nutrition in compliance with recent American and European guidelines. Low-dose enteral nutrition can be safely started within 48 h after admission, even during treatment with small or moderate doses of vasopressor agents. A percutaneous access should be used when enteral nutrition is anticipated for ≥ 4 weeks. Energy delivery should not be calculated to match energy expenditure before day 4–7, and the use of energy-dense formulas can be restricted to cases of inability to tolerate full-volume isocaloric enteral nutrition or to patients who require fluid restriction. Low-dose protein (max 0.8 g/kg/day) can be provided during the early phase of critical illness, while a protein target of > 1.2 g/kg/day could be considered during the rehabilitation phase. The occurrence of refeeding syndrome should be assessed by daily measurement of plasma phosphate, and a phosphate drop of 30% should be managed by reduction of enteral feeding rate and high-dose thiamine. Vomiting and increased gastric residual volume may indicate gastric intolerance, while sudden abdominal pain, distension, gastrointestinal paralysis, or rising abdominal pressure may indicate lower gastrointestinal intolerance.

A multicenter randomized clinical trial of pharmacological vitamin B1 administration to critically ill patients who develop hypophosphatemia during enteral nutrition (The THIAMINE 4 HYPOPHOSPHATEMIA trial)

BACKGROUND

Hypophosphatemia may be a useful biomarker to identify thiamine deficiency in critically ill enterally-fed patients. The objective was to determine whether intravenous thiamine affects blood lactate, biochemical and clinical outcomes in this group.

METHOD

This randomized clinical trial was conducted across 5 Intensive Care Units. Ninety critically ill adult patients with a serum phosphate ≤0.65 mmol/L within 72 h of commencing enteral nutrition were randomized to intravenous thiamine (200 mg every 12 h for up to 14 doses) or usual care (control). The primary outcome was blood lactate over time and data are median [IQR] unless specified.

RESULTS

Baseline variables were well balanced (thiamine: lactate 1.2 [1.0, 1.6] mmol/L, phosphate 0.56 [0.44, 0.64] mmol/L vs. control: lactate 1.0 [0.8, 1.3], phosphate 0.54 [0.44, 0.61]). Patients randomized to the intervention received a median of 11 [7.5, 13.5] doses for a total of 2200 [1500, 2700] mg of thiamine. Blood lactate over the entire 7 days of treatment was similar between groups (mean difference = -0.1 (95 % CI -0.2 to 0.1) mmol/L; P = 0.55). The percentage change from lactate pre-randomization to T = 24 h was not statistically different (thiamine: -32 (-39, -26) vs. control: -24 (-31, -16) percent, P = 0.09). Clinical outcomes were not statistically different (days of vasopressor administration: thiamine 2 [1, 4] vs. control 2 [0, 5.5] days; P = 0.37, and deaths 9 (21 %) vs. 5 (11 %); P = 0.25).

CONCLUSIONS

In critically ill enterally-fed patients who developed hypophosphatemia, intravenous thiamine did not cause measurable differences in blood lactate or clinical outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12619000121167).

A comparison of two different refeeding protocols and its effect on hand grip strength and refeeding syndrome: a randomized controlled clinical trial

PURPOSE

Optimal refeeding protocols in older malnourished hospital patients remain unclear. We aimed to compare the effect of two different refeeding protocols; an assertive and a cautious protocol, on HGS, mortality and refeeding syndrome (RFS), in patients ≥ 65 years METHODS: Patients admitted under medical or surgical category and at risk of RFS, were randomized to either an enteral nutrition (EN) refeeding protocol of 20 kcal/kg/day, reaching energy goals within 3 days (intervention group), or a protocol of 10 kcal/kg/day, reaching goals within 7 days (control group). Primary outcome was the difference in hand grip strength (HGS) at 3 months follow-up, in an intention to treat analysis. RFS (phosphate < 0.65 mmol/L) during the hospital stay and mortality rates at 3 months were secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 85 patients were enrolled, with mean (SD) age of 79.8(7.4) and 54.1% female, 41 in the intervention group and 44 in the control group. HGS was similar at 3 months with mean change of 0.42 kg (95% CI - 2.52 to 3.36, p = 0.78). Serum phosphate < 0.65 mmol/L was seen in 17.1% in the intervention group and 9.3% in the control group, p = 0.29. There was no difference in mortality rates (39% vs 34.1%, p = 0.64). An indication of more respiratory distress was found in the intervention group, 53.6% vs 30.2%, p = 0.029.

CONCLUSION

A more assertive refeeding protocol providing 20 kcal/kg/day did not result in improved HGS measured 3 months after discharge compared with a cautious refeeding (10 kcal/kg/day) protocol. No difference in incidence of mortality or RFS was found.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Record 2017/FO148295, Registered: 21st of February, 2017.