Temporal trends in the use of parenteral nutrition in critically ill patients

Parenteral Nutrition in the Critically Ill Adult: A Narrative Review

Malnutrition in adult intensive care unit patients is associated with poor clinical outcomes. Providing adequate nutritional support to the critically ill adult should be an important goal for the intensivist. This narrative review aims to delineate the role of parenteral nutrition (PN) in meeting nutritional goals. We examined the data regarding the safety and efficacy of PN compared to enteral nutrition. In addition, we describe practical considerations for the use of PN in the ICU including patient nutritional risk stratification, nutrient composition selection for PN, route of PN administration, and biochemical monitoring.

Timing of parenteral nutrition is associated with adequacy of nutrient delivery and anthropometry in critically ill children: A single-center study

BACKGROUND

The optimal timing of supplemental parenteral nutrition (PN) use in the pediatric intensive care unit (ICU) is unclear. We aimed to describe patterns of PN use in the ICU and the association between the timing of PN initiation and macronutrient delivery and anthropometry.

METHODS

We enrolled patients (aged <18 years) with an ICU stay >3 days were started on PN in the ICU. Initiation within 48 hours of admission was deemed as early, and duration <5 days was deemed as short. We used multivariable analysis to examine the association between PN timing and macronutrient delivery adequacy (percentage of the prescribed target that was actually delivered) and weight-for-age z-score (WAZ) over hospital stay.

RESULTS

Ninety-five patients were included. Median (interquartile range [IQR]) time to initiate PN was 4 (1, 6) days, and in 33%, PN was initiated early. Median (IQR) PN duration was 8 (5, 14) days, and in 16.8%, duration was short. Median (IQR) adequacies for total energy and protein delivery were 55% (40, 74) and 72% (44, 81) in the early PN group compared with 29% (3, 50) and 31% (4, 47), respectively, in the late PN group (P < .001). The late PN group had a 0.50-unit greater decline in mean WAZ compared with the early PN group (95% CI, 0.11-0.89; P = .012).

CONCLUSION

Late PN initiation was associated with significantly lower adequacy of macronutrient delivery and greater decline in WAZ in critically ill children. The relationship between PN timing patient outcomes must be further examined.

Nutritional therapy and outcomes in underweight critically ill patients

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Critically ill patients with body mass index (BMI) < 20 kg/m² have worse outcomes than normal/overweight patients possibly because underweight is a marker of malnutrition. To assess the effects of nutrition therapy in this population during the first week of an ICU stay.

METHODS

Prospective, 2-centre, observational study. Nutritional evaluations were performed between days 2 and 3 (first) and between days 5 and 7 (second) of ICU admission. In the first evaluation, patients were divided into non-fed (without nutritional support) and early-fed (those already receiving nutritional support) groups. In the second evaluation, patients were divided according to caloric intake (≥or<20 kcal/kg) and protein intake (≥or<1.3 g of protein/kg).

RESULTS

Of the 4236 patients screened and 342 were included in the cohort. Mortality was 58.5% (median 21 [11-38.25] days of follow-up). Unadjusted patient survival was worse in the non-fed group than in the early-fed group (HR 1.66; 95%CI, 1.18 to 2.32). There was no difference in mortality between groups after adjusting for the SOFA score on the day of the evaluation. At the second evaluation, unadjusted analysis showed better in-hospital survival in patients with higher caloric (HR0.58; 95%CI, 0.40 to 0.86) and protein intake (HR0.59; 95%CI, 0.42 to 0.82); there was no association between mortality and caloric or protein intake after adjusting for the SOFA score on the day of the evaluation.

CONCLUSION

Nutritional therapy in the first week of ICU stay did not affect vital outcome after adjusting for the SOFA score on the day of the evaluation in underweight critically ill patients.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY

ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT03398343.

Propensity-Score Matched Comparative Study on Effects of Intravenous Human Serum Albumin Administration in Critically Ill Adult Patients Receiving Parenteral Nutrition

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to assess the effect of intravenous human serum albumin administration (IV HSA) on nutrition markers, including non-serum-albumin plasma protein levels, in adult critically ill patients receiving parenteral nutrition (PN).

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of prospectively collected data. Patients included in an initial cohort were patients who initiated IV HSA within 24 hours of start of PN. A second cohort who did not received IV HSA during PN was manually selected, matching several variables. Subsequently, both cohorts were propensity-score matched, resulting in 2 final cohorts: the cohort receiving IV HSA (ALB) and the cohort not receiving IV HSA (NOALB).

RESULTS

A total of 42 patients, 21 in each cohort, entered the study. Both cohorts were similar in demographics, anthropometrics, comorbidities, diagnoses, PN composition, and severity of the disease, biochemistry, and nutrition markers. Patients in the ALB cohort received IV HSA at a dose of 30.0 g/day during 5 days. The ALB cohort presented higher values of final serum albumin level and serum albumin level change from baseline, but also presented lower values of final non-serum-albumin plasma protein levels and their change and lower final prealbumin. In addition, bilirubin in the ALB cohort increased, whereas it decreased in the NOALB cohort.

CONCLUSION

Patients receiving IV HSA and PN for several days increased serum albumin level, but decreased non-serum-albumin plasma protein levels. In addition, bilirubin clearance could be slightly impaired in these patients.

Parenteral or enteral nutrition: do you have the choice?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The review focuses on the use of parenteral nutrition and enteral nutrition in critically ill patients to optimize the nutrition care throughout the ICU stay. The key message is: you have the choice!

RECENT FINDINGS

Enteral nutrition has been recommended for critically ill patients, whereas parenteral nutrition has been considered harmful and to be avoided. However, recent studies have challenged this theory. They demonstrated that enteral nutrition is frequently associated with energy and protein undernutrition, whereas parenteral nutrition becomes deleterious only if overfeeding is induced. Measuring energy expenditure by indirect calorimetry, in most cases, enables accurate determination of the energy needs to optimize the prescription of nutrition. Protein targets should also be considered for adequate feeding. Parenteral nutrition can be used as a supplement or as an alternative to enteral nutrition in case of gastrointestinal intolerance, to enable adequate energy, and protein provision.

SUMMARY

Parenteral nutrition is a powerful tool to optimize nutrition care of critically ill patients to improve clinical outcome, if prescribed according to the individual needs of the patients. After 3-4 days of attempt to feed enterally, enteral nutrition or parenteral nutrition can be used alternatively or combined, as long as the target is reached with special attention to avoid hypercaloric feeding.

When Is Parenteral Nutrition Appropriate?

Parenteral nutrition (PN) represents one of the most notable achievements of modern medicine, serving as a therapeutic modality for all age groups across the healthcare continuum. PN offers a life-sustaining option when intestinal failure prevents adequate oral or enteral nutrition. However, providing nutrients by vein is an expensive form of nutrition support, and serious adverse events can occur. In an effort to provide clinical guidance regarding PN therapy, the Board of Directors of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN) convened a task force to develop consensus recommendations regarding appropriate PN use. The recommendations contained in this document aim to delineate appropriate PN use and promote clinical benefits while minimizing the risks associated with the therapy. These consensus recommendations build on previous ASPEN clinical guidelines and consensus recommendations for PN safety. They are intended to guide evidence-based decisions regarding appropriate PN use for organizations and individual professionals, including physicians, nurses, dietitians, pharmacists, and other clinicians involved in providing PN. They not only support decisions related to initiating and managing PN but also serve as a guide for developing quality monitoring tools for PN and for identifying areas for further research. Finally, the recommendations contained within the document are also designed to inform decisions made by additional stakeholders, such as policy makers and third-party payers, by providing current perspectives regarding the use of PN in a variety of healthcare settings.

Parenteral nutrition in the ICU setting: need for a shift in utilization

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The difficulties to feed the patients adequately with enteral nutrition alone have drawn the attention of the clinicians toward the use of parenteral nutrition, although recommendations by the recent guidelines are conflicting. This review focuses on the intrinsic role of parenteral nutrition, its new indication, and modalities of use for the critically ill patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

A recent trial demonstrated that selecting either parenteral nutrition or enteral nutrition for early nutrition has no impact on clinical outcomes. However, it must be acknowledged that the risk of relative overfeeding is greater when using parenteral nutrition and the risk of underfeeding is greater when using enteral nutrition because of gastrointestinal intolerance. Both overfeeding and underfeeding in the critically ill patients are associated with deleterious outcomes. Thus, early and adequate feeding according to the specific energy needs can be recommended as the optimal feeding strategy.

SUMMARY

Parenteral nutrition can be used to substitute or supplement enteral nutrition, if adequately prescribed. Testing for enteral nutrition tolerance during 2-3 days after ICU admission provides the perfect timing to start parenteral nutrition, if needed. In case of absolute contraindication for enteral nutrition, consider starting parenteral nutrition carefully to avoid overfeeding.