Administration of enteral nutrition in the prone position, gastric residual volume and other clinical outcomes in critically ill patients: a systematic review

Achieving nutritional goals in prone position: A cohort study in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to describe nutritional therapy and clinical outcomes in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) hospitalized in an intensive care unit, submitted or not to the prone position.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included adult patients with COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) of a public university hospital from June to December 2020. Sociodemographic, clinical, nutritional, and anthropometric data were collected in electronic medical records with a prestructured collection instrument. Patients who underwent a prone position at least once during hospitalization were considered in the prone group.

RESULTS

677 patients were included and 35.4 % were placed in the prone position. Pronated patients had a higher prevalence of obesity (p = 0.005), pressure ulcers (p < 0.001), required more mechanical ventilation (p < 0.001) and renal replacement therapy (p = 0.004), had longer hospital length of stay (p < 0.001) and higher mortality rate (p < 0.001). They required enteral nutrition more frequently and remained on this therapy for a longer duration, despite having similar caloric and protein targets. No significant differences were found in the ability to achieve nutritional goals between pronated and non-pronated patients.

CONCLUSION

Critically ill patients in the prone position had longer hospital stays and higher mortality rates, while being more likely to initiate and remain on enteral nutrition for a longer period. However, no significant differences were observed in the time to achieve protein and caloric goals compared to those in the supine position.

Provision of Enteral Nutrition in a Critically Ill Patient Requiring Multiple Prone Ventilation Sessions

Timely and adequate nutrition support in critical care is necessary to prevent metabolic deterioration and preserve lean body mass. However, providing enteral nutrition during prone ventilation carries certain risks. The potential for gastrointestinal intolerance and ventilator-associated pneumonia is a concern in this context. Furthermore, healthcare providers are often hesitant to start or continue enteral nutrition for patients in prone ventilation due to fears of gastrointestinal complications. Here we describe a case involving a 53-year-old male patient admitted to the critical care unit, diagnosed with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), requiring mechanical ventilation and multiple rounds of prone ventilation. Enteral feeding was initiated and increased to a maximum rate of 65 ml/hour, allowing the patient to meet his energy and protein needs while in prone ventilation. The feeding rate was well tolerated, with no adverse effects reported. Complete nutritional requirements could be satisfied even amid the demands of multiple prone ventilation sessions in a critically ill patient.

Nine Myths about Enteral Feeding in Critically Ill Adults: An Expert Perspective

Malnutrition is a well-studied and significant prognostic risk factor for morbidity and mortality in critically ill perioperative patients. Common nutrition myths in the critically ill may prevent early, consistent, and adequate delivery of enteral nutrition. We outlined 9 common intensive care unit (ICU) nutrition misconceptions and our recommendations to optimize enteral nutrition in critically ill patients based on the review of available literature. Our approach is to treat every patient admitted to the ICU as at risk for malnutrition and to initiate enteral nutrition upon admission in the absence of contraindications. Early enteral nutrition via the gastric route is more beneficial than delaying feeding while awaiting small bowel access and daytime-intermittent nutrition support can safely be initiated over continuous feeding. Gastric residual volumes to assess feeding tolerance should no longer be routinely measured. For perioperative nutrition, we recommend continuing enteral nutrition for most patients with secure airways undergoing anesthesia and resuming nutrition within 24 h of abdominal surgery; even patients with open abdomens can be safely fed in the absence of bowel injury. Critically ill patients who are proned, paralyzed, and on vasopressors can usually continue enteral nutrition. Finally, continuing enteral nutrition before extubation may optimize nutrition without compromising extubation success. In this review, we highlight several common misconceptions regarding ICU nutrition that may prevent achieving nutrition goals and subsequently lead to increased malnutrition, morbidity, and mortality. This knowledge may contribute to increased implementation of early and consistent enteral nutrition strategies to improve outcomes in critically ill adult patients.

Nutrition delivery across hospitalisation in critically ill patients with COVID-19: An observational study of the Australian experience

BACKGROUND

Data on nutrition delivery over the whole hospital admission in critically ill patients with COVID-19 are scarce, particularly in the Australian setting.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to describe nutrition delivery in critically ill patients admitted to Australian intensive care units (ICUs) with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), with a focus on post-ICU nutrition practices.

METHODS

A multicentre observational study conducted at nine sites included adult patients with a positive COVID-19 diagnosis admitted to the ICU for >24 h and discharged to an acute ward over a 12-month recruitment period from 1 March 2020. Data were extracted on baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes. Nutrition practice data from the ICU and weekly in the post-ICU ward (up to week four) included route of feeding, presence of nutrition-impacting symptoms, and nutrition support received.

RESULTS

A total of 103 patients were included (71% male, age: 58 ± 14 years, body mass index: 30±7 kg/m2), of whom 41.7% (n = 43) received mechanical ventilation within 14 days of ICU admission. While oral nutrition was received by more patients at any time point in the ICU (n = 93, 91.2% of patients) than enteral nutrition (EN) (n = 43, 42.2%) or parenteral nutrition (PN) (n = 2, 2.0%), EN was delivered for a greater duration of time (69.6% feeding days) than oral and PN (29.7% and 0.7%, respectively). More patients received oral intake than the other modes in the post-ICU ward (n = 95, 95.0%), and 40.0% (n = 38/95) of patients were receiving oral nutrition supplements. In the week after ICU discharge, 51.0% of patients (n = 51) had at least one nutrition-impacting symptom, most commonly a reduced appetite (n = 25; 24.5%) or dysphagia (n = 16; 15.7%).

CONCLUSION

Critically ill patients during the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia were more likely to receive oral nutrition than artificial nutrition support at any time point both in the ICU and in the post-ICU ward, whereas EN was provided for a greater duration when it was prescribed. Nutrition-impacting symptoms were common.

Enteral nutrition practice in the prone position in patients with coronavirus disease 2019: An international one-day point prevalence analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Enteral nutrition (EN) in the prone position for severe respiratory failure is considered possible with care. However, the extent to which it is feasible, especially its association with the length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, is unclear. Therefore, we investigated the relationship between the duration of prone position therapy and adequacy of EN delivery and explored factors associated with this relationship in an observational study of critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who were actively treated in the prone position.

METHODS

This study was a secondary analysis of a worldwide one-day prevalence study in the COVID-19 era. We investigated the care and nutritional therapy provided to critically ill patients with COVID-19 admitted to ICU, along with ICU-related information. We targeted patients who received only tube feeding and analyzed the relationship between the duration of prone position, length of ICU stays, and nutrition delivery via EN. In addition, a multivariate analysis was performed to examine factors affecting the achievement of EN delivery of 20 kcal/kg/day or more in patients who were placed in the prone position for at least 6 h.

RESULTS

A total of 399 patients who received only EN, excluding parenteral nutrition and oral intake, were included, of whom 58 % received EN energy delivery of ≥20 kcal/kg/day; this rate increased with the length of ICU stay, regardless of the duration of prone position. In a multivariate analysis of 121 patients who were in the prone position for at least 6 h, the presence of dedicated dietitians in the ICU (OR = 6.91, 95 % CI = 1.98 to 24.1, p < 0.01) was associated with a higher energy delivery. Conversely, the use of muscle relaxants (OR = 0.32, 95 % CI = 0.11 to 0.98, p = 0.04) and presence of nutrition protocols (OR = 0.24, 95 % CI = 0.07 to 0.77, p = 0.02) was associated with a lower energy delivery.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with COVID-19 received adequate nutrition by EN even during prone position. Target EN delivery would be achieved with the introduction of prone position.

Effects of ultrasound monitoring of gastric residual volume on feeding complications, caloric intake and prognosis of patients with severe mechanical ventilation

BACKGROUND

Monitoring of gastric residual is an important approach for assessing gastric emptying in patients with mechanical ventilation. By monitoring gastric contents, the enteral nutrition scheme can be adjusted in time to ensure feeding safety.

AIM

To investigate the effects of ultrasound monitoring on the incidence of feeding complications, daily caloric intake and prognosis of patients with severe mechanical ventilation. To analyze the clinical significance of ultrasound monitoring of gastric residual volume (GRV) up to 250 mL to provide a theoretical basis for clinical practice.

METHODS

Patients admitted to the department of emergency medicine of the Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University from January 2018 to June 2022 who received invasive mechanical ventilation and continuous enteral nutrition support within 24-48 h after admission were enrolled in this study. Medical records for patients within 7 d of hospitalization were retrospectively analyzed to compare the incidence of feeding complications, daily caloric intake and clinical prognosis between patients with gastric residual ≥ 250 mL and < 250 mL, as monitored by ultrasound on the third day.

RESULTS

A total of 513 patients were enrolled in this study. Incidences of abdominal distension, diarrhea, and vomiting in the < 250 mL and ≥ 250 mL groups were: 18.4% vs 21.0%, 23.9% vs 32.3% and 4.0% vs 6.5%, respectively; mortality rates were 20.8% vs 22.65%; mechanical ventilation durations were 18.30 d vs 17.56 d while lengths of stay in the intensive care units (ICU) were 19.87 d vs 19.19 ± 5.19 d. Differences in the above factors between groups were not significant. Gastric residual ≥ 250 mL was not an independent risk factor for death and prolonged ICU stay. However, target feeding time of patients in the ≥ 250 mL group was longer than that of patients in the ≥ 250 mL group, and caloric intake (22.0, 23.6, 24.8, 25.3 kcal/kg/d) for patients in the ≥ 250 mL group from the 4^th day to the 7^th day of hospitalization was lower than that of patients in the ≥ 250 mL group (23.2, 24.8, 25.7, 25.8 kcal/kg/d). On the 4^th day (Z = 4.324, P = 0.013), on the 5^th day (Z = 3.376, P = 0.033), while on the 6^th day (Z = 3.098, P = 0.04), the differences were statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

The use of ultrasound to monitor GRV and undertaking clinical interventions when the monitoring value is ≥ 250 mL has no significant effects on incidences of feeding complications and clinical prognostic outcomes, however, it significantly prolongs the time to reach target feeding, reduces the daily intake of calories during ICU hospitalization, and increases the risk of insufficient nutrition of patients. The accuracy and necessity of monitoring gastric remnants and monitoring frequencies should be investigated further.

The clinical impact of implementation of a nutritional treatment protocol in critically ill adults with SARS-CoV-2 infection

INTRODUCTION

The critical patient affected by SARS-CoV-2 is at risk of malnutrition. The need to avoid volume overload and manoeuvres that delay reaching nutritional requirements such as pronation make the nutritional approach to these patients complex. To ensure adequate treatment, a nutritional support protocol was developed as a clinical practice guideline adapted to the COVID-19 patient.

OBJECTIVE

To describe and analyse the results of introducing a nutritional support protocol aimed at SARS-CoV-2 patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) of the Consorcio Hospital General Universitario de Valencia (CHGUV) from March to May 2020.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Observational, descriptive, retrospective and longitudinal design to evaluate compliance with a nutritional support protocol.

RESULTS

Thirty-one consecutive patients were included but nutritional follow-up could not be performed in eight. Of the remaining 23 patients, only eight reached 80% of caloric requirements before the tenth day after starting treatment (good compliance group) and 15 after the eleventh day (poor compliance group). In the group with «good compliance» 75% (n=6) were discharged and 25% died (n=2), compared to the group with «bad compliance» where 53% (n=8) were discharged and 47% (n=7) died (Chi square test, p-value=0.019). Those patients who reached 80% of caloric needs during ICU stay had a shorter length of stay compared to those who did not (median days of admission=14, IQR=10-16 and median days of admission=22, IQR=13-39, p-value=0.025).

CONCLUSIONS

Introducing a nutritional protocol during the first weeks of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic could improve clinical outcomes by promoting healing and reducing associated complications.

[The clinical impact of implementation of a nutritional treatment protocol in critically ill adults with SARS-CoV-2 infection]

Introduction

The critical patient affected by SARS-CoV-2 is at risk of malnutrition. The need to avoid volume overload and manoeuvres that delay reaching nutritional requirements such as pronation make the nutritional approach to these patients complex. To ensure adequate treatment, a nutritional support protocol was developed as a clinical practice guideline adapted to the COVID-19 patient.

Objective

To describe and analyse the results of introducing a nutritional support protocol aimed at SARS-CoV-2 patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) of the Consorcio Hospital General Universitario de Valencia (CHGUV) from March to May 2020.

Material and methods

Observational, descriptive, retrospective and longitudinal design to evaluate compliance with a nutritional support protocol.

Results

Thirty-one consecutive patients were included but nutritional follow-up could not be performed in eight. Of the remaining 23 patients, only eight reached 80% of caloric requirements before the tenth day after starting treatment (good compliance group) and 15 after the eleventh day (poor compliance group). In the group with «good compliance» 75% (n = 6) were discharged and 25% died (n = 2), compared to the group with «bad compliance» where 53% (n = 8) were discharged and 47% (n = 7) died (Chi square test, p-value = 0.019). Those patients who reached 80% of caloric needs during ICU stay had a shorter length of stay compared to those who did not (median days of admission = 14, IQR = 10-16 and median days of admission = 22, IQR = 13-39, p-value = 0.025).

Conclusions

Introducing a nutritional protocol during the first weeks of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic could improve clinical outcomes by promoting healing and reducing associated complications.

Prone position, time to reach nutrition target, and energy/protein achievement rate on the seventh day of intensive care unit stay in patients with COVID-19: A cohort study

BACKGROUND

We aimed to evaluate the mean time to reach the energy (EAR) and protein (PAR) achievement rate among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who did or did not undergo prone position (PP) therapy in the first week of their stay in the intensive care unit (ICU), and the interaction of these nutrition therapy indicators on the association between PP and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

This cohort study used retrospective data collected from medical records of patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU (≥18 years). We collected nutrition data, clinical information, prescription of PP, and its frequency during the first week, and clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

PP therapy was administered to 75.2% of 153 patients (61.5 ± 14.8 years, 57.6% males) during the first week of their ICU stay. Patients who underwent PP reached nutrition therapy goals later (4 [3-6] vs 3 [2-4] days; P = 0.030) and had lower EAR (91.9 ± 25.7 vs 101.6 ± 84.0; P = 0.002) and PAR (88.0 ± 27.7 vs 98.1 ± 13.5; P = 0.009) in comparison to those who did not receive PP. Grouping patients who underwent PP according to the EAR (≥70% or <70%) did not show any differences in the incidence of ICU death, duration of mechanical ventilation, or ICU stay (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In this exploratory study, PP was associated with a delayed time to reach the nutrition target and the lowest EAR and estimated protein requirement on the seventh day of ICU stay in patients with COVID-19. Permissive enteral nutrition prescription in patients who underwent PP was not associated with worse clinical outcomes.

Administration of enteral nutrition and gastrointestinal complications in Covid-19 critical patients in prone position

Background

The prone position (PP) used in the treatment of critically ill patients infected with SARS-CoV-2, may be a barrier to enteral nutrition (EN). This study aimed to analyze the effectiveness and complications of EN in the PP, as well as clinical outcomes.

Methods

Prospective cohort study with patients in EN and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), on mechanical ventilation (MV), which whom needed or not PP. Gastrointestinal intolerances (GII) related to PP were evaluated, and correlated with possible confounding factors. EN, days on MV, Intensive Care Unit (ICU) length of stay, hospital length of stay, ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and mortality were analyzed. The data were evaluated daily and compared prone group (PG=57) and supine group (SG=69).

Results

The PP was associated with GII (P=0.000) and presented in 32 patients (26,44%) with no difference among groups. Association between epinephrine (P=0.003), vasopressin (P=0.018), and GII was observed. There was no difference between the total volume of enteral nutrition (TVEN) infused in the groups. However, the mean EN infused for the days when the patient was on PP was (70.0% ± 31.5) and for the days in supine position was (74.8% ± 27.3), P= 0.006. The PG had a longer time on MV (P=0.005) and ICU (P=0.003) and PP was associated with VAP (P=<0.001). The infused TVEN showed no association with VAP (P=0.09).

Conclusion

PP was a determining factor in GII and proved to be a risk factor for VAP, but the EN protocol seems to have ensured an adequate EN supply in PP and be a safe alternative.

Nutritional priorities in patients with severe COVID-19

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The COVID-19 pandemic has altered the profile of critical care services internationally, as professionals around the globe have struggled to rise to the unprecedented challenge faced, both in terms of individual patient management and the sheer volume of patients that require treatment and management in intensive care. This review article sets out key priorities in nutritional interventions during the patient journey, both in the acute and recovery phases.

RECENT FINDINGS

The current review covers the care of the acutely unwell patient, and the evidence base for nutritional interventions in the COVID-19 population. One of the biggest differences in caring for critically ill patients with acute respiratory failure from COVID-19 is often the time prior to intubation. This represents specific nutritional challenges, as does nursing patients in the prone position or in the setting of limited resources. This article goes on to discuss nutritional support for COVID-19 sufferers as they transition through hospital wards and into the community.

SUMMARY

Nutritional support of patients with severe COVID-19 is essential. Given the longer duration of their critical illness, combined with hypermetabolism and energy expenditure, patients with COVID-19 are at increased risk for malnutrition during and after their hospital stay.

Nutrition during extracorporeal life support: A review of pathophysiological bases and application of guidelines

BACKGROUND

Patients on extracorporeal life support (ECLS), either for respiratory or cardiac support, are at high risk of malnutrition; guidelines on nutrition in critical care have not incorporated solid evidence regarding these settings. The aim of this narrative review is to gather the available evidence in the existing literature and transpose general principles to the ECLS population.

METHODS

A literature review of observational and interventional studies on nutrition during ECLS, and evaluation of nutrition guidelines in this perspective.

RESULTS

Nutrition is paramount for improving outcomes in ECLS, as well as in critically ill patients. The caloric needs during ECLS can vary according to the severity of the clinical state, sedation, paralysis, and temperature stability. Precise evaluation of energy expenditure by indirect calorimetry is difficult because ECLS is a system dedicated to removing carbon dioxide; however, modified equations composed of carbon dioxide values taken from the membrane lung are available. Guidelines suggest starting early enteral nutrition (EN) with a hypocaloric (70%-80% of the needs) strategy, also in acute states such as septic or cardiogenic shock. Moreover, EN, despite previous concerns, is feasible in prone position, an increasingly adopted strategy during mechanical ventilation. The catabolic state is maximal in these patients, causing a protein and muscular reduction. Therefore, adequate protein delivery should be guaranteed by administering a high protein intake of up to 2 g/kg/day.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies on nutrition tailored to ECLS patients are warranted. Early hypocaloric EN with high protein intake, tailored on indirect calorimetry, may be the most appropriate option.

Energy Achievement Rate Is an Independent Factor Associated with Intensive Care Unit Mortality in High-Nutritional-Risk Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Requiring Prolonged Prone Positioning Therapy

Early enteral nutrition (EN) and a nutrition target >60% are recommended for patients in the intensive care unit (ICU), even for those with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Prolonged prone positioning (PP) therapy (>48 h) is the rescue therapy of ARDS, but it may worsen the feeding status because it requires the heavy sedation and total paralysis of patients. Our previous studies demonstrated that energy achievement rate (EAR) >65% was a good prognostic factor in ICU. However, its impact on the mortality of patients with ARDS requiring prolonged PP therapy remains unclear. We retrospectively analyzed 79 patients with high nutritional risk (modified nutrition risk in the critically ill; mNUTRIC score ≥5); and identified factors associated with ICU mortality by using a Cox regression model. Through univariate analysis, mNUTRIC score, comorbid with malignancy, actual energy intake, and EAR (%) were associated with ICU mortality. By multivariate analysis, EAR (%) was a strong predictive factor of ICU mortality (HR: 0.19, 95% CI: 0.07-0.56). EAR >65% was associated with lower 14-day, 28-day, and ICU mortality after adjustment for confounding factors. We suggest early EN and increase EAR >65% may benefit patients with ARDS who required prolonged PP therapy.

A Quick Review on the Multisystem Effects of Prone Position in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) Including COVID-19

Objective:

The purpose of this review is to highlight the multisystem effects of prone position in ARDS patients with a focus on current findings regarding its use in COVID-19 patients.

Methods:

Two reviewers comprehensively searched PubMed database for literature regarding pathophysiology and efficacy of prone position in ARDS patients as well as specific data regarding this approach in COVID-19 patients.

Conclusion:

Prone positioning is well-documented to improve oxygenation and cardiac function in ARDS patients and might confer increased survival, with benefits that outweigh risks such as facial edema, endotracheal tube displacement, and intraabdominal organ dysfunction in obese patients. Severe COVID-19 pneumonia, while meeting ARDS criteria, differs from typical ARDS in several ways. Data would suggest that advantages of prone position would become limited after significant disease progression and fibrosis. The use of this technique in COVID-19 requires prolonged sessions that are unprecedented in the treatment of ARDS patients. New data regarding COVID-19 pathophysiology and patients continues to evolve daily. More frequently, patients are proned while maintaining spontaneous breathing—the results of this intervention are an area for future studies. There is more to learn about the appropriate use of prone position in COVID-19 patients. The multisystem risks and benefits require clinicians to adopt a patient centered decision-making algorithm when employing this technique in COVID-19 patients.

Level of evidence:

NA

Nutritional Interventions on Physical Functioning for Critically Ill Patients: An Integrative Review

Background

Poor physical functioning (PF) is a common issue among critically ill patients. It was suggested that reasonable nutrition accelerates PF recovery. However, the details and types of nutritional interventions on the PF of different intensive care unit (ICU) patients at present have not been well analyzed yet. This study aimed to systematically synthesize nutritional interventions on PF in different ICU populations.

Methods

Whittemore and Knafl’s framework was employed. PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL Plus with Full Text, and Cochrane Library were searched to obtain studies from January 2010 to September 2020, with a manual search of the included studies’ references. Record screening, data extraction, and quality appraisal were conducted independently by each reviewer before reaching an agreement after discussion.

Results

Twelve studies were included reporting the effects of early parenteral nutrition, early enteral nutrition, early goal-directed nutrition, early adequate nutrition, higher protein delivery, higher energy delivery, low energy delivery, energy and protein delivery, intermittent enteral feeding on PF like muscle mass, muscle strength, and function. Function was the most common outcome but showed little improvements. Muscle strength outcomes improved the most. The mechanically ventilated were the most popular target ICU population. The commenced time of the interventions is usually within 24 to 48 hours after ICU admission.

Conclusion

Research on nutritional interventions on critically ill patients’ PF is limited, but most are of a high level of evidence. Few intervention studies specified their evidence basis. Qualitative studies investigating timeframe of initiating feeding, perspectives of the patients’ perspectives and caregivers are warranted to advance research and further discuss this topic.

Risks in Management of Enteral Nutrition in Intensive Care Units: A Literature Review and Narrative Synthesis

Critically ill patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) have a high risk of developing malnutrition, and this is associated with poorer clinical outcomes. In clinical practice, nutrition, including enteral nutrition (EN), is often not prioritized. Resulting from this, risks and safety issues for patients and healthcare professionals can emerge. The aim of this literature review, inspired by the Rapid Review Guidebook by Dobbins, 2017, was to identify risks and safety issues for patient safety in the management of EN in critically ill patients in the ICU. Three databases were used to identify studies between 2009 and 2020. We assessed 3495 studies for eligibility and included 62 in our narrative synthesis. Several risks and problems were identified: No use of clinical assessment or screening nutrition assessment, inadequate tube management, missing energy target, missing a nutritionist, bad hygiene and handling, wrong time management and speed, nutritional interruptions, wrong body position, gastrointestinal complication and infections, missing or not using guidelines, understaffing, and lack of education. Raising awareness of these risks is a central aspect in patient safety in ICU. Clinical experts can use a checklist with 12 identified top risks and the recommendations drawn up to carry out their own risk analysis in clinical practice.

Enteral Nutrition Safety With Advanced Treatments: Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation, Prone Positioning, and Infusion of Neuromuscular Blockers

This review aims at assessing the safety and efficacy of enteral nutrition in critically ill patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, prone positioning, and infusion of neuromuscular blockers. Existing data from randomized controlled trials demonstrate the survival benefit of early enteral nutrition in critically ill patients. Observational data have demonstrated that enteral nutrition in patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, prone positioning, and infusion of neuromuscular blockers is generally safe. However, these patients are at increased risk for gastrointestinal complications from enteral nutrition because of critical illness-induced gastrointestinal dysfunction; associated shock; the concomitant use of vasopressor agents, sedatives, and narcotics; possibly mesenteric circulatory compromise; and regurgitation associated with prone positioning. Therefore, early enteral nutrition is generally recommended in these patients in the absence of severe gastrointestinal dysfunction or shock. To reduce the complications, early nutrition should be advanced gradually (trophic feeding or permissive underfeeding), the bed should be tilted to a maximum of 30°, and concentrated nutritional formulae and the use of prokinetics may be considered to treat enteral feeding intolerance. Physicians should be vigilant about monitoring for early signs of acute mesenteric ischemia, which should lead to holding enteral feeding. Parenteral nutrition may be utilized in patients who cannot receive enteral nutrition or are unable to reach their nutrition goals by the end of the first week.