-
1.
Body Composition following Necrotising Enterocolitis in Preterm Infants.
Binder, C, Longford, N, Gale, C, Modi, N, Uthaya, S
Neonatology. 2018;(3):242-248
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND The optimal nutritional regimen for preterm infants, including those that develop necrotising enterocolitis (NEC), is unknown. OBJECTIVE The objective here was to evaluate body composition at term in infants following NEC, in comparison with healthy infants. The primary outcome measure was non-adipose tissue mass (non-ATM). METHODS We compared body composition assessed by magnetic resonance imaging at term in infants born <31 weeks of gestational age that participated in NEON, a trial comparing incremental versus immediate delivery of parenteral amino acids on non-ATM, and SMOF versus intralipid on intrahepatocellular lipid content. There were no differences in the primary outcomes. We compared infants that received surgery for NEC (NEC-surgical), infants with medically managed NEC (NEC-medical), and infants without NEC (reference). RESULTS A total of 133 infants were included (8 NEC-surgical; 15 NEC-medical; 110 reference). In comparison with the reference group, infants in the NEC-surgical and NEC-medical groups were significantly lighter [adjusted mean difference (95% CI) NEC-surgical: -630 g (-1,010, -210), p = 0.003; NEC-medical: -440 g (-760, -110), p = 0.009] and the total adipose tissue volume (ATV) was significantly lower [NEC-surgical: -360 cm3 (-516, -204), p < 0.001; NEC-medical: -127 cm3 (-251, -4); p = 0.043]. There were no significant differences in non-ATM [adjusted mean difference (95% CI) NEC-surgical: -46 g (-281, 189), p = 0.70; NEC-medical: -122 g (-308, 63), p = 0.20]. CONCLUSION The lower weight at term in preterm infants following surgically and medically managed NEC, in comparison to preterm infants that did not develop the disease, was secondary to a reduction in ATV. This suggests that the nutritional regimen received was adequate to preserve non-ATM but not to support the normal third-trimester deposition of adipose tissue in preterm infants.
-
2.
The effect of enteral versus parenteral nutrition for critically ill patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Zhang, G, Zhang, K, Cui, W, Hong, Y, Zhang, Z
Journal of clinical anesthesia. 2018;:62-92
Abstract
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.
-
3.
Systematic Review of Hypersensitivity to Parenteral Nutrition.
Christian, VJ, Tallar, M, Walia, CLS, Sieracki, R, Goday, PS
JPEN. Journal of parenteral and enteral nutrition. 2018;(8):1222-1229
Abstract
Hypersensitivity to the components of parenteral nutrition (PN) is a rare but important complication of PN. We performed a systematic review of hypersensitivity to PN to enable us to build an approach to the individual patient who presents with PN hypersensitivity. A systematic literature search was performed in Ovid Medline, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science using terms for "hypersensitivity" AND "parenteral nutrition" and relevant synonyms. A total of 28 articles were analyzed, and 33 hypersensitivities to PN or components of PN were reported in these 28 articles. Reports of hypersensitivity and subsequent conclusions were based on the clinical observations made by each reporting author. These reactions were evenly split between pediatric and adult patients. Hypersensitivity to PN occurred on day of starting PN in 60.6% patients and after that time in 36.3% patients (range: 1-21 days). Of the hypersensitivities that occurred on day 1 of PN, 70% occurred in the first 30 minutes of initiation of PN. Cutaneous manifestations were the most common, followed by anaphylaxis, respiratory symptoms, and hemodynamic instability. The components most frequently identified as allergens were intravenous fat emulsion (48.4%), multivitamin solution (33.3%), and amino acid solution (9%). Based on this review, an algorithm was created to guide the practitioner on management of PN after the occurrence of such a reaction.
-
4.
A Neonatologist's Perspective: Is the Quest for an "Ideal" Lipid Emulsion Over?
Premkumar, MH, Calkins, KL
JPEN. Journal of parenteral and enteral nutrition. 2018;(1):12-13
-
5.
Intermittent versus continuous feeding in critically ill adults.
Patel, JJ, Rosenthal, MD, Heyland, DK
Current opinion in clinical nutrition and metabolic care. 2018;(2):116-120
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW Early enteral nutrition is recommended in critically ill adult patients. The optimal method of administering enteral nutrition remains unknown. Continuous enteral nutrition administration in critically ill patients remains the most common practice worldwide; however, its practice has recently been called into question in favor of intermittent enteral nutrition administration, where volume is infused multiple times per day. This review will outline the key differences between continuous and intermittent enteral nutrition, describe the metabolic responses to continuous and intermittent enteral nutrition administration and outline recent studies comparing continuous with intermittent enteral nutrition administration on outcomes in critically ill adults. RECENT FINDINGS In separate studies, healthy humans and critically ill patients receiving intermittent nutrition (infused over 3 h) had improved whole body protein balance from negative to positive. These studies did not have an isonitrogenous control group. A randomized controlled trial of intermittent bolus versus continuous enteral nutrition in healthy humans found that intermittent bolus feeding increased mesenteric arterial blood flow, increased insulin and peptide YY and reduced blood glucose concentration. A randomized controlled trial comparing intermittent bolus to continuous enteral nutrition in critically ill patients did not demonstrate clinically relevant differences in glycemic variability, insulin use or tube feeding volume or caloric intake between the two groups. SUMMARY Studies in healthy humans suggest that intermittent nutrient administration, as opposed to continuous, improves whole body protein synthesis. Unfortunately, similarly designed studies are lacking for critically ill patients. Future studies evaluating the impact of intermittent versus continuous nutrition administration on critical care outcomes should take into account factors such as protein quantity, protein quality and delivery route (enteral and/or parenteral). Until further studies are conducted in critically ill patients, a recommendation for or against intermittent nutrition delivery cannot be made.
-
6.
Enteral versus parenteral nutrition and enteral versus a combination of enteral and parenteral nutrition for adults in the intensive care unit.
Lewis, SR, Schofield-Robinson, OJ, Alderson, P, Smith, AF
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2018;(6):CD012276
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
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.
-
7.
Prognostic value of respiratory quotients in severe polytrauma patients with nutritional support.
Patkova, A, Joskova, V, Havel, E, Najpaverova, S, Uramova, D, Kovarik, M, Zadak, Z, Hronek, M
Nutrition (Burbank, Los Angeles County, Calif.). 2018;:90-95
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The association between energy metabolism and prognosis in polytrauma patients has not yet been defined. The aim of this study was to describe energy metabolism and analyze the prognostic value of respiratory quotient (RQ) and nonprotein respiratory quotient (npRQ) in fasting polytrauma patients (fPP) and polytrauma patients with nutritional support (nsPP). METHODS Twenty-two polytrauma patients (before and after parenteral nutrition administration) and 22 healthy controls (after overnight fasting) were examined on day 4 (median) after admission to the intensive care unit. To evaluate energy expenditure in nsPP and resting energy expenditure in fPP and controls with RQ and npRQ in all groups, we used indirect calorimetry. With regression analysis, the descriptive models of intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS) and mechanical ventilation time (VT) were derived. RESULTS RQ and npRQ were significantly lower in fPP than in controls (P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, respectively) and in nsPP (P < 0.05). In nsPP, relationships between RQ or npRQ and the ICU LOS or mechanical VT were demonstrated (P < 0.0001, r = -0.78 for RQ and VT; P < 0.0001, r = -0.78 for npRQ and VT; P < 0.001, r = -0.69 for RQ and LOS; P < 0.001, r = -0.72 for npRQ and LOS). CONCLUSIONS RQ and npRQ parameters measured by indirect calorimetry in polytrauma patients with parenteral nutrition on the fourth day of ICU stay related to clinical outcomes such as duration of mechanical ventilation and ICU LOS.
-
8.
Leukocyte telomere length in paediatric critical illness: effect of early parenteral nutrition.
Verstraete, S, Vanhorebeek, I, van Puffelen, E, Derese, I, Ingels, C, Verbruggen, SC, Wouters, PJ, Joosten, KF, Hanot, J, Guerra, GG, et al
Critical care (London, England). 2018;(1):38
Abstract
BACKGROUND Children who have suffered from critical illnesses that required treatment in a paediatric intensive care unit (PICU) have long-term physical and neurodevelopmental impairments. The mechanisms underlying this legacy remain largely unknown. In patients suffering from chronic diseases hallmarked by inflammation and oxidative stress, poor long-term outcome has been associated with shorter telomeres. Shortened telomeres have also been reported to result from excessive food consumption and/or unhealthy nutrition. We investigated whether critically ill children admitted to the PICU have shorter-than-normal telomeres, and whether early parenteral nutrition (PN) independently affects telomere length when adjusting for known determinants of telomere length. METHODS Telomere length was quantified in leukocyte DNA from 342 healthy children and from 1148 patients who had been enrolled in the multicenter, randomised controlled trial (RCT), PEPaNIC. These patients were randomly allocated to initiation of PN within 24 h (early PN) or to withholding PN for one week in PICU (late PN). The impact of early PN versus late PN on the change in telomere length from the first to last PICU-day was investigated with multivariable linear regression analyses. RESULTS Leukocyte telomeres were 6% shorter than normal upon PICU admission (median 1.625 (IQR 1.446-1.825) telomere/single-copy-gene ratio (T/S) units vs. 1.727 (1.547-1.915) T/S-units in healthy children (P < 0.0001)). Adjusted for potential baseline determinants and leukocyte composition, early PN was associated with telomere shortening during PICU stay as compared with late PN (estimate early versus late PN -0.021 T/S-units, 95% CI -0.038; 0.004, P = 0.01). Other independent determinants of telomere length identified in this model were age, gender, baseline telomere length and fraction of neutrophils in the sample from which the DNA was extracted. Telomere shortening with early PN was independent of post-randomisation factors affected by early PN, including longer length of PICU stay, larger amounts of insulin and higher risk of infection. CONCLUSIONS Shorter than normal leukocyte telomeres are present in critically ill children admitted to the PICU. Early initiation of PN further shortened telomeres, an effect that was independent of other determinants. Whether such telomere-shortening predisposes to long-term consequences of paediatric critical illness should be further investigated in a prospective follow-up study. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01536275 . Registered on 16 February 2012.
-
9.
Prevention and Treatment of Intestinal Failure-Associated Liver Disease in Children.
Norsa, L, Nicastro, E, Di Giorgio, A, Lacaille, F, D'Antiga, L
Nutrients. 2018;(6)
Abstract
Intestinal failure-associated liver disease (IFALD) is a threatening complication for children on long-term parenteral nutrition because of intestinal failure. When progressive and intractable, it may jeopardize intestinal rehabilitation and lead to combined liver and intestinal transplantation. The institution of dedicated intestinal failure centers has dramatically decreased the incidence of such complication. IFALD may rapidly fade away if very early management aimed at preventing progression to end-stage liver disease is provided. In this review, we address the etiology and risk factors of IFALD in order to introduce pillars of prevention (nutritional management and catheter-related infections control). The latest evidence of therapeutic strategies, such as medical and surgical treatments, is also discussed.
-
10.
Insights into medical management of pediatric intestinal failure.
Oliveira, SB, Cole, CR
Seminars in pediatric surgery. 2018;(4):256-260
Abstract
Medical management of children with Intestinal failure continues to evolve. The development of specialized teams focused on the management of these children has made the most significant impact in improving outcomes. Medical management strategies are centered on the provision of adequate fluid electrolytes and calories to allow for appropriate growth and neurological development. Enteral therapy and drugs are required to enhance bowel adaptation while parenteral nutrition is the main source of nutrients, electrolytes and fluid. Modification in parenteral nutrition with the availability of lipid alternatives are contributing to decreasing incidence of Intestinal failure associated liver disease. Utilization of patient centered central line care bundles has also significantly contributed to the decrease in morbidity and mortality. This review provides insight into the current medical therapy available for managing intestinal failure in children.