Clinical nutrition (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2017
Enteral nutrition improves clinical outcome and reduces costs of acute mesenteric ischaemia after recanalisation in the intensive care unit.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Yang Shuofei, Guo Jianming, Ni Qihong, Chen Jiaquan, Guo Xiangjiang, Xue Guanhua, Ye Meng, Zhang Lan
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Little data evaluate the enteral nutrition (EN) for patients with acute mesenteric ischaemia (AMI) in the intensive care unit (ICU). This study assessed the outcomes of EN for recanalised AMI patients in the ICU.
METHODS: In this retrospective study, 183 AMI patients with mesenteric recanalisation admitted to two surgical ICUs were included. Patients were divided into EN (EN within first week, n = 95) and total parenteral nutrition (TPN) group (TPN in 1st week, n = 88). The etiology, outcomes and complications were compared. Nutritional, immunologic, inflammatory response and mesenteric reperfusion were evaluated. Subgroup analysis and cost-assessment were performed.
RESULTS: No significant difference of demographics and illness severity at baseline were found. The rates of TPN for ≥6 months (7.4% vs. 18.2%, P < 0.01), infectious complications (7.4% vs. 20.5%, P = 0.01) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (4.2% vs. 13.6%, P < 0.01) were lower in EN group. For patients with mesenteric infarction (n = 101), EN was associated with earlier bowel continuity restoration (P < 0.01) and lower 30-day mortality (7.3% vs. 26.1%, P = 0.01). For patients without initial bowel resection (n = 82), length of ICU and hospital stay was significantly shortened in EN group. The 1-year survival was 88.4% in EN group and 78.4% in TPN group (P = 0.031). EN was cost-effective, with improved inflammatory response and elevated peak velocity of mesenteric flow.
CONCLUSIONS: For recanalised AMI patients, EN starting within the first week represents a favourable alternative to TPN. A multicentre randomised controlled trial with high level of evidence is warranted in the future.
CLINICAL RELEVANCY STATEMENT: Acute mesenteric ischaemia (AMI) is a catastrophic abdominal vascular emergency in the surgical intensive care unit (ICU), and the mortality of AMI remains unchanged despite significant progress of endovascular techniques. A multidisciplinary and multimodal management approach of AMI in the ICU has been recently proposed to improve patient's survival and prevent the intestinal failure. Post-recanalisation nutrition therapy may significantly improve the overall survival of AMI patients is quite underemphasised in the ICU. Definitive data comparing EN with TPN for this patient population are very lacking. This study provides the clinical data to suggest that early EN starting after ICU admission represents a favourable alternative to TPN for recanalised AMI patients. The nutrition therapy protocol in the ICU for this special cohort needs to be updated with more high-level evidence in the future.
METHODS: In this retrospective study, 183 AMI patients with mesenteric recanalisation admitted to two surgical ICUs were included. Patients were divided into EN (EN within first week, n = 95) and total parenteral nutrition (TPN) group (TPN in 1st week, n = 88). The etiology, outcomes and complications were compared. Nutritional, immunologic, inflammatory response and mesenteric reperfusion were evaluated. Subgroup analysis and cost-assessment were performed.
RESULTS: No significant difference of demographics and illness severity at baseline were found. The rates of TPN for ≥6 months (7.4% vs. 18.2%, P < 0.01), infectious complications (7.4% vs. 20.5%, P = 0.01) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (4.2% vs. 13.6%, P < 0.01) were lower in EN group. For patients with mesenteric infarction (n = 101), EN was associated with earlier bowel continuity restoration (P < 0.01) and lower 30-day mortality (7.3% vs. 26.1%, P = 0.01). For patients without initial bowel resection (n = 82), length of ICU and hospital stay was significantly shortened in EN group. The 1-year survival was 88.4% in EN group and 78.4% in TPN group (P = 0.031). EN was cost-effective, with improved inflammatory response and elevated peak velocity of mesenteric flow.
CONCLUSIONS: For recanalised AMI patients, EN starting within the first week represents a favourable alternative to TPN. A multicentre randomised controlled trial with high level of evidence is warranted in the future.
CLINICAL RELEVANCY STATEMENT: Acute mesenteric ischaemia (AMI) is a catastrophic abdominal vascular emergency in the surgical intensive care unit (ICU), and the mortality of AMI remains unchanged despite significant progress of endovascular techniques. A multidisciplinary and multimodal management approach of AMI in the ICU has been recently proposed to improve patient's survival and prevent the intestinal failure. Post-recanalisation nutrition therapy may significantly improve the overall survival of AMI patients is quite underemphasised in the ICU. Definitive data comparing EN with TPN for this patient population are very lacking. This study provides the clinical data to suggest that early EN starting after ICU admission represents a favourable alternative to TPN for recanalised AMI patients. The nutrition therapy protocol in the ICU for this special cohort needs to be updated with more high-level evidence in the future.