Search

Background: Children who are critically ill are often reliant on enteral and oral nutrition support. However, there is limited evidence to guide "what" to prescribe, and current practice is unknown. The primary objective of this study was to describe enteral nutrition prescription in children ≤2 years of age in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). The secondary objectives were to describe oral nutrition support practices and factors associated with the use of increased energy and protein density nutrition support., Methods: Children ≤2 years of age admitted to participating PICUs over a 2-week period in June 2021 were enrolled. Data were collected on PICU admission days 1 to 7, 14, 21, and 28 on the mode of nutrition, enteral and oral nutrition support prescription, and dietitian intervention., Results: Eighty-four children were included (49 [58%] male; 79 [94%] ≤1 year of age). Enteral nutrition was administered to 79 (94%) children (with expressed breast milk in 45 [57%]). Forty-three children received formula as enteral nutrition. Increased energy and protein density formulas were provided to 14 (33%) children enterally, with concentrated standard infant formula powder being the most common (5 [12%]). Among children offered oral intake (22; 26%), three (14%) received oral nutrition support. Children who received increased energy and protein density enteral nutrition were more likely to receive dietitian intervention (P = 0.002)., Conclusion: In children ≤2 years of age admitted to PICU, expressed breast milk was provided to half of those requiring enteral nutrition and oral nutrition support prescription was infrequent. One third of children receiving formula via enteral nutrition received an increased energy and protein density feed, and this was strongly associated with dietitian intervention., (© 2024 The Author(s). Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition.)

Background: Induction of ketosis by manipulation of nutrition intake has been proposed as an adjunctive treatment for super-refractory status epilepticus (SRSE). However, the classical 4:1 ketogenic ratio may not meet the nutrition needs, specifically protein for critically ill adults. The aim of this study was to analyze the outcomes of adults with SRSE who received a lower ketogenic ratio of 2:1 grams of fat to non-fat grams, including 20%-30% of energy from medium chain triglycerides., Methods: We reviewed patients aged ≥18 years with SRSE treated with ketogenic therapy between July 2015 and December 2020 at two quaternary teaching hospitals in Melbourne, Australia. Data collected from medical records included patient demographics, nutrition prescription, clinical outcomes, and ketogenic therapy-related complications. The primary outcome of the study was to assess tolerability of ketogenic therapy., Results: Twelve patients (female = 7) were treated with ketogenic therapy for SRSE. Patients received between 4 and 8 antiseizure medications and 1-5 anesthetic agents prior to commencement of ketogenic therapy. Blood beta-hydroxybutyrate concentrations were variable (median = 0.5 mmol/L, range: 0.0-6.1 mmol/L). SRSE resolved in 10 cases (83%) after a median of 9 days (range: 2-21 days) following commencement of ketogenic therapy. Ketogenic therapy-associated complications were reported in five patients, leading to cessation in two patients., Conclusion: Despite the challenge in maintaining ketosis during critical illness, low ratio 2:1 ketogenic therapy incorporating medium chain triglycerides is tolerable for adults with SRSE. Further studies are required to determine the optimal timing, nutrition prescription and duration of ketogenic therapy for SRSE treatment., (© 2022 The Authors. Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition.)

Background: Increased intestinal permeability (IP) is associated with sepsis in the intensive care unit (ICU). This study aimed to pilot a sensitive multisugar test to measure IP in the nonfasted state., Methods: Critically ill, mechanically ventilated adults were recruited from 2 ICUs in Australia. Measurements were completed within 3 days of admission using a multisugar test measuring gastroduodenal (sucrose recovery), small-bowel (lactulose-rhamnose [L-R] and lactulose-mannitol [L-M] ratios), and whole-gut permeability (sucralose-erythritol ratio) in 24-hour urine samples. Urinary sugar concentrations were compared at baseline and after sugar ingestion, and IP sugar recoveries and ratios were explored in relation to known confounders, including renal function., Results: Twenty-one critically ill patients (12 males; median, 57 years) participated. Group median concentrations of all sugars were higher following sugar administration; however, sucrose and mannitol increases were not statistically significant. Within individual patients, sucrose and mannitol concentrations were higher in baseline than after sugar ingestion in 9 (43%) and 4 (19%) patients, respectively. Patients with impaired (n = 9) vs normal (n = 12) renal function had a higher L-R ratio (median, 0.130 vs 0.047; P = .003), lower rhamnose recovery (median, 15% vs 24%; P = .007), and no difference in lactulose recovery., Conclusion: Small-bowel and whole-gut permeability measurements are possible to complete in the nonfasted state, whereas gastroduodenal permeability could not be measured reliably. For small-bowel IP measurements, the L-R ratio is preferred over the L-M ratio. Alterations in renal function may reduce the reliability of the multisugar IP test, warranting further exploration., (© 2021 American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition.)

Background: This study aimed to compare recommendations in the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN) Guidelines for the Provision and Assessment of Nutrition Support Therapy in the Adult Critically Ill Patient with measured energy expenditure in obese, critically ill adults., Methods: After enrollment, measured energy expenditure was attempted at baseline and twice weekly to extubation or day 14. Data are reported as median [interquartile range]., Results: Twenty patients were included. The median baseline and subsequent measured energy expenditures were 2438 [1807-2703] kcal and 2919 [2318-3362] kcal, respectively. Baseline measured energy expenditures were -491 [-788 to -323] kcal lower than subsequent measurements, and week 1 measurements were lower than those of week 2. The median bias between the guideline recommendation of 11-14 kcal/kg of actual body weight and measured expenditure at baseline was -950 [-1254 to -595] kcal/d and -1618 [-1820 to -866] kcal/d at subsequent measurements., Conclusion: Clinically significant variation was observed between measured expenditure and guideline recommendations at all time points., (© 2020 American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition.)

Background: Propofol sedation is common in critically ill patients, providing energy of 1.1 kcal/mL when administered as a 1% solution. We aimed to determine the proportion of energy administered as propofol on days 1-5 in the intensive care unit (ICU) and any association with outcomes., Methods: Retrospective observational study in a quaternary ICU from January-December 2012. Inclusion criteria were length of stay (LOS) ≥5 days, age ≥18 years, and provision of mechanical ventilation (MV) for ≥5 days. Outcome measures included proportion of total daily energy provided as propofol, overall energy balance, hospital mortality, duration of MV, and ICU LOS., Results: Data from 370 patients were analyzed, 87.8% (n = 325) of whom received propofol during days 1-5 in ICU. A median [interquartile range (IQR)] of 119 [50-730] kcal was provided as propofol per patient-day. Proportion of energy provided by propofol as a percentage of total energy delivered was 55.4%, 15.4%, 9.3%, 7.9%, and 9.9% days 1-5, respectively. Patients administered propofol received a greater proportion of their total daily energy prescription compared with those who were not (P < .01). Proportion of energy provided as propofol was not significantly different based on hospital mortality (P = .62), duration of MV (P = .50), or ICU LOS (P = .15)., Conclusion: Propofol contributes to overall energy intake on days 1-5 of ICU admission. Energy balance was higher in those receiving propofol. No association was found between the proportion of energy delivered as propofol and outcomes., (© 2017 American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition.)

Background: Nutrition delivered to patients with a traumatic brain injury (TBI) is typically below prescribed amounts. While the dietitian plays an important role in the assessment and provision of nutrition needs, they are part of a multidisciplinary team. The views and attitudes of medical and nursing practitioners are likely to be crucial to implementation of nutrition to patients with TBI, but there is limited information describing these., Methods: A qualitative exploratory approach was used to explore the views and attitudes of medical and nursing practitioners on nutrition for patients with TBI. Participants at 2 major neurotrauma hospitals in Australia completed individual semi-structured interviews with a set of questions and a case study. Interviews were transcribed and coded for themes., Results: Thirty-four health practitioners participated: 18 nurses and 16 physicians. Three major themes emerged: (1) nutrition practices over the hospital admission reflect the recovery course, (2) there are competing priorities when caring for patients with TBI, and (3) the implementation of nutrition therapy is influenced by practitioner roles and expectations., Conclusion: Use of qualitative inquiry in the study of attitudes toward nutrition provision to patients with TBI provided detailed insights into the challenges of operationalizing nutrition therapy. These insights can be used to clarify communication between health practitioners working with patients with TBI across the continuum of care., (© 2017 American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition.)