P249 ANALYSIS OF THE SENSITIVITY OF THE UK GUIDELINES ON IDENTIFICATION OF PATIENTS AT RISK OF DEVELOPING REFEEDING SYNDROME

2009 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 130
Author(s):  
S.S. Zeki ◽  
A. Culkin ◽  
J.M.D. Nightingale ◽  
T. Shepherd ◽  
S.M. Gabe
2011 ◽  
Vol 106 (6) ◽  
pp. 906-912 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manal O. Elnenaei ◽  
Jamshid Alaghband-Zadeh ◽  
Roy Sherwood ◽  
Mahmoud A. Awara ◽  
Caje Moniz ◽  
...  

Refeeding syndrome is difficult to diagnose since the guidelines for identifying those at risk are largely based on subjective clinical parameters and there are no predictive biochemical markers. We examined the suitability of insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF1) and leptin as markers to identify patients at risk of the refeeding syndrome before initiation of parenteral nutrition (PN). A total of thirty-five consecutive patients referred for commencement of PN were included. Serum leptin and IGF1 were measured before starting PN. Electrolytes, liver and renal function tests were conducted before and daily for 1 week after initiating PN. The primary outcome was a decrease in phosphate 12–36 h after initiating PN. ‘Refeeding index’ (RI) was defined as leptin × IGF1 divided by 2800 to produce a ratio of 1·0 in patients who are well nourished. RI had better sensitivity (78 %; 95 % CI 40, 97 %) and specificity (78 %; 95 % CI 40, 97 %) with a likelihood ratio of 3·4, at a cut-off value of 0·19 for predicting a ≥ 30 % decrease in phosphate concentration within 12–36 h after starting PN, compared with IGF1 or leptin alone. However, IGF1 was a better predictor of mortality than either leptin or the RI. The present study is the first to derive and test the ‘RI’, and find that it is a sensitive and specific predictor of the refeeding syndrome in hospitalised patients before starting PN.


2011 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 209
Author(s):  
J. EdakkanambethVarayil ◽  
S.M. Ali ◽  
J.M. Nadeau ◽  
D.G. Kelly

2018 ◽  
Vol 84 (10) ◽  
pp. 2344-2351 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikesh Parekh ◽  
Jennifer M. Stevenson ◽  
Rebekah Schiff ◽  
J. Graham Davies ◽  
Stephen Bremner ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (10) ◽  
pp. 801
Author(s):  
Alida Fe Talento ◽  
Malcolm Qualie ◽  
Laura Cottom ◽  
Matthijs Backx ◽  
P. Lewis White

Invasive fungal disease (IFD) is a growing health burden. High mortality rates, increasing numbers of at-risk hosts, and a limited availability of rapid diagnostics and therapeutic options mean that patients are increasingly exposed to unnecessary antifungals. High rates of prescriptions promote patient exposure to undue toxicity and drive the emergence of resistance. Antifungal stewardship (AFS) aims to guide antifungal usage and reduce unnecessary exposure and antifungal consumption whilst maintaining or improving outcomes. Here, we examine several AFS approaches from hospitals across the UK and Ireland to demonstrate the benefits of AFS practices and support the broader implementation of AFS as both a necessary and achievable strategy. Since the accuracy and turnaround times (TATs) of diagnostic tools can impact treatment decisions, several AFS strategies have included the development and implementation of diagnostic-driven care pathways. AFS informed treatment strategies can help stratify patients on a risk basis ensuring the right patients receive antifungals at the optimal time. Using a multidisciplinary approach is also key due to the complexity of managing and treating patients at risk of IFD. Through knowledge sharing, such as The Gilead Antifungal Information Network (GAIN), we hope to drive practices that improve patient management and support the preservation of antifungals for future use.


2005 ◽  
Vol 173 (4S) ◽  
pp. 455-455
Author(s):  
Anthony V. D’Amico ◽  
Ming-Hui Chen ◽  
Kimberly A. Roehl ◽  
William J. Catalona

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document