Early Enteral Nutrition and Outcomes of Critically Ill Patients Treated With Vasopressors and Mechanical Ventilation

2010 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 261-268 ◽  
Author(s):  
I. Khalid ◽  
P. Doshi ◽  
B. DiGiovine
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Enteral Nutrition ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Early Enteral Nutrition

Evaluation of Delivery of Enteral Nutrition in Critically Ill Patients Receiving Mechanical Ventilation

2008 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Debra O’Meara ◽  
Eduardo Mireles-Cabodevila ◽  
Fran Frame ◽  
A. Christine Hummell ◽  
Jeffrey Hammel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Enteral Nutrition ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Feeding Tube ◽  
Feeding Tubes ◽  
Academic Center ◽  
Specific Step ◽  
Feeding Process ◽  
Medical Intensive Care

Background Published reports consistently describe incomplete delivery of prescribed enteral nutrition. Which specific step in the process delays or interferes with the administration of a full dose of nutrients is unclear. Objectives To assess factors associated with interruptions in enteral nutrition in critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation. Methods An observational prospective study of 59 consecutive patients who required mechanical ventilation and were receiving enteral nutrition was done in an 18-bed medical intensive care unit of an academic center. Data were collected prospectively on standardized forms. Steps involved in the feeding process from admission to discharge were recorded, each step was timed, and delivery of nutrition was quantified. Results Patients received approximately 50% (mean, 1106.3; SD, 885.9 Cal) of the prescribed caloric needs. Enteral nutrition was interrupted 27.3% of the available time. A mean of 1.13 interruptions occurred per patient per day; enteral nutrition was interrupted a mean of 6 (SD, 0.9) hours per patient each day. Prolonged interruptions were mainly associated with problems related to small-bore feeding tubes (25.5%), increased residual volumes (13.3%), weaning (11.7%), and other reasons (22.8%). Placement and confirmation of placement of the small-bore feeding tube were significant causes of incomplete delivery of nutrients on the day of admission. Conclusions Delivery of enteral nutrition in critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation is interrupted by practices embedded in the care of these patients. Evaluation of the process reveals areas to improve the delivery of enteral nutrition.

scholarly journals Intra-Abdominal Pressure as a Marker of Enteral Nutrition Intolerance in Critically Ill Patients. The PIANE Study

Nutrients ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. 2616
Author(s):  
M Bordejé ◽  
Juan Montejo ◽  
M Mateu ◽  
Manuel Solera ◽  
Jose Acosta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Enteral Nutrition ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Urinary Catheter ◽  
Abdominal Pressure ◽  
Icu Patients ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B ◽  
Low Sensitivity

To determine whether elevated intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) is associated with a higher rate of enteral nutrition-related gastrointestinal (GI) complications; to assess the value of IAP as a predictor of enteral nutrition (EN) intolerance. Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients on mechanical ventilation requiring at least 5 days of EN were recruited for a prospective, observational, non-interventional, multicenter study. EN was performed and GI complications were managed with an established protocol. IAP was determined via a urinary catheter. Patients who developed any GI complications were considered as presenting EN intolerance. Variables related to EN, IAP and GI complications were monitored daily. Statistical analysis compared patients without GI complications (group A) vs. GI complications (group B). 247 patients were recruited from 28 participating ICUs (group A: 119, group B: 128). No differences between groups were recorded. Patients in group B (p < 0.001) spent more days on EN (8.1 ± 8.4 vs. 18.1 ± 13.7), on mechanical ventilation (8.0 ± 7.7 vs. 19.3 ± 14.9) and in the ICU (12.3 ± 11.4 vs. 24.8 ± 17.5). IAP prior to the GI complication was (14.3 ± 3.1 vs. 15.8 ± 4.8) (p < 0.003). The best IAP value identified for EN intolerance was 14 mmHg but it had low sensitivity and specificity. Although a higher IAP was associated with EN intolerance, IAP alone did not emerge as a good predictor of EN intolerance in critically ill patients.

566: Effect of Early Enteral Nutrition on Muscle Size, Quality, and Strength in Critically Ill Patients

2020 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 276-276
Author(s):  
Jacqueline Dempsey ◽  
Kirby Mayer ◽  
Selina Parry ◽  
Peter Morris ◽  
Melissa Thompson Bastin
Keyword(s):  
Enteral Nutrition ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Muscle Size ◽  
Early Enteral Nutrition

scholarly journals Feasibility, tolerance and effectiveness of enteral feeding in critically ill patients in prone position

2020 ◽  
pp. 175114371990010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raymond Dominic Savio ◽  
Rajalakshmi Parasuraman ◽  
Daphnee Lovesly ◽  
Bhuvaneshwari Shankar ◽  
Lakshmi Ranganathan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Enteral Nutrition ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Prone Position ◽  
Supine Position ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Apache Ii ◽  
Apache Ii Score ◽  
The Mean

Aim To assess the feasibility, tolerance and effectiveness of enteral nutrition in critically ill patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation in the prone position for severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS). Methods Prospective observational study conducted in a multidisciplinary critical care unit of a tertiary care hospital from January 2013 until July 2015. All patients with ARDS who received invasive mechanical ventilation in prone position during the study period were included. Patients’ demographics, severity of illness (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II) score), baseline markers of nutritional status (subjective global assessment (SGA) and body mass index), details of nutrition delivery during prone and supine hours and outcomes (Length of stay and discharge status) were recorded. Results Fifty-one patients met inclusion criteria out of whom four patients were excluded from analysis since they did not receive any enteral nutrition due to severe hemodynamic instability. The mean age of patients was 46.4 ± 12.9 years, with male:female ratio of 7:3. On admission, SGA revealed moderate malnutrition in 51% of patients and the mean APACHE II score was 26.8 ± 9.2. The average duration of prone ventilation per patient was 60.2 ± 30.7 h. All patients received continuous nasogastric/orogastric feeds. The mean calories (kcal/kg/day) and protein (g/kg/day) prescribed in the supine position were 24.5 ± 3.8 and 1.1 ± 0.2 while the mean calories and protein prescribed in prone position were 23.5 ± 3.6 and 1.1 ± 0.2, respectively. Percentage of prescribed calories received by patients in supine position was similar to that in prone position (83.2% vs. 79.6%; P = 0.12). Patients received a higher percentage of prescribed protein in supine compared to prone position (80.8% vs. 75%, P = 0.02). The proportion of patients who received at least 75% of the caloric and protein goals was 37 (78.7%) and 37 (78.7%) in supine and 32 (68.1%) and 21 (44.6%) in prone position. Conclusion In critically ill patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation in the prone position, enteral nutrition with nasogastric/orogastric feeding is feasible and well tolerated. Nutritional delivery of calories and proteins in prone position is comparable to that in supine position.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document