Literature DB >> 12765670

Comparison of a high-protein disease-specific enteral formula with a high-protein enteral formula in hyperglycemic critically ill patients.

A Mesejo1, J A Acosta, C Ortega, J Vila, M Fernández, J Ferreres, J C Sanchis, F López.   

Abstract

AIMS: To determine whether a specific high-protein enteral formula with a similar caloric percentage of fat and carbohydrates achieves greater control over glycemic levels and reduces insulin requirements in hyperglycemic critically ill patients when compared to a control high-protein enteral formula.
DESIGN: A prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blind trial in two University Hospital Intensive Care Units in Spain.
METHODS: We enrolled 50 patients with diabetes mellitus or stress hyperglycemia with basal glycemia > or =160 mg/dl and indication for enteral nutrition > or =5 days. Patients with severe kidney failure, liver failure or obesity were excluded from the study. In the first 48 h of admission, after randomization, 26 patients received the study diet and 24 patients received the control diet. The variables were monitored for 14 days. The Harris-Benedict formula with a fixed stress factor of 1.2 was used to calculate caloric needs. Insulin was administered by continuous infusion. An intention-to-treat analysis was performed.
RESULTS: On admission, there were no differences between the study and control group in plasma glucose levels (mg/dl) (190.9+/-45 vs 210.3+/-63) and capillary glucose levels (mg/dl) (226.1+/-73 vs 213.8+/-67). After the feeding trial, there were differences between the study and control group in plasma glucose levels (mg/dl) (176.8+/-44 vs 222.8+/-47, P=0.001), capillary glucose levels (mg/dl) (163.1+/-45 vs 216.4+/-56, P=0.001), insulin requirements/day (IU) 8.73 (2.3-27.5) vs 30.2 (21.5-57.1) (P=0.001), insulin/received carbohydrates (UI/g) 0.07 (0.02-0.22) vs 0.18 (0.11-0.35) (P=0.02) and insulin/received carbohydrates/kg 0.98 (0.26-3.59) vs 2.13 (1.44-4.58) (P=0.04). These differences remain in a day-to-day comparison. There were no differences in the analytical tests, or in digestive or infectious complications. Intensive Care Unit length of stay, mechanical ventilation and mortality were similar in both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Hyperglycemic critically ill patients fed with a high-protein diet with a similar caloric percentage of fat and carbohydrates show a significant reduction in plasma glucose levels, capillary glucose levels and insulin requirements in comparison to patients on a conventional high-protein diet. This better glycemic control do not modify Intensive Care Unit length of stay, infectious complications, mechanical ventilation and mortality.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12765670     DOI: 10.1016/s0261-5614(02)00234-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Nutr        ISSN: 0261-5614            Impact factor:   7.324


  12 in total

1.  Glycemic control in critically ill patients: What to do post NICE-SUGAR?

Authors:  Paul E Marik
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2009-11-30

Review 2.  Nutrition and Hyperglycemia Management in the Inpatient Setting (Meals on Demand, Parenteral, or Enteral Nutrition).

Authors:  Andjela T Drincic; Jon T Knezevich; Padmaja Akkireddy
Journal:  Curr Diab Rep       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 4.810

Review 3.  Carbohydrate provision in the era of tight glucose control.

Authors:  Keith R Miller; Christy M Lawson; Vance L Smith; Brian G Harbrecht
Journal:  Curr Gastroenterol Rep       Date:  2011-08

Review 4.  Inpatient enteral and parenteral [corrected] nutrition for patients with diabetes.

Authors:  Michael A Via; Jeffrey I Mechanick
Journal:  Curr Diab Rep       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 4.810

5.  Randomized clinical trial of the effects of perioperative use of immune-enhancing enteral formula on metabolic and immunological status in patients undergoing esophagectomy.

Authors:  Yoichi Sakurai; Toshihiko Masui; Ikuo Yoshida; Shuhei Tonomura; Mitsutaka Shoji; Yasuko Nakamura; Jun Isogaki; Ichiro Uyama; Yoshiyuki Komori; Masahiro Ochiai
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 3.352

6.  Disease-specific nutrition therapy: one size does not fit all.

Authors:  D D Yeh; G C Velmahos
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2013-02-25       Impact factor: 3.693

7.  Diabetes-specific enteral nutrition formula in hyperglycemic, mechanically ventilated, critically ill patients: a prospective, open-label, blind-randomized, multicenter study.

Authors:  Alfonso Mesejo; Juan Carlos Montejo-González; Clara Vaquerizo-Alonso; Gabriela Lobo-Tamer; Mercedes Zabarte-Martinez; Jose Ignacio Herrero-Meseguer; Jose Acosta-Escribano; Antonio Blesa-Malpica; Fátima Martinez-Lozano
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2015-11-09       Impact factor: 9.097

8.  Effect of Fat-based versus Carbohydrate-based Enteral Feeding on Glycemic Control in Critically Ill Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Mahdieh Nourmohammadi; Omid Moradi Moghadam; Mohammad Niakan Lahiji; Sevak Hatamian; Zahra Vahdat Shariatpanahi
Journal:  Indian J Crit Care Med       Date:  2017-08

9.  Diabetes-Specific Formulae Versus Standard Formulae as Enteral Nutrition to Treat Hyperglycemia in Critically Ill Patients: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Feasibility Trial.

Authors:  Ra'eesa Doola; Alwyn S Todd; Josephine M Forbes; Adam M Deane; Jeffrey J Presneill; David J Sturgess
Journal:  JMIR Res Protoc       Date:  2018-04-09

10.  The effect of higher versus lower protein delivery in critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Zheng-Yii Lee; Cindy Sing Ling Yap; M Shahnaz Hasan; Julia Patrick Engkasan; Mohd Yusof Barakatun-Nisak; Andrew G Day; Jayshil J Patel; Daren K Heyland
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2021-07-23       Impact factor: 9.097

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.