Literature DB >> 18496367

Current practice in nutritional support and its association with mortality in septic patients--results from a national, prospective, multicenter study.

Gunnar Elke1, Dirk Schädler, Christoph Engel, Holger Bogatsch, Inez Frerichs, Maximilian Ragaller, Jens Scholz, Frank M Brunkhorst, Markus Löffler, Konrad Reinhart, Norbert Weiler.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To identify current clinical practice regarding nutrition and its association with morbidity and mortality in patients with severe sepsis or septic shock in Germany.
DESIGN: Nationwide prospective, observational, cross-sectional, 1-day point-prevalence study.
SETTING: The study included 454 intensive care units from a representative sample of 310 hospitals stratified by size. PATIENTS: Participants were 415 patients with severe sepsis or septic shock (according to criteria of the American College of Chest Physicians/Society of Critical Care Medicine Consensus Conference).
INTERVENTIONS: None.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Data were collected by on-site audits of trained external study physicians during randomly scheduled visits during 1 yr. Valid data on nutrition were available for 399 of 415 patients. The data showed that 20.1% of patients received exclusively enteral nutrition, 35.1% exclusively parenteral nutrition, and 34.6% mixed nutrition (parenteral and enteral); 10.3% were not fed at all. Patients with gastrointestinal/intra-abdominal infection, pancreatitis or neoplasm of the gastrointestinal tract, mechanical ventilation, or septic shock were less likely to receive exclusively enteral nutrition. Median Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II and Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment scores were significantly different among the nutrition groups. Overall hospital mortality was 55.2%. Hospital mortality was significantly higher in patients receiving exclusively parenteral (62.3%) or mixed nutrition (57.1%) than in patients with exclusively enteral nutrition (38.9%) (p = .005). After adjustment for patient morbidity (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score, presence of septic shock) and treatment factors (mechanical ventilation), multivariate analysis revealed that the presence of parenteral nutrition was significantly predictive of mortality (odds ratio, 2.09; 95% confidence interval, 1.29-3.37).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with severe sepsis or septic shock in German intensive care units received preferentially parenteral or mixed nutrition. The use of parenteral nutrition was associated with an increased risk of death.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18496367     DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e318174dcf0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Crit Care Med        ISSN: 0090-3493            Impact factor:   7.598


  14 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.  [Enteral and/or parenteral nutrition in the critically ill : An algorithm as a possible basis for decision-making].

Authors:  A Weimann
Journal:  Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed       Date:  2015-09-08       Impact factor: 0.840

3.  Impact of early nutrition and feeding route on outcomes of mechanically ventilated patients with shock: a post hoc marginal structural model study.

Authors:  Jean Reignier; Michael Darmon; Romain Sonneville; Anne-Laure Borel; Maité Garrouste-Orgeas; Stéphane Ruckly; Bertrand Souweine; Anne-Sylvie Dumenil; Hakim Haouache; Christophe Adrie; Laurent Argaud; Lilia Soufir; Guillaume Marcotte; Virginie Laurent; Dany Goldgran-Toledano; Christophe Clec'h; Carole Schwebel; Elie Azoulay; Jean-François Timsit
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2015-03-20       Impact factor: 17.440

4.  Ventilatory strategies in septic patients. Results from a nationwide observational trial.

Authors:  D Schädler; G Elke; C Engel; H Bogatsch; I Frerichs; R Kuhlen; R Rossaint; M Quintel; J Scholz; F M Brunkhorst; M Loeffler; K Reinhart; N Weiler
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2013-01-16       Impact factor: 1.041

5.  Parenteral versus enteral nutrition in the critically ill patient: a re-analysis of a flawed meta-analysis.

Authors:  Paul E Marik; Michael Hooper
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2013-02-14       Impact factor: 17.440

6.  Proximal gut mucosal epithelial homeostasis in aged IL-1 type I receptor knockout mice after starvation.

Authors:  Juquan Song; Steven E Wolf; Xiao-Wu Wu; Celeste C Finnerty; David N Herndon; Marc G Jeschke
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2010-04-21       Impact factor: 2.192

7.  Enteral nutrition is associated with improved outcome in patients with severe sepsis. A secondary analysis of the VISEP trial.

Authors:  G Elke; E Kuhnt; M Ragaller; D Schädler; I Frerichs; F M Brunkhorst; M Löffler; K Reinhart; N Weiler
Journal:  Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed       Date:  2013-03-03       Impact factor: 0.840

Review 8.  Parenteral nutrition in the critically ill patient.

Authors:  Thomas R Ziegler
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2009-09-10       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  A new technique for bedside placement of enteral feeding tubes: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Günther Zick; Alexander Frerichs; Markus Ahrens; Bodo Schniewind; Gunnar Elke; Dirk Schädler; Inéz Frerichs; Markus Steinfath; Norbert Weiler
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2011-01-07       Impact factor: 9.097

10.  Enteral nutrition in critical care.

Authors:  Carlos Seron-Arbeloa; Monica Zamora-Elson; Lorenzo Labarta-Monzon; Tomas Mallor-Bonet
Journal:  J Clin Med Res       Date:  2013-01-11
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.