脓毒性休克的肠内营养:呼吁转变模式。

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Current Opinion in Critical Care Pub Date : 2024-04-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-12 DOI:10.1097/MCC.0000000000001134
Jayshil J Patel, Juan Carlos Lopez-Delgado, Christian Stoppe, Stephen A McClave
{"title":"脓毒性休克的肠内营养:呼吁转变模式。","authors":"Jayshil J Patel, Juan Carlos Lopez-Delgado, Christian Stoppe, Stephen A McClave","doi":"10.1097/MCC.0000000000001134","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>The purpose of this review is to identify contemporary evidence evaluating enteral nutrition in patients with septic shock, outline risk factors for enteral feeding intolerance (EFI), describe the conundrum of initiating enteral nutrition in patients with septic shock, appraise current EFI definitions, and identify bedside monitors for guiding enteral nutrition therapy.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>The NUTRIREA-2 and NUTRIREA-3 trial results have better informed the dose of enteral nutrition in critically ill patients with circulatory shock. In both trials, patients with predominant septic shock randomized to receive early standard-dose nutrition had more gastrointestinal complications. Compared to other contemporary RCTs that included patients with circulatory shock, patients in the NUTRIREA-2 and NUTRIREA-3 trials had higher bowel ischemia rates, were sicker, and received full-dose enteral nutrition while receiving high baseline dose of vasopressor. These findings suggest severity of illness, vasopressor dose, and enteral nutrition dose impact outcomes.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>The provision of early enteral nutrition preserves gut barrier functions; however, these benefits are counterbalanced by potential complications of introducing luminal nutrients into a hypo-perfused gut, including bowel ischemia. Findings from the NUTRIREA2 and NUTRIREA-3 trials substantiate a 'less is more' enteral nutrition dose strategy during the early acute phase of critical illness. In the absence of bedside tools to guide the initiation and advancement of enteral nutrition in patients with septic shock, the benefit of introducing enteral nutrition on preserving gut barrier function must be weighed against the risk of harm by considering dose of vasopressor, dose of enteral nutrition, and severity of illness.</p>","PeriodicalId":10851,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Critical Care","volume":" ","pages":"165-171"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Enteral nutrition in septic shock: a call for a paradigm shift.\",\"authors\":\"Jayshil J Patel, Juan Carlos Lopez-Delgado, Christian Stoppe, Stephen A McClave\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/MCC.0000000000001134\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>The purpose of this review is to identify contemporary evidence evaluating enteral nutrition in patients with septic shock, outline risk factors for enteral feeding intolerance (EFI), describe the conundrum of initiating enteral nutrition in patients with septic shock, appraise current EFI definitions, and identify bedside monitors for guiding enteral nutrition therapy.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>The NUTRIREA-2 and NUTRIREA-3 trial results have better informed the dose of enteral nutrition in critically ill patients with circulatory shock. In both trials, patients with predominant septic shock randomized to receive early standard-dose nutrition had more gastrointestinal complications. Compared to other contemporary RCTs that included patients with circulatory shock, patients in the NUTRIREA-2 and NUTRIREA-3 trials had higher bowel ischemia rates, were sicker, and received full-dose enteral nutrition while receiving high baseline dose of vasopressor. These findings suggest severity of illness, vasopressor dose, and enteral nutrition dose impact outcomes.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>The provision of early enteral nutrition preserves gut barrier functions; however, these benefits are counterbalanced by potential complications of introducing luminal nutrients into a hypo-perfused gut, including bowel ischemia. Findings from the NUTRIREA2 and NUTRIREA-3 trials substantiate a 'less is more' enteral nutrition dose strategy during the early acute phase of critical illness. In the absence of bedside tools to guide the initiation and advancement of enteral nutrition in patients with septic shock, the benefit of introducing enteral nutrition on preserving gut barrier function must be weighed against the risk of harm by considering dose of vasopressor, dose of enteral nutrition, and severity of illness.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10851,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Opinion in Critical Care\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"165-171\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Opinion in Critical Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCC.0000000000001134\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/12 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Critical Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCC.0000000000001134","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

综述目的:本综述旨在确定评估脓毒性休克患者肠内营养的当代证据,概述肠内喂养不耐受(EFI)的风险因素,描述脓毒性休克患者开始肠内营养的难题,评估当前的 EFI 定义,并确定用于指导肠内营养治疗的床旁监测器:NUTRIREA-2和NUTRIREA-3试验结果更好地指导了循环休克重症患者的肠内营养剂量。在这两项试验中,随机接受早期标准剂量营养的主要脓毒性休克患者的胃肠道并发症较多。与包括循环性休克患者在内的其他当代 RCT 相比,NUTRIREA-2 和 NUTRIREA-3 试验中的患者肠缺血率更高、病情更严重,并且在接受高基线剂量血管加压素的同时接受全剂量肠内营养。这些研究结果表明,病情严重程度、血管舒张剂剂量和肠内营养剂量都会影响治疗效果。总结:早期肠内营养可保护肠道屏障功能;然而,将肠腔营养引入灌注不足的肠道可能会引起肠缺血等并发症,从而抵消了这些益处。NUTRIREA2和NUTRIREA-3试验的结果证明,在危重症早期急性期,肠内营养剂量策略 "少即是多"。由于缺乏床旁工具来指导脓毒性休克患者开始和推进肠内营养,因此必须通过考虑血管舒张剂的剂量、肠内营养的剂量和病情严重程度来权衡引入肠内营养对保护肠道屏障功能的益处和危害风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Enteral nutrition in septic shock: a call for a paradigm shift.

Purpose of review: The purpose of this review is to identify contemporary evidence evaluating enteral nutrition in patients with septic shock, outline risk factors for enteral feeding intolerance (EFI), describe the conundrum of initiating enteral nutrition in patients with septic shock, appraise current EFI definitions, and identify bedside monitors for guiding enteral nutrition therapy.

Recent findings: The NUTRIREA-2 and NUTRIREA-3 trial results have better informed the dose of enteral nutrition in critically ill patients with circulatory shock. In both trials, patients with predominant septic shock randomized to receive early standard-dose nutrition had more gastrointestinal complications. Compared to other contemporary RCTs that included patients with circulatory shock, patients in the NUTRIREA-2 and NUTRIREA-3 trials had higher bowel ischemia rates, were sicker, and received full-dose enteral nutrition while receiving high baseline dose of vasopressor. These findings suggest severity of illness, vasopressor dose, and enteral nutrition dose impact outcomes.

Summary: The provision of early enteral nutrition preserves gut barrier functions; however, these benefits are counterbalanced by potential complications of introducing luminal nutrients into a hypo-perfused gut, including bowel ischemia. Findings from the NUTRIREA2 and NUTRIREA-3 trials substantiate a 'less is more' enteral nutrition dose strategy during the early acute phase of critical illness. In the absence of bedside tools to guide the initiation and advancement of enteral nutrition in patients with septic shock, the benefit of introducing enteral nutrition on preserving gut barrier function must be weighed against the risk of harm by considering dose of vasopressor, dose of enteral nutrition, and severity of illness.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Current Opinion in Critical Care
Current Opinion in Critical Care 医学-危重病医学
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
3.00%
发文量
172
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: ​​​​​​​​​Current Opinion in Critical Care delivers a broad-based perspective on the most recent and most exciting developments in critical care from across the world. Published bimonthly and featuring thirteen key topics – including the respiratory system, neuroscience, trauma and infectious diseases – the journal’s renowned team of guest editors ensure a balanced, expert assessment of the recently published literature in each respective field with insightful editorials and on-the-mark invited reviews.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信