{"title":"比较连续和大剂量肠内营养对危重病人血清白蛋白和前白蛋白的影响:一项随机临床试验。","authors":"Javad Seyyedi, Zahra Rooddehghan, Mostafa Mohammadi, Shima Haghani, Raoofeh Karimi","doi":"10.1186/s41043-025-01042-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>Mechanically ventilated patients in intensive care units frequently require enteral nutrition. The choice of an appropriate feeding method may significantly influence nutritional status and clinical outcomes. Among biomarkers used for nutritional assessment, serum albumin, and prealbumin are widely accepted as reliable indicators for evaluating the effectiveness of nutritional interventions. This study aimed to compare the effects of two common enteral feeding methods-bolus and continuous feeding-on serum albumin and prealbumin levels in mechanically ventilated ICU patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This parallel, single-blind clinical trial was conducted at Imam Khomeini Hospital in Tehran, Iran, with 34 ICU patients receiving mechanical ventilation. Participants were randomly assigned to either the continuous feeding group (Intervention, n = 17) or the bolus feeding group (Control, n = 17). Enteral feeding was delivered via a nasogastric tube for one week. Serum albumin and prealbumin levels were measured before and one week after the intervention. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 16, and hypotheses were tested using paired and independent t-tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No significant changes were observed in serum albumin levels within or between the groups over the intervention period. However, patients in the continuous feeding group (Intervention group) showed a statistically significant increase in serum prealbumin levels (from 0.11 ± 0.06 to 0.15 ± 0.02 g/L, p = 0.004). In contrast, the change in the Bolus feeding group (Control group) was not significant (from 0.10 ± 0.04 to 0.12 ± 0.06 g/L, p = 0.39). The between-group comparison of post-intervention prealbumin levels approached significance in favor of the continuous feeding group (p = 0.08).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Continuous enteral feeding may have a positive effect on serum prealbumin levels in mechanically ventilated patients, while bolus feeding showed no such impact. However, due to the small sample size and short duration of the intervention, these findings should be interpreted cautiously. Further research with larger sample sizes and longer follow-ups is needed to confirm these results (Fig. 1).</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>The protocol of this clinical trial has been registered in the Iranian Clinical Trial Registration Center (registration code: IRCT20190128042528N1). Registered 18 January 2020- Retrospectively registered, date of first recruitment: 6 October 2018, https://www.irct.ir/ .</p>","PeriodicalId":15969,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health, Population, and Nutrition","volume":"44 1","pages":"337"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12486703/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison the effect of continuous and bolus enteral nutrition methods on serum albumin and prealbumin in critical ill patients: A randomized clinical trial.\",\"authors\":\"Javad Seyyedi, Zahra Rooddehghan, Mostafa Mohammadi, Shima Haghani, Raoofeh Karimi\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s41043-025-01042-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>Mechanically ventilated patients in intensive care units frequently require enteral nutrition. The choice of an appropriate feeding method may significantly influence nutritional status and clinical outcomes. Among biomarkers used for nutritional assessment, serum albumin, and prealbumin are widely accepted as reliable indicators for evaluating the effectiveness of nutritional interventions. This study aimed to compare the effects of two common enteral feeding methods-bolus and continuous feeding-on serum albumin and prealbumin levels in mechanically ventilated ICU patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This parallel, single-blind clinical trial was conducted at Imam Khomeini Hospital in Tehran, Iran, with 34 ICU patients receiving mechanical ventilation. Participants were randomly assigned to either the continuous feeding group (Intervention, n = 17) or the bolus feeding group (Control, n = 17). Enteral feeding was delivered via a nasogastric tube for one week. Serum albumin and prealbumin levels were measured before and one week after the intervention. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 16, and hypotheses were tested using paired and independent t-tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No significant changes were observed in serum albumin levels within or between the groups over the intervention period. However, patients in the continuous feeding group (Intervention group) showed a statistically significant increase in serum prealbumin levels (from 0.11 ± 0.06 to 0.15 ± 0.02 g/L, p = 0.004). In contrast, the change in the Bolus feeding group (Control group) was not significant (from 0.10 ± 0.04 to 0.12 ± 0.06 g/L, p = 0.39). The between-group comparison of post-intervention prealbumin levels approached significance in favor of the continuous feeding group (p = 0.08).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Continuous enteral feeding may have a positive effect on serum prealbumin levels in mechanically ventilated patients, while bolus feeding showed no such impact. However, due to the small sample size and short duration of the intervention, these findings should be interpreted cautiously. Further research with larger sample sizes and longer follow-ups is needed to confirm these results (Fig. 1).</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>The protocol of this clinical trial has been registered in the Iranian Clinical Trial Registration Center (registration code: IRCT20190128042528N1). Registered 18 January 2020- Retrospectively registered, date of first recruitment: 6 October 2018, https://www.irct.ir/ .</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15969,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Health, Population, and Nutrition\",\"volume\":\"44 1\",\"pages\":\"337\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12486703/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Health, Population, and Nutrition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41043-025-01042-7\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health, Population, and Nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41043-025-01042-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景和目的:重症监护病房机械通气患者经常需要肠内营养。选择合适的喂养方法可能会显著影响营养状况和临床结果。在用于营养评估的生物标志物中,血清白蛋白和前白蛋白被广泛接受为评估营养干预有效性的可靠指标。本研究旨在比较两种常见的肠内喂养方式——大剂量和连续喂养——对机械通气ICU患者血清白蛋白和前白蛋白水平的影响。方法:在伊朗德黑兰伊玛目霍梅尼医院进行平行、单盲临床试验,34例ICU患者接受机械通气。参与者被随机分配到连续喂养组(干预组,n = 17)或批量喂养组(对照组,n = 17)。经鼻胃管肠内喂养一周。在干预前和干预后一周测定血清白蛋白和前白蛋白水平。数据分析采用SPSS version 16,假设检验采用配对和独立t检验。结果:干预期间,两组血清白蛋白水平均无明显变化。而持续喂养组(干预组)患者血清前白蛋白水平升高有统计学意义(从0.11±0.06 g/L升高至0.15±0.02 g/L, p = 0.004)。而丸饲组(对照组)变化不显著(从0.10±0.04 g/L降至0.12±0.06 g/L, p = 0.39)。干预后连续喂养组的前白蛋白水平组间比较接近显著性(p = 0.08)。结论:持续肠内喂养对机械通气患者血清白蛋白前水平有积极影响,而单次喂养无明显影响。然而,由于样本量小,干预时间短,这些发现应谨慎解释。进一步的研究需要更大的样本量和更长的随访时间来证实这些结果(图1)。试验注册:本临床试验方案已在伊朗临床试验注册中心注册(注册代码:IRCT20190128042528N1)。2020年1月18日注册-追溯注册,首次招聘日期:2018年10月6日,https://www.irct.ir/。
Comparison the effect of continuous and bolus enteral nutrition methods on serum albumin and prealbumin in critical ill patients: A randomized clinical trial.
Background and aims: Mechanically ventilated patients in intensive care units frequently require enteral nutrition. The choice of an appropriate feeding method may significantly influence nutritional status and clinical outcomes. Among biomarkers used for nutritional assessment, serum albumin, and prealbumin are widely accepted as reliable indicators for evaluating the effectiveness of nutritional interventions. This study aimed to compare the effects of two common enteral feeding methods-bolus and continuous feeding-on serum albumin and prealbumin levels in mechanically ventilated ICU patients.
Methods: This parallel, single-blind clinical trial was conducted at Imam Khomeini Hospital in Tehran, Iran, with 34 ICU patients receiving mechanical ventilation. Participants were randomly assigned to either the continuous feeding group (Intervention, n = 17) or the bolus feeding group (Control, n = 17). Enteral feeding was delivered via a nasogastric tube for one week. Serum albumin and prealbumin levels were measured before and one week after the intervention. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 16, and hypotheses were tested using paired and independent t-tests.
Results: No significant changes were observed in serum albumin levels within or between the groups over the intervention period. However, patients in the continuous feeding group (Intervention group) showed a statistically significant increase in serum prealbumin levels (from 0.11 ± 0.06 to 0.15 ± 0.02 g/L, p = 0.004). In contrast, the change in the Bolus feeding group (Control group) was not significant (from 0.10 ± 0.04 to 0.12 ± 0.06 g/L, p = 0.39). The between-group comparison of post-intervention prealbumin levels approached significance in favor of the continuous feeding group (p = 0.08).
Conclusion: Continuous enteral feeding may have a positive effect on serum prealbumin levels in mechanically ventilated patients, while bolus feeding showed no such impact. However, due to the small sample size and short duration of the intervention, these findings should be interpreted cautiously. Further research with larger sample sizes and longer follow-ups is needed to confirm these results (Fig. 1).
Trial registration: The protocol of this clinical trial has been registered in the Iranian Clinical Trial Registration Center (registration code: IRCT20190128042528N1). Registered 18 January 2020- Retrospectively registered, date of first recruitment: 6 October 2018, https://www.irct.ir/ .
期刊介绍:
Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition brings together research on all aspects of issues related to population, nutrition and health. The journal publishes articles across a broad range of topics including global health, maternal and child health, nutrition, common illnesses and determinants of population health.