Hasse et al. investigated the impact of early EN on the outcome of 50 liver transplant patients.
The patients were randomised to receive either EN within 12 h after transplantation or maintenance i.v. fluid until oral intake was initiated on day 2.
Caloric intake was 3–4 times higher in the group receiving early EN during 3–4 days after transplantation and 80–110% of the actual energy expenditure was therefore met early.
Despite the higher caloric intake in the early EN group, no significant effect was found on length of time on ventilatory support, length of stay in ICU and hospital, number of readmissions, infections, or rejection during the first 21 post-transplant days.
However, viral infections occurred less frequently in the early EN group.
Singh et al. compared the effect of early postoperative EN with spontaneous oral intake in patients with nontraumatic intestinal perforation and peritonitis. Early EN was delivered, via an intra-operatively placed jejunostomy, within 12 h of surgery.
In total, 42 patients were included (21 in the study group, 22 in the control group).
On day 1 the EN group received a higher intake (800 versus 400 kcal) and by day 4 this had increased further to 42000 kcal, while the control group still had a very low oral intake.
With the early EN, a significant decrease of infectious complication rates was observed, although mortality did not differ between the groups.
None of the above trials met the current standards for a controlled trial (prospective,
randomised and double blind) with power calculations and error estimation for the anticipated effects.
Because of the small number of patients studied, the data on mortality are difficult to interpret and a classification of observed effects according to the underlying diseases does not make sense.
In contrast to animal models, it remains unclear whether early EN—even in small amounts, might prevent alterations of intestinal permeability in man.
A newer study, published after the two metaanalyses cited above, evaluated early versus late (day 1 versus day 5) EN in mechanically ventilated patients.
Patients in the early feeding group had statistically greater incidences of ventilatorassociated pneumonia (49.3% versus 30.7%;P ¼ 0:020) as well as a longer intensive care unit (13.6714.2 days versus 9.877.4 days; P ¼ 0:043) and hospital lengths of stay (22.9719.7 days versus 16.7712.5 days; P ¼ 0:023).
It should be noted, that patients randomised to late EN also received 20% of their estimated daily nutritional requirements during the first 4 days. This study therefore,
actually compared early aggressive versus less aggressive feeding rather than early versus late feeding.
Unfortunately, the study was also not randomised, since group assignment was based on the day of enrolment (odd-versus even-numbered days).
In summary, the evidence in favour of early EN in critical illness is not as strong as suggested by Zaloga We conclude however—based more on current data and our own experience than on conclusive scientific data—that early EN in an appropriate amount (see statement 3) and with the aim of avoiding gut failure can be recommended at level C.
Hasse et al. investigated the impact of early EN on the outcome of 50 liver transplant patients. The patients were randomised to receive either EN within 12 h after transplantation or maintenance i.v. fluid until oral intake was initiated on day 2.Caloric intake was 3–4 times higher in the group receiving early EN during 3–4 days after transplantation and 80–110% of the actual energy expenditure was therefore met early.Despite the higher caloric intake in the early EN group, no significant effect was found on length of time on ventilatory support, length of stay in ICU and hospital, number of readmissions, infections, or rejection during the first 21 post-transplant days. However, viral infections occurred less frequently in the early EN group.Singh et al. compared the effect of early postoperative EN with spontaneous oral intake in patients with nontraumatic intestinal perforation and peritonitis. Early EN was delivered, via an intra-operatively placed jejunostomy, within 12 h of surgery. In total, 42 patients were included (21 in the study group, 22 in the control group). On day 1 the EN group received a higher intake (800 versus 400 kcal) and by day 4 this had increased further to 42000 kcal, while the control group still had a very low oral intake. With the early EN, a significant decrease of infectious complication rates was observed, although mortality did not differ between the groups.
None of the above trials met the current standards for a controlled trial (prospective,
randomised and double blind) with power calculations and error estimation for the anticipated effects.
Because of the small number of patients studied, the data on mortality are difficult to interpret and a classification of observed effects according to the underlying diseases does not make sense.
In contrast to animal models, it remains unclear whether early EN—even in small amounts, might prevent alterations of intestinal permeability in man.
A newer study, published after the two metaanalyses cited above, evaluated early versus late (day 1 versus day 5) EN in mechanically ventilated patients.
Patients in the early feeding group had statistically greater incidences of ventilatorassociated pneumonia (49.3% versus 30.7%;P ¼ 0:020) as well as a longer intensive care unit (13.6714.2 days versus 9.877.4 days; P ¼ 0:043) and hospital lengths of stay (22.9719.7 days versus 16.7712.5 days; P ¼ 0:023).
It should be noted, that patients randomised to late EN also received 20% of their estimated daily nutritional requirements during the first 4 days. This study therefore,
actually compared early aggressive versus less aggressive feeding rather than early versus late feeding.
Unfortunately, the study was also not randomised, since group assignment was based on the day of enrolment (odd-versus even-numbered days).
In summary, the evidence in favour of early EN in critical illness is not as strong as suggested by Zaloga We conclude however—based more on current data and our own experience than on conclusive scientific data—that early EN in an appropriate amount (see statement 3) and with the aim of avoiding gut failure can be recommended at level C.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/98aba/98abadb1435b0cfbe63f2dabdddc22693678da81" alt=""