Effects of Standard vs Energy-Dense Formulae on Gastric Retention, Energy Delivery, and Glycemia in Critically Ill Patients.
Journal
JPEN. Journal of parenteral and enteral nutrition
ISSN: 1941-2444
Titre abrégé: JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7804134
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 2021
05 2021
Historique:
revised:
20
11
2020
received:
28
08
2020
accepted:
14
12
2020
pubmed:
6
2
2021
medline:
9
7
2021
entrez:
5
2
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Energy-dense formulae are often provided to critically ill patients with enteral feed intolerance with the aim of increasing energy delivery, yet the effect on gastric emptying is unknown. The rate of gastric emptying of a standard compared with an energy-dense formula was quantified in critically ill patients. Mechanically ventilated adults were randomized to receive radiolabeled intragastric infusions of 200 mL standard (1 kcal/mL) or 100 mL energy-dense (2 kcal/mL) enteral formulae on consecutive days in this noninferiority, blinded, crossover trial. The primary outcome was scintigraphic measurement of gastric retention (percentage at 120 minutes). Other measures included area under the curve (AUC) for gastric retention and intestinal energy delivery (calculated from gastric retention of formulae over time), blood glucose (peak and AUC), and intestinal glucose absorption (using 3-O-methyl-D-gluco-pyranose [3-OMG] concentrations). Comparisons were undertaken using paired mixed-effects models. Data presented are mean ± SE. Eighteen patients were studied (male/female, 14:4; age, 55.2 ± 5.3 years). Gastric retention at 120 minutes was greater with the energy-dense formula (standard, 17.0 ± 5.9 vs energy-dense, 32.5 ± 7.1; difference, 12.7% [90% confidence interval, 0.8%-30.1%]). Energy delivery (AUC In critical illness, administration of an energy-dense formula does not reduce gastric retention, increase energy delivery to the small intestine, or improve glucose absorption or glucose control; instead, there is a signal for delayed gastric emptying.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Energy-dense formulae are often provided to critically ill patients with enteral feed intolerance with the aim of increasing energy delivery, yet the effect on gastric emptying is unknown. The rate of gastric emptying of a standard compared with an energy-dense formula was quantified in critically ill patients.
METHODS
Mechanically ventilated adults were randomized to receive radiolabeled intragastric infusions of 200 mL standard (1 kcal/mL) or 100 mL energy-dense (2 kcal/mL) enteral formulae on consecutive days in this noninferiority, blinded, crossover trial. The primary outcome was scintigraphic measurement of gastric retention (percentage at 120 minutes). Other measures included area under the curve (AUC) for gastric retention and intestinal energy delivery (calculated from gastric retention of formulae over time), blood glucose (peak and AUC), and intestinal glucose absorption (using 3-O-methyl-D-gluco-pyranose [3-OMG] concentrations). Comparisons were undertaken using paired mixed-effects models. Data presented are mean ± SE.
RESULTS
Eighteen patients were studied (male/female, 14:4; age, 55.2 ± 5.3 years). Gastric retention at 120 minutes was greater with the energy-dense formula (standard, 17.0 ± 5.9 vs energy-dense, 32.5 ± 7.1; difference, 12.7% [90% confidence interval, 0.8%-30.1%]). Energy delivery (AUC
CONCLUSION
In critical illness, administration of an energy-dense formula does not reduce gastric retention, increase energy delivery to the small intestine, or improve glucose absorption or glucose control; instead, there is a signal for delayed gastric emptying.
Substances chimiques
Blood Glucose
0
Glucose
IY9XDZ35W2
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
710-719Informations de copyright
© 2021 American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition.
Références
Casaer MP, Van den Berghe G. Nutrition in the acute phase of critical illness. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(13):1227-1236.
McClave SA, Martindale RG, Rice TW, Heyland DK. Feeding the critically ill patient. Crit Care Med. 2014;42(12):2600-2610.
Cahill NE, Dhaliwal R, Day AG, Jiang X, Heyland DK. Nutrition therapy in the critical care setting: what is “best achievable” practice? An international multicenter observational study. Crit Care Med. 2010;38(2):395-401.
De Beaux I, Chapman M, Fraser R, et al. Enteral nutrition in the critically ill: a prospective survey in an australian intensive care unit. Anaes Intensive Care. 2001;29(6):619-622.
Chapman MJ, Nguyen NQ, Deane AM. Gastrointestinal dysmotility: clinical consequences and management of the critically ill patient. Gastro Clin North Am. 2011;40(4):725-739.
Blaser AR, Starkopf J, Kirsimagi U, Deane AM. Definition, prevalence, and outcome of feeding intolerance in intensive care: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2014;58(8):914-922.
Singer P, Blaser AR, Berger MM, et al. ESPEN guideline on clinical nutrition in the intensive care unit. Clin Nutr. 2019;38(1):48-79.
McClave SA, Taylor BE, Martindale RG, et al. Guidelines for the provision and assessment of nutrition support therapy in the adult critically ill patient: Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) and American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (A.S.P.E.N.). JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2016;40(2):159-211.
Kim H, Stotts NA, Froelicher ES, Engler MM, Porter C. Why patients in critical care do not receive adequate enteral nutrition? A review of the literature. J Crit Care. 2012;27(6):702-713.
Peake SL, Chapman MJ, Davies AR, et al. Enteral nutrition in Australian and New Zealand intensive care units: a point-prevalence study of prescription practices. Crit Care Resusc. 2012;14(2):148-153.
Bryk J, Zenati M, Forsythe R, Peitzman A, Ochoa JB. Effect of calorically dense enteral nutrition formulas on outcome in critically ill trauma and surgical patients. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2008;32(1):6-11.
Lin HC, Doty JE, Reedy TJ, Meyer JH. Inhibition of gastric emptying by glucose depends on length of intestine exposed to nutrient. Am J Physiol. 1989;256(2 Pt 1):G404-G411.
Chapman M, Fraser R, Vozzo R, et al. Antro-pyloro-duodenal motor responses to gastric and duodenal nutrient in critically ill patients. Gut. 2005;54(10):1384-1390.
Nematy M, O'Flynn JE, Wandrag L, et al. Changes in appetite related gut hormones in intensive care unit patients: a pilot cohort study. Crit Care. 2006;10(1):R10.
Nguyen NQ, Fraser RJ, Chapman MJ, et al. Feed intolerance in critical illness is associated with increased basal and nutrient-stimulated plasma cholecystokinin concentrations. Crit Care Med. 2007;35(1):82-88.
Summers MJ, Di Bartolomeo AE, Zaknic AV, et al. Endogenous amylin and glucagon-like peptide-1 concentrations are not associated with gastric emptying in critical illness. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2014;58(2):235-242.
Sachdeva P, Kantor S, Knight LC, Maurer AH, Fisher RS, Parkman HP. Use of a high caloric liquid meal as an alternative to a solid meal for gastric emptying scintigraphy. Digestive Dis Sci. 2013;58(7):2001-2006.
Clegg M, Shafat A. Energy and macronutrient composition of breakfast affect gastric emptying of lunch and subsequent food intake, satiety and satiation. Appetite. 2010;54(3):517-523.
Maljaars PW, van der Wal RJ, Wiersma T, Peters HP, Haddeman E, Masclee AA. The effect of lipid droplet size on satiety and peptide secretion is intestinal site-specific. Clin Nutr. 2012;31(4):535-542.
Akrabawi SS, Mobarhan S, Stoltz RR, Ferguson PW. Gastric emptying, pulmonary function, gas exchange, and respiratory quotient after feeding a moderate versus high fat enteral formula meal in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients. Nutrition. 1996;12(4):260-265.
Kar P, Plummer MP, Chapman MJ, et al. Energy-dense formulae may slow gastric emptying in the critically ill. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2016;40(7):1050-1056.
Kar P, Cousins CE, Annink CE, et al. Effects of glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide on gastric emptying, glycaemia and insulinaemia during critical illness: a prospective, double blind, randomised, crossover study. Crit Care. 2015;19(1):20.
Chapman RJ, Templeton M, Ashworth S, Broomhead R, McLean A, Brett SJ. Long-term survival of chronic dialysis patients following survival from an episode of multiple-organ failure. Crit Care. 2009;13(3):R65.
Fordtran JS, Clodi PH, Soergel KH, Ingelfinger FJ. Sugar absorption tests, with special reference to 3-0-methyl-d-glucose and d-xylose. Ann Intern Med. 1962;57(6):883-891.
Flight L, Julious SA. Practical guide to sample size calculations: non-inferiority and equivalence trials. Pharm Stat. 2016;15(1):80-89.
TARGET Investigators for the ANZICS Clinical Trials Group, Chapman M, Peake SL, et al. Energy-dense versus routine enteral nutrition in the critically ill. N Engl J Med. 2018;379(19):1823-1834.
Gentilcore D, Chaikomin R, Jones KL, et al. Effects of fat on gastric emptying of and the glycemic, insulin, and incretin responses to a carbohydrate meal in Type 2 Diabetes. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2006;91(6):2062-2067.
Kuyumcu S, Menne D, Curcic J, et al. Noncoagulating enteral formula can empty faster from the stomach: A double-blind, randomized crossover trial using magnetic resonance imaging. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2015;39(5):544-551.
Okabe T, Terashima H, Sakamoto A. What is the manner of gastric emptying after ingestion of liquids with differences in the volume under uniform glucose-based energy content? Clin Nutr. 2017;36(5):1283-1287.
Phillips RJ, Powley TL. Tension and stretch receptors in gastrointestinal smooth muscle: re-evaluating vagal mechanoreceptor electrophysiology. Brain Res Brain Res Rev. 2000;34(1-2):1-26.
McNelly AS, Bear DE, Connolly BA, et al. Effect of intermittent or continuous feed on muscle wasting in critical illness: A phase 2 clinical trial. Chest. 2020;158(1):183-194.
Deane AM, Rayner CK, Keeshan A, et al. The effects of critical illness on intestinal glucose sensing, transporters, and absorption. Crit Care Med. 2014;42(1):57-65.