Enteral nutrition (EN) can maintain the structure and function of the gastrointestinal mucosa better than parenteral nutrition. In critically ill patients, EN must be discontinued or interrupted, if gastrointestinal complications, particularly vomiting and bowel movement disorders, do not resolve with appropriate management. To avoid such gastrointestinal complications, EN should be started as soon as possible with a small amount of EN first and gradually increased. EN itself may also promote intestinal peristalsis. The measures to decrease the risk of reflux and aspiration include elevation the head of the bed (30° to 45°), switch to continuous administration, administration of prokinetic drugs or narcotic antagonists to promote gastrointestinal motility, and switch to jejunal access (postpyloric route). Moreover, the control of bowel movement is also important for intensive care and management. In particular, prolonged diarrhea can cause deficiency in nutrient absorption, malnutrition, and increase in mortality. In addition, diarrhea may cause a decrease the circulating blood volume, metabolic acidosis, electrolyte abnormalities, and contamination of surgical wounds and pressure ulcers. If diarrhea occurs in critically ill patients on EN management, it is important to determine whether diarrhea is EN-related or not. After ruling out the other causes of diarrhea, the measures to prevent EN-related diarrhea include switch to continuous infusion, switch to gastric feeding, adjustment of agents that improve gastrointestinal peristalsis or laxative, administration of antidiarrheal drugs, changing the type of EN formula, and semisolidification of EN formula. One of the best ways to success for EN management is to continue as long as possible without interruption and discontinuation of EN easily by appropriate measures, even if gastrointestinal complications occur.

Background: The utility of using indirect calorimetry (IC) to estimate energy needs and methods for its application to this purpose remain unclear. This systematic review investigated whether using IC to estimate energy expenditure in critically ill patients is more meaningful for improving survival than other estimation methods. Methods: Comprehensive searches were conducted in MEDLINE using PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Igaku-Chuo-Zasshi up to March 2023. Results: Nine RCTs involving 1178 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The evidence obtained suggested that energy delivery by IC improved short-term mortality (risk ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70 to 1.06). However, the use of IC did not appear to affect the length of ICU stay (mean difference [MD], 0.86; 95% CI, −0.98 to 2.70) or the duration of mechanical ventilation (MD, 0.66; 95% CI, −0.39 to 1.72). Post hoc analyses using short-term mortality as the outcome found no significant difference by target calories in resting energy expenditure, whereas more frequent IC estimates were associated with lower short-term mortality and were more effective in mechanically ventilated patients. Conclusions: This updated meta-analysis revealed that the use of IC may improve short-term mortality in patients with critical illness and did not increase adverse events.

Background: There is lack of evidence regarding nutritional management among intensive care unit (ICU) patients in a population with relatively low body mass index. Therefore, we conducted an observational study to assess the nutritional management in Japanese ICUs. Also, we investigated the impact of nutritional management and rehabilitation on physical outcome. Methods: The study population comprised 389 consecutive patients who received mechanical ventilation for at least 24 h and those admitted to the ICU for > 72 h in 13 hospitals. The primary outcomes were caloric and protein intake in ICU on days 3 and 7, and at ICU discharge. The secondary outcome was the impact of nutritional management and rehabilitation on physical status at ICU discharge. We defined good physical status as more than end sitting and poor physical status as bed rest and sitting. We divided the participants into 2 groups, namely, the good physical status group (Good group) and poor physical status group (Poor group) for analysis of the secondary outcome. Data were expressed as median (interquartile range). Results: The median amount of caloric intake on days 3 and 7, and at ICU discharge via enteral and parenteral routes were 8.4 (3.1–15.6), 14.9 (7.5–22.0), and 11.2 (2.5–19.1) kcal/kg/day, respectively. The median amount of protein intake on days 3 and 7, and at ICU discharge were 0.2 (0–0.5), 0.4 (0.1–0.8), and 0.3 (0–0.7) g/kg/day, respectively. The amount of caloric intake on day 3 in the Poor group was significantly higher than that of the Good group (10.1 [5.8, 16.2] vs. 5.2 [1.9, 12.4] kcal/kg/day, p < 0.001). The proportion of patients who were received rehabilitation in ICU in the Good group was significantly higher than that of the Poor group (92 vs. 63%, p < 0.001). The multivariate analysis revealed that caloric intake on day 3 and rehabilitation in ICU were considered independent factors that affect physical status (OR 1.19; 95% CI 1.05–1.34; p = 0.005 and OR 0.07; 95% CI 0.01–0.34; p = 0.001). Conclusions: The caloric and protein intakes in Japanese ICUs were 15 kcal/kg/day and 0.4 g/kg/day, respectively. In addition, critically ill patients might benefit from low caloric intake (less than 10 kcal/kg/day) until day 3 and rehabilitation during ICU stay.