Background: The inability to ensure adequate nutrition for patients, and failure to provide adequate calorie and protein intake, result in malnutrition, leading to increased morbidity and mortality. The present study assesses the two approaches to enteral nutrition—intermittent and continuous enteral feeding—in critically ill pediatric patients in Türkiye to determine the superiority of one method over the other. Methods: Included in this multicenter prospective study were patients receiving enteral nutrition via a tube who were followed up over a 3-month period. Anthropometric data, calorie and protein intake, and signs of feeding intolerance were evaluated in a comparison of the different feeding methods. Results: A total of 510 patients were examined. In the continuous enteral feeding (CEF) group, 20.2% of patients developed metabolic abnormalities, and 49.5% experienced enteral nutrition intolerance, both of which were higher than in the intermittent enteral feeding (IEF) group, and the differences were statistically significant. No significant differences were observed between the two feeding methods in terms of reaching the target calorie intake on days 2 and 7 (p > 0.05). On day 7, there were significant differences between the two feeding methods in terms of calorie and protein intake (p = 0.023 and 0.014, respectively). Conclusions: In the present study, assessing the IEF and CEF approaches to enteral nutrition, critically ill pediatric patients receiving intermittent feeding exhibited lower rates of enteral nutrition intolerance and metabolic abnormalities. Furthermore, the calorie and protein intake on day 7 were noted to be higher in the IEF group than in the CEF group. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm the findings of the present study.

Introduction: Lower respiratory tract infections are the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in children worldwide. It is crucial to promptly conduct diagnostic investigations in order to determine the microbiological cause of pneumonia, since this is necessary to ensure the appropriate delivery of antibiotic therapy to each individual patient. We evaluated the results of a rapid molecular diagnostic pneumonia panel in children with LRTI in a pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). Patients and Methods: Rapid molecular diagnostic pneumonia panel (BioFire^®, FilmArray Pneumonia Panel plus; FA-PP) findings (71 results from 46 children) in a tertiary care PICU between 2019 and 2023 were retrospectively reviewed. Results: At least one bacterial pathogen was detected in 57 cases. A total of 77% of children had underlying conditions. A total of 70.4% of children needed invasive mechanical ventilation and 54.4% had ventilator-associated pneumonia. Pseudomonas aeruginosa (50.8%), Acinetobacter calcoaceticus baumannii complex (42%), and Klebsiella pneumoniae (38.6%) were the most common pathogens detected with the FA-PP. Of the 33 cases diagnosed with VAP, more than one pathogen was identified in 65.9% of cases, with the most commonly identified bacteria being K. pneumoniae (43.1%), P. aeruginosa (38.6%), and Acinetobacter calcoaceticus baumannii complex (31.8%). According to the FA-PP results, the same antibiotic therapy was continued in 39.4% of cases, escalated in 54.5%, and de-escalated in 6.1%. Conclusions: The utilization of the FA-PP has some beneficial effects, including more prompt delivery of findings compared to conventional approaches. Additionally, this approach enables the identification of resistance profiles in children diagnosed with pneumonia in the PICU. Consequently, these test results facilitate the organization of antibiotic treatment strategies, including escalation and de-escalation approaches. The detection of resistance patterns was exclusively determined via the implementation of molecular testing, prompting a reevaluation of the isolation technique in accordance with the obtained data.

The development of AKI (acute kidney injury) in critically ill patients in pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) is one of the most important factors affecting mortality. There are scoring modalities used to predict mortality in PICUs. We compared the AKIN (Acute Kidney Injury Network) and pRIFLE (pediatric risk, injury, failure, loss, and end stage) AKI classifications and PICU scoring modalities in this study. Methods: A total of 716 children, whose serum creatinine levels were within the normal limits at the time of admission to the PICU between January 2018 and December 2020, were included. Along with the demographic and clinical variables, AKIN and pRIFLE classifications were recorded at the most advanced stage of AKI. Along with the PIM-2, PRISM III, and PELOD-2 scores, the highest value of the pSOFA score was recorded. Results: According to the pRIFLE and AKIN classifications, 62 (8.7%) patients developed kidney injury, which had a statistically significant effect on mortality. The occurrence of renal injury was found to be statistically strongly and significantly correlated with high PRISM III, PELOD-2, and pSOFA scores. When the stages of kidney injury according to the AKIN criteria were compared with the PRISM III, PELOD 2, and pSOFA scores, a significant difference was found between the patients who did not develop AKI and those who developed stage 1, stage 2, and stage 3 kidney injury. For the PRISM III, PELOD 2, and pSOFA scores, there were no significant differences between the stages according to the AKIN criteria. A substantial difference was discovered between the patients who did not develop AKI and those who were in the risk, injury, and failure plus loss stages according to the pRIFLE criteria. According to the PIM-2 ratio and pRIFLE criteria, there was a statistically significant difference between patients in the injury and failure plus loss stages and those who did not develop AKI. Conclusions: Our study is the first pediatric study to show a substantial correlation between the variables associated with the PICU scoring modalities in critically ill children with AKI. Identifying the risk factors for the development of AKI and planning antimicrobial regimens for patients with favorable prognoses at the time of PICU admission could lower mortality rates.

Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM) is an inflammatory, demyelinating, and rapidly progressive disorder of the central nervous system. This condition is also known as postinfectious encephalomyelitis, and it is characterized by multifocal lesions in the brain and spinal cord with widespread neurological findings. High doses of intravenous (IV) methylprednisolone, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), and plasma exchange (PLEX) treatments comprise the first‐line therapy. There are limited pediatric case reports refractory to standard treatment. Here, we present the case of a 17‐year‐old girl diagnosed with ADEM associated with Salmonella infection, which was treated with rituximab.

Objective: Prevention and management of malnutrition are important in critically ill children. Parenteral nutrition (PN) is considered for patients who cannot tolerate enteral feeding. There are many reasons why PN cannot be delivered in the prescribed amount. We aimed to evaluate whether PN is delivered as prescribed in the pediatric intensive care units and to reveal the reasons for failure. Method: Demographics, pediatric risk of mortality (PRISM) III scores, predicted death rates (PDR), indications for PN, duration of PN, vascular access site, daily amount of prescribed and delivered PN, reasons for not receiving PN as prescribed, and whether renal replacement therapy (RRT) was received were noted. The delivered/prescribed PN volume ratio was compared by gender, age, PRISM III score, PDR, indications for PN, duration of PN, and vascular access site. Results: The most common indication for PN was failing to meet the targeted energy enterally (n=51, 69.9%). The duration of PN was ≤ 7 days in 40 (54.8%) patients and the type of vascular access was jugular venous catheter in 46 (63%) patients. 16 (21.9%) patients received RRT. PN was administered for 906 PN-days and the patients received the prescribed volume on 698 PN-days (77%). The most common reasons for not receiving the PN volume as prescribed were volume restrictions (n= 29, 39.7%) and electrolyte imbalance (n=13, 17.8%). Age, gender, weight, duration of PN, vascular access site, receiving RRT, PRISM III score, and PDR were not associated with receiving more than 0.8 of the prescribed PN volume. All gastrointestinal surgery patients received more than 0.8 of the prescribed amount. Conclusion: In about a quarter of PN-days, the prescribed volume could not be delivered, often due to volume restrictions in the pediatric intensive care units. Setting the correct nutritional targets, individualizing nutritional support, and preventing and overcoming obstacles on the way to the targets may improve outcomes.