The importance of the interplay between inflammation and nutrition has generated much interest in recent times. Inflammation has been identified as a key driver for disease-related malnutrition, leading to anorexia, reduced food intake, muscle catabolism, and insulin resistance, which are stimulating a catabolic state. Interesting recent data suggest that inflammation also modulates the response to nutritional treatment. Studies have demonstrated that patients with high inflammation show no response to nutritional interventions, while patients with lower levels of inflammation do. This may explain the contradictory results of nutritional trials to date. Several studies of heterogeneous patient populations, or in the critically ill or advanced cancer patients, have not found significant benefits on clinical outcome. Vice versa, several dietary patterns and nutrients with pro- or anti-inflammatory properties have been identified, demonstrating that nutrition influences inflammation. Within this review, we summarize and discuss recent advances in both the role of inflammation in malnutrition and the effect of nutrition on inflammation.

Aims In this study, we aimed to investigate whether body composition analysis (BCA) derived from bioelectrical impedance vector analysis (BIVA) could be used to monitor the hydration status of patients with acute heart failure (AHF) during intensified diuretic therapy. Methods and results This observational, single-centre study involved a novel, validated eight-electrode segmental body composition analyser to perform BCA derived from BIVA with an alternating current of 100 μA at frequencies of 5, 7.5, 50, and 75 kHz. The BCA-derived and BIVA-derived parameters were estimated and compared with daily body weight measurements in hospitalized patients with AHF. A total of 867 BCA and BIVA assessments were conducted in 142 patients (56.3% men; age 76.8 ± 10.7 years). Daily changes in total body water (TBW) and extracellular water (ECW) were significantly associated with changes in body weight in 62.2% and 89.1% of all measurements, respectively (range, ±1 kg). Repeated measures correlation coefficients between weight loss and TBW loss resulted with rho 0.43, P < 0.01, confidence interval (CI) [0.36, 0.50] and rho 0.71, P > 0.01, CI [0.67, 0.75] for ECW loss. Between the first and last assessments, the mean weight loss was −2.5 kg, compared with the −2.6 L mean TBW loss and −1.7 L mean ECW loss. BIVA revealed an increase in mean Resistance R and mean Reactance X_c across all frequencies, with the subsequent reduction in body fluid (including corresponding body weight) between the first and last assessments. Conclusions Body composition analysis derived from BIVA with a focus on ECW is a promising approach to detect changes in hydration status in patients undergoing intensified diuretic therapy. Defining personalized BIVA reference values using bioelectrical impedance devices is a promising approach to monitor hydration status.

Objectives: The main objective of this study was to investigate the effects of nutritional support on mortality in hospitalised patients with diabetes and nutritional risk participating in the Effect of early nutritional support on Frailty, Functional Outcomes, and Recovery of malnourished medical inpatients Trial (EFFORT) trial. Design: Secondary analysis of a Swiss-wide multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Participants: Patients with diabetes and risk for malnutrition. Interventions: Individualised nutritional support versus usual care. Primary outcome measure: 30-day all-cause mortality. Results: Of the 2028 patients included in the original trial, 445 patients were diagnosed with diabetes and included in this analysis. In terms of efficacy of nutritional therapy, there was a 25% lower risk for mortality in patients with diabetes receiving nutritional support compared with controls (7% vs 10%, adjusted HR 0.75 (95% CI 0.39 to 1.43)), a finding that was not statistically significant but similar to the overall trial effects with no evidence of interaction (p=0.92). Regarding safety of nutritional therapy, there was no increase in diabetes-specific complications associated with nutritional support, particularly there was no increase in risk for hyperglycaemia (adjusted OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.67 p=0.90). Conclusion: Patients with diabetes and malnutrition in the hospital setting have a particularly high risk for adverse outcomes and mortality. Individualised nutritional support reduced mortality in this secondary analysis of a randomized trial, but this effect was not significant calling for further large-scale trials in this vhighly ulnerable patient population. Trial registration number: NCT02517476 .