Although energy intake might be associated with clinical outcomes in critically ill patients, it remains unclear whether full or trophic feeding is suitable for critically ill patients with high or low nutrition risk. We conducted a prospective study to determine which feeding energy intakes were associated with clinical outcomes in critically ill patients with high or low nutrition risk. This was an investigator-initiated, single center, single blind, randomized controlled trial. Critically ill patients were allocated to either high or low nutrition risk based on their Nutrition Risk in the Critically Ill score, and then randomized to receive either the full or the trophic feeding. The feeding procedure was administered for six days. No significant differences were observed in hospital, 14-day and 28-day mortalities, the length of ventilator dependency, or ICU and hospital stay among the four groups. There were no associations between energy and protein intakes and hospital, 14-day and 28-day mortalities in any of the four groups. However, protein intake was positively associated with the length of hospital stay and ventilator dependency in patients with low nutrition risk receiving trophic feeding. Full or trophic feeding in critically ill patients showed no associations with clinical outcomes, regardless of nutrition risk.

Small bowel enteral nutrition (SBEN) may improve nutrient delivery to critically ill patients intolerant of gastric enteral nutrition. However, the optimal time and target for evaluating SBEN efficacy are unknown. This retrospective cohort study investigates these parameters in 55 critically ill patients at high nutrition risk (modified NUTRIC score ≥ 5). Daily actual energy intake was recorded from 3 days before SBEN initiation until 7 days thereafter. The energy achievement rate (%) was calculated as follows: (actual energy intake/estimated energy requirement) × 100. The optimal time was determined from the day on which energy achievement rate reached >60% post-SBEN. Assessment results were as follows: median APACHE II score, 27; SOFA score, 10.0; modified NUTRIC score, 7; and median time point of SBEN initiation, ICU day 8. The feeding volume, energy and protein intake, and achievement rate (%) of energy and protein intake increased significantly after SBEN (p < 0.001). An energy achievement rate less than 65% 3 days after SBEN was significantly associated with increased mortality after adjusting for confounding factors (odds ratio, 4.97; 95% confidence interval, 1.44–17.07). SBEN improves energy delivery in critically ill patients who are still at high nutrition risk after 1 week of stomach enteral nutrition.

Nasogastric tube enteral nutrition (NGEN) should be initiated within 48 h for patients at high nutritional risk. However, whether small bowel enteral nutrition (SBEN) should be routinely used instead of NGEN to improve hospital mortality remains unclear. We retrospectively analyzed 113 critically ill patients with modified Nutrition Risk in Critically Ill (mNUTRIC) score ≥ 5 and feeding volume < 750 mL/day in the first week of their stay in the intensive care unit (ICU). Age, sex, mNUTRIC score, and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score were matched in the SBEN (n = 48) and NGEN (n = 65) groups. Through a univariate analysis, factors associated with hospital mortality were SBEN group (hazard ratio (HR), 0.56; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.31–1.00), Simplified Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score on day 7 (HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.03–1.22), and energy intake achievement rate < 65% (HR, 2.53; 95% CI, 1.25–5.11). A multivariate analysis indicated that energy intake achievement rate < 65% on the third follow-up day (HR, 2.29; 95% CI, 1.12–4.69) was the only factor independently associated with mortality. We suggest initiation of SBEN on the seventh ICU day before parenteral nutrition initiation for critically ill patients at high nutrition risk.

Early enteral nutrition (EN) and a nutrition target >60% are recommended for patients in the intensive care unit (ICU), even for those with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Prolonged prone positioning (PP) therapy (>48 h) is the rescue therapy of ARDS, but it may worsen the feeding status because it requires the heavy sedation and total paralysis of patients. Our previous studies demonstrated that energy achievement rate (EAR) >65% was a good prognostic factor in ICU. However, its impact on the mortality of patients with ARDS requiring prolonged PP therapy remains unclear. We retrospectively analyzed 79 patients with high nutritional risk (modified nutrition risk in the critically ill; mNUTRIC score ≥5); and identified factors associated with ICU mortality by using a Cox regression model. Through univariate analysis, mNUTRIC score, comorbid with malignancy, actual energy intake, and EAR (%) were associated with ICU mortality. By multivariate analysis, EAR (%) was a strong predictive factor of ICU mortality (HR: 0.19, 95% CI: 0.07–0.56). EAR >65% was associated with lower 14-day, 28-day, and ICU mortality after adjustment for confounding factors. We suggest early EN and increase EAR >65% may benefit patients with ARDS who required prolonged PP therapy.