No abstract

The clinical conditions of critically ill patients are highly heterogeneous; therefore, nutrient requirements should be personalized based on the patient’s nutritional status. However, nutritional status is not always considered when evaluating a patient’s nutritional therapy in the medical intensive care unit (ICU). We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study to assess the effect of ICU patients’ nutrition risk status on the association between energy intake and clinical outcomes (i.e., hospital, 14-day and 28-day mortality). The nutrition risk of critically ill patients was classified as either high- or low-nutrition risk using the modified Nutrition Risk in the Critically Ill score. There were 559 (75.3%) patients in the high nutrition risk group, while 183 patients were in the low nutrition risk group. Higher mean energy intake was associated with lower hospital, 14-day and 28-day mortality rates in patients with high nutrition risk; while there were no significant associations between mean energy intake and clinical outcomes in patients with low nutrition risk. Further examination of the association between amount of energy intake and clinical outcomes showed that patients with high nutrition risk who consumed at least 800 kcal/day had significantly lower hospital, 14-day and 28-day mortality rates. Although patients with low nutrition risk did not benefit from high energy intake, patients with high nutrition risk are suggested to consume at least 800 kcal/day in order to reduce their mortality rate in the medical ICU.

BackgroundAlthough the optimal timing of initiation of renal replacement therapy (RRT) in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury has been extensively studied in the past, it is still unclear.MethodsIn this systematic review, we searched all related randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that directly compared earlier and later RRT published prior to June 25, 2016, from PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE. We extracted the study characteristics and outcomes of all-cause mortality, RRT dependence, and intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay (LOS).ResultsWe identified 51 published relevant studies from 13,468 screened abstracts. Nine RCTs with 1627 participants were included in this meta-analysis. Earlier RRT was not associated with benefits in terms of mortality [relative risk (RR) 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68–1.14, p = 0.33] and RRT dependence (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.46–1.42, p = 0.46). There were also no significant differences in the ICU and hospital LOS between patients who underwent earlier versus later RRT [standard means difference −0.08 (95% CI −0.26 to 0.09) and −0.11 (95% CI −0.37 to 0.16) day, respectively]. In subgroup analysis, earlier RRT was associated with a reduction in the in-hospital mortality among surgical patients (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.64–0.96) and patients who underwent continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.67–0.96).ConclusionsCompared with later RRT, earlier initiation of RRT did not show beneficial impacts on patient outcomes. However, a lower rate of death was observed among surgical patients and in those who underwent CRRT. The included literature is highly heterogeneous and, therefore, potentially subject to bias. Further high-quality RCT studies are warranted.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13613-017-0265-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background Several biomarkers have been proposed to predict the occurrence of acute kidney injury (AKI); however, their efficacy varies between different trials. The aim of this study was to compare the predictive performance of different candidate biomarkers for AKI. Methods In this systematic review, we searched PubMed, Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for papers published up to August 15, 2022. We selected all studies of adults (> 18 years) that reported the predictive performance of damage biomarkers (neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL), kidney injury molecule-1 (KIM-1), liver-type fatty acid-binding protein (L-FABP)), inflammatory biomarker (interleukin-18 (IL-18)), and stress biomarker (tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases-2 × insulin-like growth factor-binding protein-7 (TIMP-2 × IGFBP-7)) for the occurrence of AKI. We performed pairwise meta-analyses to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) individually. Hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curves (HSROCs) were used to summarize the pooled test performance, and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations criteria were used to appraise the quality of evidence. Results We identified 242 published relevant studies from 1,803 screened abstracts, of which 110 studies with 38,725 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Urinary NGAL/creatinine (diagnostic odds ratio [DOR] 16.2, 95% CI 10.1–25.9), urinary NGAL (DOR 13.8, 95% CI 10.2–18.8), and serum NGAL (DOR 12.6, 95% CI 9.3–17.3) had the best diagnostic accuracy for the risk of AKI. In subgroup analyses, urinary NGAL, urinary NGAL/creatinine, and serum NGAL had better diagnostic accuracy for AKI than urinary IL-18 in non-critically ill patients. However, all of the biomarkers had similar diagnostic accuracy in critically ill patients. In the setting of medical and non-sepsis patients, urinary NGAL had better predictive performance than urinary IL-18, urinary L-FABP, and urinary TIMP-2 × IGFBP-7: 0.3. In the surgical patients, urinary NGAL/creatinine and urinary KIM-1 had the best diagnostic accuracy. The HSROC values of urinary NGAL/creatinine, urinary NGAL, and serum NGAL were 91.4%, 85.2%, and 84.7%, respectively. Conclusions Biomarkers containing NGAL had the best predictive accuracy for the occurrence of AKI, regardless of whether or not the values were adjusted by urinary creatinine, and especially in medically treated patients. However, the predictive performance of urinary NGAL was limited in surgical patients, and urinary NGAL/creatinine seemed to be the most accurate biomarkers in these patients. All of the biomarkers had similar predictive performance in critically ill patients. Trial registrationCRD42020207883, October 06, 2020.

Malnutrition is common in intensive care units (ICU), and volume based feeding protocols have been proposed to increase nutrient delivery. However, the volume based approach compared to trophic feeding has not been proven entirely successful in critically ill patients. Our study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes both before and after the implementation of the feeding protocol, and to also evaluate the effects of total energy delivery on outcomes in these patients. We retrospectively collected all patient data, one year before and after the implementation of the volume-based feeding protocol, in the ICU at Taichung Veterans General Hospital. Daily actual energy intake from enteral nutritional support was recorded from the day of ICU admission until either the 7th day of ICU stay, or the day of discharge from the ICU. The energy achievement rate (%) was calculated as: (actual energy intake/estimated energy requirement) × 100%. Two-hundred fourteen patients were enrolled before the implementation of the volume-based feeding protocol (pre-FP group), while 198 patients were enrolled after the implementation of the volume-based feeding protocol (FP group). Although patients in the FP group had significantly higher actual energy intakes and achievement rates when compared with the patients in the pre-FP group, there was no significant difference in mortality rate between the two groups. Comparing survivors and non-survivors from both groups, an energy achievement rate of less than 65% was associated with an increased mortality rate after adjusting for potential confounders (odds ratio, 1.6, 95% confidence interval, 1.01–2.47). The implementation of the feeding protocol could improve energy intake for critically ill patients, however it had no beneficial effects on reducing the ICU mortality rate. Receiving at least 65% of their energy requirements is the main key point for improving clinical outcomes in patients.