The current era of health care delivery, with its focus on providing high-quality, affordable care, presents many challenges to hospital-based health professionals. The prevention and treatment of hospital malnutrition offers a tremendous opportunity to optimize the overall quality of patient care, improve clinical outcomes, and reduce costs. Unfortunately, malnutrition continues to go unrecognized and untreated in many hospitalized patients. This article represents a call to action from the interdisciplinary Alliance to Advance Patient Nutrition to highlight the critical role of nutrition intervention in clinical care and to suggest practical ways to promptly diagnose and treat malnourished patients and those at risk for malnutrition. We underscore the importance of an interdisciplinary approach to addressing malnutrition both in the hospital and in the acute post-hospital phase. It is well recognized that malnutrition is associated with adverse clinical outcomes. Although data vary across studies, available evidence shows that early nutrition intervention can reduce complication rates, length of hospital stay, readmission rates, mortality, and cost of care. The key is to systematically identify patients who are malnourished or at risk and to promptly intervene. We present a novel care model to drive improvement, emphasizing the following six principles: (1) create an institutional culture where all stakeholders value nutrition; (2) redefine clinicians' roles to include nutrition care; (3) recognize and diagnose all malnourished patients and those at risk; (4) rapidly implement comprehensive nutrition interventions and continued monitoring; (5) communicate nutrition care plans; and (6) develop a comprehensive discharge nutrition care and education plan.

BackgroundVitamin D insufficiency is common in hospitalized patients. Recent evidence suggests that vitamin D may enhance the innate immune response by induction of cathelicidin (LL-37), an endogenous antimicrobial peptide produced by macrophages and neutrophils. Thus, the relationship between vitamin D status and LL-37 production may be of importance for host immunity, but little data is available on this subject, especially in the setting of human sepsis syndrome and other critical illness.MethodsPlasma concentrations of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D), vitamin D binding protein (DBP) and LL-37 in critically ill adult subjects admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) with sepsis and without sepsis were compared to healthy controls.ResultsCritically ill subjects had significantly lower plasma 25(OH)D concentrations compared to healthy controls. Mean plasma LL-37 levels were significantly lower in critically ill subjects compared to healthy controls. Vitamin D binding protein levels in plasma were significantly lower in critically ill subjects with sepsis compared to critically ill subjects without sepsis. There was a significant positive association between circulating 25(OH)D and LL-37 levels.ConclusionThis study demonstrates an association between critical illness and lower 25(OH)D and DBP levels in critically ill patients as compared to healthy controls. It also establishes a positive association between vitamin D status and plasma LL-37, which suggests that systemic LL-37 levels may be regulated by vitamin D status. Optimal vitamin D status may be important for innate immunity especially in the setting of sepsis. Further invention studies to examine this association are warranted.

Background and aims: Glucagon-like peptide 2 (GLP-2) may improve intestinal absorption in short bowel syndrome (SBS) patients with an end jejunostomy. Teduglutide (ALX-0600), a dipeptidyl peptidase IV resistant GLP-2 analogue, prolongs the intestinotrophic properties of GLP-2 in animal models. The safety and effect of teduglutide were investigated in SBS patients with and without a colon in continuity. Methods: Teduglutide was given subcutaneously for 21 days once or twice daily to 16 SBS patients in the per protocol investigational group, 10 with end jejunostomy (doses of 0.03 (n = 2), 0.10 (n = 5), or 0.15 (n = 3) mg/kg/day), one with ,50% colon in continuity (dose 0.03 mg/kg/day), and five with >50% colon in continuity (dose 0.10 mg/kg/day). Nutrient balance studies, D-xylose tests, and intestinal mucosa biopsies were performed at baseline, on the last three days of treatment, and after three weeks of follow up. Pre-study fasting native GLP-2 levels were determined for the five patients with >50% colon in continuity.Results: Pooled across groups and compared with baseline, teduglutide increased absolute (+743 (477) g/day; p,0.001) and relative (+22 (16)%; p,0.001) wet weight absorption, urine weight (+555 (485) g/day; p,0.001), and urine sodium excretion (+53 (40) mmol/day; p,0.001). Teduglutide decreased faecal wet weight (2711 (734) g/day; p = 0.001) and faecal energy excretion (2808 (1453) kJ/day (2193 (347) kcal/day); p = 0.040). In SBS patients with end jejunostomy, teduglutide significantly increased villus height (+38 (45)%; p = 0.030), crypt depth (+22 (18)%; p = 0.010), and mitotic index (+115 (108)%; p = 0.010). Crypt depth and mitotic index did not change in colonic biopsies from SBS patients with colon in continuity. The most common side effects were enlargement of the stoma nipple and mild lower leg oedema. The improvements in intestinal absorption and decreases in faecal excretion noted after treatment had reversed after the drug free follow up period. A controlled study with a more robust design is ongoing in order to determine the optimal dosage of teduglutide for SBS patients to achieve the maximal effect and utility of this drug in clinical practice. Conclusion: Teduglutide, at three dose levels for 21 days, was safe and well tolerated, intestinotrophic, and significantly increased intestinal wet weight absorption in SBS patients with an end jejunostomy or a colon in continuity.

www.ClinicalTrials.govNCT01626742.

Patients receiving glutamine-supplemented parenteral nutrition after bone marrow transplantation had improved nitrogen balance, a diminished incidence of clinical infection, lower rates of microbial colonization, and shortened hospital stay compared with patients receiving standard parenteral nutrition. These effects occurred despite no differences between groups in the incidence of fever, antibiotic requirements, or time to neutrophil engraftment.