Jane M. Gervasio

Guidelines for the Provision and Assessment of Nutrition Support Therapy in the Adult Critically Ill Patient: Society of Critical Care Medicine (sccm) and American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (a.s.p.e.n.)

A.S.P.E.N. and SCCM are both nonprofit organizations composed of multidisciplinary healthcare professionals. The mission of A.S.P.E.N. is to improve patient care by advancing the science and practice of clinical nutrition and metabolism. The mission of SCCM is to secure the highest quality care for all critically ill and injured patients. Guideline Limitations: These A.S.P.E.N.−SCCM Clinical Guidelines are based on general conclusions of health professionals who, in developing such guidelines, have balanced potential benefits to be derived from a particular mode of medical therapy against certain risks inherent with such therapy. However, practice guidelines are not intended as absolute requirements. The use of these practice guidelines does not in any way project or guarantee any specific benefit in outcome or survival. The judgment of the healthcare professional based on individual circumstances of the patient must always take precedence over the recommendations in these guidelines. The guidelines offer basic recommendations that are supported by review and analysis of the current literature, other national and international guidelines, and a blend of expert opinion and clinical practicality. The population of critically ill patients in an intensive care unit (ICU) is not homogeneous. Many of the studies on which the guidelines are based are limited by sample size, patient heterogeneity, variability in disease severity, lack of baseline nutritional status, and insufficient statistical power for analysis. Periodic Guideline Review and Update: This particular report is an update and expansion of guidelines published by A.S.P.E.N. and SCCM in 2009 (1). Governing bodies of both A.S.P.E.N. and SCCM have mandated that these guidelines be updated every three to five years. The database of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that served as the platform for the analysis of the literature was assembled in a joint “harmonization process” with the Canadian Clinical Guidelines group. Once completed, each group operated separately in their interpretation of the studies and derivation of guideline recommendations (2). The current A.S.P.E.N. and SCCM guidelines included in this paper were derived from data obtained via literature searches by the authors through December 31, 2013. Although the committee was aware of landmark studies published after this date, these data were not included in this manuscript. The process by which the literature was evaluated necessitated a common end date for the search review. Adding a last-minute landmark trial would have introduced bias unless a formalized literature search was re-conducted for all sections of the manuscript. Target Patient Population for Guideline: The target of these guidelines is intended to be the adult (≥ 18 years) critically ill patient expected to require a length of stay (LOS) greater than 2 or 3 days in a medical ICU (MICU) or surgical ICU (SICU). The current guidelines were expanded to include a number of additional subsets of patients who met the above criteria, but were not included in the previous 2009 guidelines. Specific patient populations addressed by these expanded and updated guidelines include organ failure (pulmonary, renal, and liver), acute pancreatitis, surgical subsets (trauma, traumatic brain injury [TBI], open abdomen [OA], and burns), sepsis, postoperative major surgery, chronic critically ill, and critically ill obese. These guidelines are directed toward generalized patient populations but, like any other management strategy in the ICU, nutrition therapy should be tailored to the individual patient. Target Audience: The intended use of these guidelines is for all healthcare providers involved in nutrition therapy of the critically ill, primarily physicians, nurses, dietitians, and pharmacists. Methodology: The authors compiled clinical questions reflecting key management issues in nutrition therapy. A committee of multidisciplinary experts in clinical nutrition composed of physicians, nurses, pharmacists, and dietitians was jointly convened by the two societies.

Sequential single doses of cisapride, erythromycin, and metoclopramide in critically ill patients intolerant to enteral nutrition: A randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover study

Objective: To evaluate the comparative efficacy of enteral cisapride, metoclopramide, erythromycin, and placebo for promoting gastric emptying in critically ill patients with intolerance to gastric enteral nutrition (EN). Design: A randomized, crossover study. Setting: Adult medical intensive care unit at a university‐affiliated private hospital and trauma intensive care unit at a university teaching hospital. Patients: Ten adult, critically ill, mechanically ventilated patients not tolerating a fiber‐containing EN product defined as a single aspirated gastric residual volume >150 mL or two aspirated gastric residual volumes >120 mL during a 12‐hr period. Interventions: Patients received 10 mg of cisapride, 200 mg of erythromycin ethylsuccinate, 10 mg of metoclopramide, and placebo as 20 mL of sterile water every 12 hrs over 48 hrs. Acetaminophen solution (1000 mg) was administered concurrently. Gastric residual volumes were assessed, and plasma acetaminophen concentrations were serially determined by TDx between 0 and 12 hrs to evaluate gastric emptying. Measurements and Main Results: Gastric residual volumes during the study were not significantly different between agents. No differences in area under the concentration vs. time curve or elimination rate constant were identified between agents. Metoclopramide and cisapride had a significantly shorter mean residence time of absorption than erythromycin (6.3 ± 4.5 [SEM] mins and 10.9 ± 5.8 vs. 30.1 ± 4.5 mins, respectively [p < .05]). Metoclopramide (9.7 ± 15.3 mins) had a significantly shorter time to peak concentration compared with erythromycin and placebo (60.7 ± 8.1 and 50.9 ± 13.5 mins, respectively [p < .05]). The time to onset of absorption was significantly shorter for metoclopramide vs. cisapride (5.7 ± 4.5 vs. 22.9 ± 5.7 mins [p < .05]). Conclusion: In critically ill patients intolerant to EN, single enteral doses of metoclopramide or cisapride are effective for promoting gastric emptying in critically ill patients with gastric motility dysfunction. Additionally, metoclopramide may provide a quicker onset than cisapride.

A.S.P.E.N. Parenteral Nutrition Safety Consensus Recommendations

Parenteral nutrition (PN) serves as an important therapeutic modality that is used in adults, children, and infants for a variety of indications. The appropriate use of this complex therapy aims to maximize clinical benefit while minimizing the potential risks for adverse events. Complications can occur as a result of the therapy and as the result of the PN process. These consensus recommendations are based on practices that are generally accepted to minimize errors with PN therapy, categorized in the areas of PN prescribing, order review and verification, compounding, and administration. These recommendations should be used in conjunction with other A.S.P.E.N. publications, and researchers should consider studying the questions brought forth in this document.

Oxandrolone in trauma patients.

Study Objective. To determine the effect of oxandrolone administration on nutritional and clinical outcomes after multiple trauma.

A comparison of renal phosphorus regulation in thermally-injured and multiple trauma patients receiving specialized nutrition support

To compare phosphorus intake and renal phosphorus regulation between thermally injured patients and multiple trauma patients, 40 consecutive critically ill patients, 20 with thermal injury and 20 with multiple trauma, who required enteral tube feeding were evaluated. Phosphorus intakes were recorded for 14 days from the initiation of tube feeding which was started 1 to 3 days postinjury. Serum for determination of phosphorus concentrations was collected at days 1, 3, 7, and 14 of the study period. A 24-hour urine collection was obtained during the first and second weeks of nutrition support for urinary phosphorus excretion, fractional excretion of phosphorus, renal threshold phosphate concentration, and phosphorus clearance. Average total daily phosphorus intake during the 14-day study for thermally injured patients and multiple trauma patients was 0.99+/-0.26 mmol/kg/d vs 0.58+/-0.21 mmol/kg/d, respectively, p < .001. Serum phosphorus concentration on the third day of observation was significantly lower in the thermally injured group than those with multiple trauma (1.9+/-0.8 mg/dL vs 3.0+/-0.8 mg/dL, p < or = .01). A trend toward hypophosphatemia in the thermally injured group persisted by the seventh day of feeding (2.7+/-1.2 mg/dL vs 3.3+/-0.6 mg/dL, p < or = .04). Differences in urinary phosphorus excretion was not statistically significant between the thermally injured and multiple trauma groups (271+/-213 mg/d vs 171+/-181 mg/d for week 1, and 320+/-289 mg/d vs 258+/-184 mg/d for week 2, respectively). Urinary phosphorus clearance, fractional excretion of phosphorus, or renal threshold phosphate concentrations were also not significantly different between thermally injured and multiple trauma patients. During nutrition support, serum phosphorus concentrations are lower in thermally injured patients compared with multiple trauma patients despite receiving a significantly greater intake of phosphorus. Renal phosphorus regulation does not significantly contribute to the profound hypophosphatemia observed in thermally injured patients when compared with multiple trauma patients during nutrition support.

Standardized Competencies for Parenteral Nutrition Prescribing The American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition Model

Parenteral nutrition (PN) provision is complex, as it is a high-alert medication and prone to a variety of potential errors. With changes in clinical practice models and recent federal rulings, the number of PN prescribers may be increasing. Safe prescribing of this therapy requires that competency for prescribers from all disciplines be demonstrated using a standardized process. A standardized model for PN prescribing competency is proposed based on a competency framework, the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (A.S.P.E.N.)-published interdisciplinary core competencies, safe practice recommendations, and clinical guidelines. This framework will guide institutions and agencies in developing and maintaining competency for safe PN prescription by their staff.

2005 American society for parenteral and enteral nutrition (A.S.P.E.N.) standards and guidelines survey

An online survey about the use and format of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (A.S.P.E.N.) Standards and Guidelines documents was conducted. The survey was sent to A.S.P.E.N. members, and an acceptable number of responses were received (470, or 9% of those surveyed). Most respondents indicated an overall satisfaction with the standards and guidelines and suggested format changes, many of which will be incorporated into future guidelines and standards. The results of this survey are presented here for general interest. Changes in the process with which A.S.P.E.N. produces standards and guidelines are discussed.

Nutrition Support in Acute Kidney Injury

Acute kidney injury is a frequent complication affecting many hospitalized patients and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Acute kidney injury often occurs in conjunction with critical illness, which is a hypermetabolic state presenting with hyperglycemia, insulin resistance, hypertriglyceridemia, and increased protein catabolism. In addition to addressing these changes, the clinician should evaluate the important nutrition implications of decreased kidney function. These include vitamins, electrolytes, minerals, trace elements, and the presence and type of renal replacement therapy. Optimal nutrition management in acute kidney injury includes providing adequate macronutrient support to correct underlying conditions and prevent ongoing loss, supplementing micronutrients and vitamins during renal replacement therapy, and adjusting electrolyte replacement based on the degree and extent of renal dysfunction.

Compounding vs Standardized Commercial Parenteral Nutrition Product: Pros and Cons

Standardized commercial parenteral nutrition (PN) formulations have advantages and disadvantages as compared with PN formulations compounded using an automated compounding device. These advantages and disadvantages are discussed along with the supporting available research.

Total nutrient admixtures (3-in-1): pros vs cons for adults.

Total nutrient admixture (TNA) is a complete parenteral nutrition (PN) formulation composed of all macronutrients, including dextrose, amino acids, and intravenous fat emulsions (IVFE), in one bag. The TNA may be safely administered to the patient, with all components aseptically compounded and minimal administration manipulation required, lending itself to decreases in risks of catheter contamination and patient infections. The TNA is compatible and stable at recommended concentrations, and since the IVFE is in the TNA, it is infused at slower rates, allowing for better fat clearance. The TNA offers convenience of administration and a potential cost savings to the healthcare institution both directly and indirectly. Unfortunately, the TNA is not without concerns. At low macronutrient concentrations (lower than recommended), the formulation is compromised. Greater divalent and monovalent cation amounts and increased concentrations of phosphate and calcium may destabilize the TNA or result in precipitation, respectively. With the addition of IVFE in the TNA, catheter occlusion is greater and larger pore size filters are necessary, resulting in less microbial elimination. Determining if the implementation of the TNA is appropriate for an institution requires a recognition of the advantages and disadvantages of the TNA as well as an understanding of the institutions patient population and their nutrition requirements.