S. J. Taylor

Prospective, randomized, controlled trial to determine the effect of early enhanced enteral nutrition on clinical outcome in mechanically ventilated patients suffering head injury.

OBJECTIVE To determine the effect of early enhanced enteral nutrition (EN) on clinical outcome of head-injured patients. DESIGN Prospective, randomized, controlled trial. SETTING Tertiary neurosurgical and trauma center. PATIENTS Eighty-two patients suffering head injury and requiring mechanical ventilation. INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive standard EN (gradually increased from 15 mL/hr up to estimated energy and nitrogen requirements) or enhanced EN (started at a feeding rate that met estimated energy and nitrogen requirements) from day 1. Good neurologic outcome (Glasgow Outcome Scale score of 4 or 5) was determined at 3 and 6 months after injury, and the incidence of infective and total complications was determined during the hospital stay up to 6 months. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS Disease severity assessed by best preintubation Glasgow Coma Scale score, pupillary responses, Injury Severity Score, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score, computed tomographic scan categorization, and age was similar in both groups. Intervention patients had a higher percentage of energy (p = .0008) and nitrogen (p<.0001) requirements met by EN in the first week after injury. Neurologic outcome at 6 months was similar between groups, but there was a tendency for more intervention patients to have a good neurologic outcome at 3 months than control patients (61% vs. 39%, p = .08). Fewer intervention patients had an infective complication (61% vs. 85%, p = .02) or more than one total complication (37% vs. 61%, p = .046) compared with control patients. Enhanced EN was associated with a reduction in the ratio of serum concentration of C-reactive protein to albumin up to day 6 after injury (p = .004). CONCLUSIONS Enhanced EN appears to accelerate neurologic recovery and reduces both the incidence of major complications and postinjury inflammatory responses.

Propofol use precludes prescription of estimated nitrogen requirements.

The objective was to determine whether reducing enteral nutrition to accommodate 1% Propofol-derived energy results in suboptimal nitrogen prescription. This was a prospective observational study of 85 consecutive patients requiring mechanical ventilation and receiving 1% Propofol. Enteral nutrition prescription often failed to meet nitrogen requirements (<90%, in 50.6%; <80%, in 21.1%), whereas fat provided 51% of total energy input, exceeding 2 g fat/kg/d in 20%. However, gastroparesis was common, resulting in suboptimal nutrition (median of requirements: energy 71%; nitrogen 57%). If energy balance had been strictly maintained, substituting 1% with 2% Propofol would reduce the number of patients failing to meet nitrogen requirements (1% vs 2%: <90%: in 58.8% vs 17.6%,P< .001; <80% in 35.3% vs 4.7%,P< .014). These effects are directly related to the amount of fat delivered with Propofol. Intensive care unit–associated gastroparesis commonly reduces enteral nutrition input. However, even where this is overcome, use of 1% Propofol frequently precludes prescription of estimated nitrogen requirements; either 2% Propofol or a non-Propofol alternative should be considered.