We have located links that may give you full text access.
EVALUATION STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Hypocaloric enteral tube feeding in critically ill obese patients.
Nutrition 2002 March
OBJECTIVE: We respectively compared the nutritional and clinical efficacies of eucaloric and hypocaloric enteral feedings in 40 critically ill, obese patients admitted to the trauma or surgical intensive care unit.
METHODS: Adult patients, 18 to 69 years old, with weights greater than 125% of ideal body weight, normal renal and hepatic functions, and who received at least 7 d of enteral tube feeding were studied. Patients were stratified according to feeding group: eucaloric feeding (>or=20 kcal/kg of adjusted weight per day; n = 12) or hypocaloric feeding (<20 kcal/kg of adjusted weight per day; n = 28). The goal protein intake for both groups was approximately 2 g/kg of ideal body weight per day. Clinical events and nutrition data were recorded for 4 wk.
RESULTS: Patients were similar according to sex, age, weight, body mass index, Second Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation score, Trauma score, and Injury Severity Score. The hypocaloric feeding group received significantly fewer calories than the eucaloric group (P<or= 0.05). The hypocaloric group had a shorter stay in the intensive care unit (18.6 +/- 9.9 d versus 28.5 +/- 16.1 d, P < 0.03), decreased duration of antibiotic therapy days (16.6 +/- 11.7 d versus 27.4 +/- 17.3 d, P < 0.03), and a trend toward a decrease in days of mechanical ventilation (15.9 +/- 10.8 d versus 23.7 +/- 16.6 d, P = 0.09). There was no statistically significant difference in nitrogen balance or serum prealbumin response between groups.
CONCLUSION: These data suggest that hypocaloric enteral nutrition support is as least as effective as eucaloric feeding in critically ill, obese patients.
METHODS: Adult patients, 18 to 69 years old, with weights greater than 125% of ideal body weight, normal renal and hepatic functions, and who received at least 7 d of enteral tube feeding were studied. Patients were stratified according to feeding group: eucaloric feeding (>or=20 kcal/kg of adjusted weight per day; n = 12) or hypocaloric feeding (<20 kcal/kg of adjusted weight per day; n = 28). The goal protein intake for both groups was approximately 2 g/kg of ideal body weight per day. Clinical events and nutrition data were recorded for 4 wk.
RESULTS: Patients were similar according to sex, age, weight, body mass index, Second Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation score, Trauma score, and Injury Severity Score. The hypocaloric feeding group received significantly fewer calories than the eucaloric group (P<or= 0.05). The hypocaloric group had a shorter stay in the intensive care unit (18.6 +/- 9.9 d versus 28.5 +/- 16.1 d, P < 0.03), decreased duration of antibiotic therapy days (16.6 +/- 11.7 d versus 27.4 +/- 17.3 d, P < 0.03), and a trend toward a decrease in days of mechanical ventilation (15.9 +/- 10.8 d versus 23.7 +/- 16.6 d, P = 0.09). There was no statistically significant difference in nitrogen balance or serum prealbumin response between groups.
CONCLUSION: These data suggest that hypocaloric enteral nutrition support is as least as effective as eucaloric feeding in critically ill, obese patients.
Full text links
Trending Papers
A Personalized Approach to the Management of Congestion in Acute Heart Failure.Heart International 2023
Potential Mechanisms of the Protective Effects of the Cardiometabolic Drugs Type-2 Sodium-Glucose Transporter Inhibitors and Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists in Heart Failure.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 Februrary 21
The Effect of Albumin Administration in Critically Ill Patients: A Retrospective Single-Center Analysis.Critical Care Medicine 2024 Februrary 8
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app