COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Effect of enteral versus parenteral nutrition on outcome of medical patients requiring mechanical ventilation.

BACKGROUND: Early enteral nutrition (EN) in patients receiving mechanical ventilation commonly has been advocated, based mainly on studies conducted in mixed populations of trauma and surgery patients. In this study, ventilator-associated pneumonia rates and outcomes were compared in mechanically ventilated medical intensive care unit (ICU) patients receiving enteral versus parenteral nutrition.

METHODS: Patients fulfilling inclusion criteria between February 1, 2004, and January 31, 2006, were included. Patients were randomized to enteral or parenteral nutrition (PN) within 48 hours of intubation. Development of ventilator-associated pneumonia, assessment as to whether day feeding goal was attained, duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU and hospital length of stay (LOS), and mortality rates were recorded.

RESULTS: Of 249 consecutive patients receiving mechanical ventilation, 71 patients were included. Thirty (42.3%) patients received EN, and 41 (57.7%) received PN. There was no difference between groups for age, sex, body mass index, and scores on the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II. Ventilator-associated pneumonia rate, ICU and hospital LOS, and mortality rates were similar for both groups. In the parenterally fed group, duration of mechanical ventilation was longer (p = .023), but the feeding goal was attained earlier (p = .012).

CONCLUSIONS: In mechanically ventilated patients in the medical ICU, ventilator-associated pneumonia rates, ICU and hospital lengths of stay, and ICU and hospital mortality rates of patients receiving PN are not significantly different than those in patients receiving EN, and feeding goals can more effectively be attained by PN. Yet, duration of mechanical ventilation is slightly longer in patients receiving PN.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

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 Toggle icon

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