Should we measure intra-abdominal pressures in every intensive care patient?

Intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) is seldom measured by default in intensive care patients. This review summarises the current evidence on the prevalence and risk factors of intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) to assist the decision-making for IAP monitoring

Intra-Abdominal Hypertension and Gastrointestinal Symptoms in Mechanically Ventilated Patients

Background. We aimed to describe the incidence of intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) and gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms and related outcome in mechanically ventilated (MV) patients. Methods. Intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) and gastric residual volumes were measured at least twice daily. IAH was defined as a mean daily value of IAP ≥ 12 mmHg. Results. 398 patients were monitored for all together 2987 days. GI symptom(s) occurred in 80.2% patients. 152 (38.2%) patients developed IAH. Majority (93.4%) of patients with IAH had GI symptoms. The more severe IAH was associated with the higher number of concomitant GI symptoms (P < .001). 142 (35.7%) patients developed both IAH and at least one GI symptom at any time in ICU, and in 77 patients they occurred simultaneously on the same day. This subgroup had the highest ICU mortality (21.8%). In contrast, the small group of patients presenting only IAH, but not GI symptoms (10 patients), had no lethal outcome. Three patients (4.4%) died without showing either IAH or GI symptoms. Conclusions. GI symptoms and IAH often, but not always, occur together. The patients having IAH solely without developing GI symptoms have rather good outcome

Early or Late Feeding after ICU Admission?

The feeding of critically ill patients has recently become a controversial issue, as several studies have provided unexpected and contradictory results. Earlier beliefs regarding energy requirements in critical illness-especially during the initial phase-have been challenged. In the current review, we summarize existing evidence about fasting and the impact of early vs. late feeding on the sick organism's responses. The most important points are the non-nutritional advantages of using the intestine, and recognition that early endogenous energy production as an important player in the response must be integrated in the nutrient prescription. There is as of yet no bedside tool to monitor dynamics in metabolism and the magnitude of the endogenous energy production. Hence, an early "full-feeding strategy" exposes patients to involuntary overfeeding, due to the absence of an objective measure enabling the adjustment of the nutritional therapy. Suggestions for future research and clinical practice are proposed

Implementation of enteral feeding protocol in an intensive care unit:Before-and-after study

AIM: To determine the effects of implementing an enteral feeding protocol on the nutritional delivery and outcomes of intensive care patients. METHODS: An uncontrolled, observational before-and-after study was performed in a tertiary mixed medical-surgical intensive care unit (ICU). In 2013, a nurse-driven enteral feeding protocol was developed and implemented in the ICU. Nutrition and outcome-related data from patients who were treated in the study unit from 2011-2012 (the Before group) and 2014-2015 (the After group) were obtained from a local electronic database, the national Population Registry and the hospital’s Infection Control Service. Data from adult patients, readmissions excluded, who were treated for at least 7 d in the study unit were analysed. RESULTS: In total, 231 patients were enrolled in the Before and 249 in the After group. The groups were comparable regarding demographics, patient profile, and severity of illness. Fewer patients were mechanically ventilated on admission in the After group (86.7% vs 93.1% in the Before group, P = 0.021). The prevalence of hospital-acquired infections, length of ICU stay and ICU, 30- and 60-d mortality did not differ between the groups. Patients in the After group had a lower 90-d (P = 0.026) and 120-d (P = 0.033) mortality. In the After group, enteral nutrition was prescribed less frequently (P = 0.039) on day 1 but significantly more frequently on all days from day 3. Implementation of the feeding protocol resulted in a higher cumulative amount of enterally (P = 0.049) and a lower cumulative amount of parenterally (P < 0.001) provided calories by day 7, with an overall reduction in caloric provision (P < 0.001). The prevalence of gastrointestinal symptoms was comparable in both groups, as was the frequency of prokinetic use. Underfeeding (total calories < 80% of caloric needs, independent of route) was observed in 59.4% of the study days Before vs 76.9% After (P < 0.001). Inclusion in the Before group, previous abdominal surgery, intra-abdominal hypertension and the sum of gastrointestinal symptoms were found to be independent predictors of insufficient enteral nutrition. CONCLUSION: The use of a nurse-driven feeding protocol improves the delivery of enteral nutrition in ICU patients without concomitant increases in gastrointestinal symptoms or intra-abdominal hypertension

Gastrointestinal function in intensive care patients: terminology, definitions and management. Recommendations of the ESICM Working Group on Abdominal Problems

Purpose: Acute gastrointestinal (GI) dysfunction and failure have been increasingly recognized in critically ill patients. The variety of definitions proposed in the past has led to confusion and difficulty in comparing one study to another. An international working group convened to standardize the definitions for acute GI failure and GI symptoms and to review the therapeutic options. Methods: The Working Group on Abdominal Problems (WGAP) of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) developed the definitions for GI dysfunction in intensive care patients on the basis of the available evidence and current understanding of the pathophysiology. Results: Definitions for acute gastrointestinal injury (AGI) with its four grades of severity, as well as for feeding intolerance syndrome and GI symptoms (e.g. vomiting, diarrhoea, paralysis, high gastric residual volumes) are proposed. AGI is a malfunctioning of the GI tract in intensive care patients due to their acute illness. AGI grade I=increased risk of developing GI dysfunction or failure (a self-limiting condition); AGI grade II=GI dysfunction (a condition that requires interventions); AGI grade III=GI failure (GI function cannot be restored with interventions); AGI grade IV=dramatically manifesting GI failure (a condition that is immediately life-threatening). Current evidence and expert opinions regarding treatment of acute GI dysfunction are provided. Conclusions: State-of-the-art definitions for GI dysfunction with gradation as well as management recommendations are proposed on the basis of current medical evidence and expert opinion. The WGAP recommends using these definitions for clinical and research purpose

Diarrhoea in the critically ill is common, associated with poor outcome, and rarely due to Clostridium difficile

Diarrhoea is common in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients, with a reported prevalence of 15-38%. Many factors may cause diarrhoea, including Clostridium difficile, drugs (e.g. laxatives, antibiotics) and enteral feeds. Diarrhoea impacts on patient dignity, increases nursing workload and healthcare costs, and exacerbates morbidity through dermal injury, impaired enteral uptake and subsequent fluid imbalance. We analysed a cohort of 9331 consecutive patients admitted to a mixed general intensive care unit to establish the prevalence of diarrhoea in intensive care unit patients, and its relationship with infective aetiology and clinical outcomes. We provide evidence that diarrhoea is common (12.9% (1207/9331) prevalence) in critically ill patients, independently associated with increased intensive care unit length of stay (mean (standard error) 14.8 (0.26) vs 3.2 (0.09) days, p < 0.001) and mortality (22.0% (265/1207) vs 8.7% (705/8124), p < 0.001; adjusted hazard ratio 1.99 (95% CI 1.70-2.32), p < 0.001) compared to patients without diarrhoea even after adjusting for potential confounding factors, and infrequently caused by infective aetiology (112/1207 (9.2%)) such as Clostridium difficile (97/1048 (9.3%) tested) or virological causes (9/172 (5.7%) tested). Our findings suggest non-infective causes of diarrhoea in ICU predominate and pathophysiology of diarrhoea in critically ill patients warrants further investigation

Gastrointestinal symptoms during the first week of intensive care are associated with poor outcome : a prospective multicentre study

The study aimed to develop a gastrointestinal (GI) dysfunction score predicting 28-day mortality for adult patients needing mechanical ventilation (MV). 377 adult patients from 40 ICUs with expected duration of MV for at least 6 h were prospectively studied. Predefined GI symptoms, intra-abdominal pressures (IAP), feeding details, organ dysfunction and treatment were documented on days 1, 2, 4 and 7. The number of simultaneous GI symptoms was higher in nonsurvivors on each day. Absent bowel sounds and GI bleeding were the symptoms most significantly associated with mortality. None of the GI symptoms alone was an independent predictor of mortality, but gastrointestinal failure (GIF)-defined as three or more GI symptoms-on day 1 in ICU was independently associated with a threefold increased risk of mortality. During the first week in ICU, GIF occurred in 24 patients (6.4 %) and was associated with higher 28-day mortality (62.5 vs. 28.9 %, P = 0.001). Adding the created subscore for GI dysfunction (based on the number of GI symptoms) to SOFA score did not improve mortality prediction (day 1 AUROC 0.706 [95 % CI 0.647-0.766] versus 0.703 [95 % CI 0.643-0.762] in SOFA score alone). An increasing number of GI symptoms independently predicts 28 day mortality with moderate accuracy. However, it was not possible to develop a GI dysfunction score, improving the performance of the SOFA score either due to data set limitations, definition problems, or possibly indicating that GI dysfunction is often secondary and not the primary cause of other organ failure