11 research outputs found

    Impact of early enteral versus parenteral nutrition on mortality in patients requiring mechanical ventilation and catecholamines: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial (NUTRIREA-2)

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Nutritional support is crucial to the management of patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and the most commonly prescribed treatment in intensive care units (ICUs). International guidelines consistently indicate that enteral nutrition (EN) should be preferred over parenteral nutrition (PN) whenever possible and started as early as possible. However, no adequately designed study has evaluated whether a specific nutritional modality is associated with decreased mortality. The primary goal of this trial is to assess the hypothesis that early first-line EN, as compared to early first-line PN, decreases day 28 all-cause mortality in patients receiving IMV and vasoactive drugs for shock. METHODS/DESIGN: The NUTRIREA-2 study is a multicenter, open-label, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial comparing early PN versus early EN in critically ill patients requiring IMV for an expected duration of at least 48 hours, combined with vasoactive drugs, for shock. Patients will be allocated at random to first-line PN for at least 72 hours or to first-line EN. In both groups, nutritional support will be started within 24 hours after IMV initiation. Calorie targets will be 20 to 25 kcal/kg/day during the first week, then 25 to 30 kcal/kg/day thereafter. Patients receiving PN may be switched to EN after at least 72 hours in the event of shock resolution (no vasoactive drugs for 24 consecutive hours and arterial lactic acid level below 2 mmol/L). On day 7, all patients receiving PN and having no contraindications to EN will be switched to EN. In both groups, supplemental PN may be added to EN after day 7 in patients with persistent intolerance to EN and inadequate calorie intake. We plan to recruit 2,854 patients at 44 participating ICUs. DISCUSSION: The NUTRIREA-2 study is the first large randomized controlled trial designed to assess the hypothesis that early EN improves survival compared to early PN in ICU patients. Enrollment started on 22 March 2013 and is expected to end in November 2015. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01802099 (registered 27 February 2013)

    Targeted Temperature Management for Cardiac Arrest with Nonshockable Rhythm

    No full text
    International audienceBACKGROUND: Moderate therapeutic hypothermia is currently recommended to improve neurologic outcomes in adults with persistent coma after resuscitated out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. However, the effectiveness of moderate therapeutic hypothermia in patients with nonshockable rhythms (asystole or pulseless electrical activity) is debated. METHODS: We performed an open-label, randomized, controlled trial comparing moderate therapeutic hypothermia (33° C during the first 24 hours) with targeted normothermia (37° C) in patients with coma who had been admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) after resuscitation from cardiac arrest with nonshockable rhythm. The primary outcome was survival with a favorable neurologic outcome, assessed on day 90 after randomization with the use of the Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) scale (which ranges from 1 to 5, with higher scores indicating greater disability). We defined a favorable neurologic outcome as a CPC score of 1 or 2. Outcome assessment was blinded. Mortality and safety were also assessed. RESULTS: From January 2014 through January 2018, a total of 584 patients from 25 ICUs underwent randomization, and 581 were included in the analysis (3 patients withdrew consent). On day 90, a total of 29 of 284 patients (10.2%) in the hypothermia group were alive with a CPC score of 1 or 2, as compared with 17 of 297 (5.7%) in the normothermia group (difference, 4.5 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.1 to 8.9; P\,=\,0.04). Mortality at 90 days did not differ significantly between the hypothermia group and the normothermia group (81.3% and 83.2%, respectively; difference, -1.9 percentage points; 95% CI, -8.0 to 4.3). The incidence of prespecified adverse events did not differ significantly between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with coma who had been resuscitated from cardiac arrest with nonshockable rhythm, moderate therapeutic hypothermia at 33° C for 24 hours led to a higher percentage of patients who survived with a favorable neurologic outcome at day 90 than was observed with targeted normothermia. (Funded by the French Ministry of Health and others; HYPERION ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01994772.)

    Epidural analgesia in ICU chest trauma patients with fractured ribs: retrospective study of pain control and intubation requirements

    No full text
    International audienceBackground Nonintubated chest trauma patients with fractured ribs admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) are at risk for complications and may require invasive ventilation at some point. Effective pain control is essential. We assessed whether epidural analgesia (EA) in patients with fractured ribs who were not intubated at ICU admission decreased the need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). We also looked for risk factors for IMV. Study design and methods This retrospective, observational, multicenter study conducted in 40 ICUs in France included consecutive patients with three or more fractured ribs who were not intubated at admission between July 2013 and July 2015. Results Of the 974 study patients, 788 were included in the analysis of intubation predictors. EA was used in 130 (16.5%) patients, and 65 (8.2%) patients required IMV. Factors independently associated with IMV were chronic respiratory disease (P = 0.008), worse SAPS II (P < 0.0001), flail chest (P = 0.02), worse Injury Severity Score (P = 0.0003), higher respiratory rate at admission (P = 0.02), alcohol withdrawal syndrome (P < 0.001), and noninvasive ventilation (P = 0.04). EA was not associated with decreases in IMV requirements, median numerical rating scale pain score, or intravenous morphine requirements from day 1 to day 7. Conclusions EA was not associated with a lower risk of IMV in chest trauma patients with at least 3 fractured ribs, moderate pain, and no intubation on admission. Further studies are needed to clarify the optimal pain control strategy in chest trauma patients admitted to the ICU, notably those with severe pain or high opioid requirements

    Factors associated with acute mesenteric ischemia among critically ill ventilated patients with shock: a post hoc analysis of the NUTRIREA2 trial

    No full text
    International audiencePurpose: Acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI) is a rare, but life-threatening condition occurring among critically ill patients. Several factors have been associated with AMI, but the causal link is debated, most studies being retrospective. Among these factors, enteral nutrition (EN) could be associated with AMI, in particular among patients with shock. We aimed to study the factors independently associated with AMI in a post hoc analysis of the NUTRIREA-2 trial including 2410 critically ill ventilated patients with shock, randomly assigned to receive EN or parenteral nutrition (PN). Methods: Post hoc analysis of the NUTRIREA-2 trial was conducted. Ventilated adults with shock were randomly assigned to receive EN or PN. AMI was assessed by computed tomography, endoscopy, or laparotomy. Factors associated with AMI were studied by univariate and multivariate analysis. Results: 2410 patients from 44 French intensive care units (ICUs) were included in the study: 1202 patients in the enteral group and 1208 patients in the parenteral group. The median age was 67 [58–76] years, with 67% men, a SAPS II score of 59 [46–74], and a medical cause for ICU admission in 92.7%. AMI was diagnosed among 24 (1%) patients, mainly by computed tomography (79%) or endoscopy (38%). The mechanism of AMI was non-occlusive mesenteric ischemia (n = 12), occlusive (n = 4), and indeterminate (n = 8). The median duration between inclusion in the trial and AMI diagnosis was 4 [1–11] days. Patients with AMI were older, had a higher SAPS II score at ICU admission, had higher plasma lactate, creatinine, and ASAT concentrations and lower hemoglobin concentration, had more frequently EN, dobutamine, and CVVHDF at inclusion, developed more frequently bacteremia during ICU stay, and had higher 28-day and 90-day mortality rates compared with patients without AMI. By multivariate analysis, AMI was independently associated with EN, dobutamine use, SAPS II score ≥ 62 and hemoglobin concentration ≤ 10.9 g/dL. Conclusion: Among critically ill ventilated patients with shock, EN, dobutamine use, SAPS II score ≥ 62 and hemoglobin ≤ 10.9 g/dL were independently associated with AMI. Among critically ill ventilated patients requiring vasopressors, EN should be delayed or introduced cautiously in case of low cardiac output requiring dobutamine and/or in case of multiple organ failure with high SAPS II score

    Impact of early low-calorie low-protein versus standard-calorie standard-protein feeding on outcomes of ventilated adults with shock: design and conduct of a randomised, controlled, multicentre, open-label, parallel-group trial (NUTRIREA-3)

    No full text
    Introduction International guidelines include early nutritional support (≤48 hour after admission), 20–25 kcal/kg/day, and 1.2–2 g/kg/day protein at the acute phase of critical illness. Recent data challenge the appropriateness of providing standard amounts of calories and protein during acute critical illness. Restricting calorie and protein intakes seemed beneficial, suggesting a role for metabolic pathways such as autophagy, a potential key mechanism in safeguarding cellular integrity, notably in the muscle, during critical illness. However, the optimal calorie and protein supply at the acute phase of severe critical illness remains unknown. NUTRIREA-3 will be the first trial to compare standard calorie and protein feeding complying with guidelines to low-calorie low-protein feeding. We hypothesised that nutritional support with calorie and protein restriction during acute critical illness decreased day 90 mortality and/or dependency on intensive care unit (ICU) management in mechanically ventilated patients receiving vasoactive amine therapy for shock, compared with standard calorie and protein targets.Methods and analysis NUTRIREA-3 is a randomised, controlled, multicentre, open-label trial comparing two parallel groups of patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation and vasoactive amine therapy for shock and given early nutritional support according to one of two strategies: early calorie-protein restriction (6 kcal/kg/day-0.2–0.4 g/kg/day) or standard calorie-protein targets (25 kcal/kg/day, 1.0–1.3 g/kg/day) at the acute phase defined as the first 7 days in the ICU. We will include 3044 patients in 61 French ICUs. Two primary end-points will be evaluated: day 90 mortality and time to ICU discharge readiness. The trial will be considered positive if significant between-group differences are found for one or both alternative primary endpoints. Secondary outcomes include hospital-acquired infections and nutritional, clinical and functional outcomes.Ethics and dissemination The NUTRIREA-3 study has been approved by the appropriate ethics committee. Patients are included after informed consent. Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration number NCT03573739

    Low versus standard calorie and protein feeding in ventilated adults with shock: a randomised, controlled, multicentre, open-label, parallel-group trial (NUTRIREA-3)

    No full text
    Also written with the NUTRIREA-3 Trial Investigators and the Clinical Research in Intensive Care and Sepsis (CRICS-TRIGGERSEP) GroupInternational audienceBackgroundThe optimal calorie and protein intakes at the acute phase of severe critical illness remain unknown. We hypothesised that early calorie and protein restriction improved outcomes in these patients, compared with standard calorie and protein targets.MethodsThe pragmatic, randomised, controlled, multicentre, open-label, parallel-group NUTRIREA-3 trial was performed in 61 French intensive care units (ICUs). Adults (≥18 years) receiving invasive mechanical ventilation and vasopressor support for shock were randomly assigned to early nutrition (started within 24 h after intubation) with either low or standard calorie and protein targets (6 kcal/kg per day and 0·2–0·4 g/kg per day protein vs 25 kcal/kg per day and 1·0–1·3 g/kg per day protein) during the first 7 ICU days. The two primary endpoints were time to readiness for ICU discharge and day 90 all-cause mortality. Key secondary outcomes included secondary infections, gastrointestinal events, and liver dysfunction. The trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03573739, and is completed.FindingsOf 3044 patients randomly assigned between July 5, 2018, and 8 Dec 8, 2020, eight withdrew consent to participation. By day 90, 628 (41·3%) of 1521 patients in the low group and 648 (42·8%) of 1515 patients in the standard group had died (absolute difference –1·5%, 95% CI –5·0 to 2·0; p=0·41). Median time to readiness for ICU discharge was 8·0 days (IQR 5·0–14·0) in the low group and 9·0 days (5·0–17·0) in the standard group (hazard ratio [HR] 1·12, 95% CI 1·02 to 1·22; p=0·015). Proportions of patients with secondary infections did not differ between the groups (HR 0·85, 0·71 to 1·01; p=0·06). The low group had lower proportions of patients with vomiting (HR 0·77, 0·67 to 0·89; p<0·001), diarrhoea (0·83, 0·73 to 0·94; p=0·004), bowel ischaemia (0·50, 0·26 to 0·95; p=0·030), and liver dysfunction (0·92, 0·86–0·99; p=0·032).InterpretationCompared with standard calorie and protein targets, early calorie and protein restriction did not decrease mortality but was associated with faster recovery and fewer complications

    S'appuyer sur l'oxymétrie de pouls pour éviter l'hypoxémie et l'hyperoxie : une étude de cohorte prospective multicentrique chez des patients en insuffisance circulatoire

    No full text
    International audiencePurposeThe purpose of this study was to assess the predictive performance of pulse oximetry (SpO2) to rule out hypoxaemia and hyperoxia in critically ill patients.MethodsSpO2, arterial oxygenation (SaO2), and arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2) were prospectively and simultaneously measured every 6 h during the first 24 h of intensive care unit admission in a multicentre cohort of critically ill patients suffering acute circulatory failure. Likelihood ratios associated with different cutoff values of SpO2 to rule out hypoxaemia (SaO2 95% or PaO2 > 100 mmHg) and post-test probabilities were calculated. Mean bias between SpO2 and SaO2 and agreement interval were calculated. Area under the receiver operating characteristics associated with SpO2 to predict different threshold values of SaO2 and PaO2 were calculated.ResultsFive hundred seventy-one patients (mean [standard deviation] Simplified Acute Physiology Score II: 58.7 [20.1]; mechanically ventilated 75.6%) with 2643 available SaO2 and PaO2 samples and corresponding 2643 SpO2 values were analysed. Mean bias between SpO2 and SaO2 was 1.1%, and its agreement interval ranged from −8.2 to +11.1%. SpO2 cutoff values of 88%, 90%, and 92% left the possibility that 8%–13% of patients had hypoxaemia. SpO2 < 95% left the possibility that 31% of patients had hyperoxia. All calculated areas under the receiver operating characteristics showed a lower limit of their 95% confidence interval below 0.85ConclusionIn this cohort of patients with circulatory failure, SpO2 had poor discriminative ability to rule out hypoxaemia and hyperoxia. Overconfidence upon SpO2 monitoring may be dangerous

    Impact of early low-calorie low-protein versus standard-calorie standard-protein feeding on outcomes of ventilated adults with shock: design and conduct of a randomised, controlled, multicentre, open-label, parallel-group trial (NUTRIREA-3)

    No full text
    International audienceInternational guidelines include early nutritional support (≤48 hour after admission), 20–25 kcal/kg/day, and 1.2–2 g/kg/day protein at the acute phase of critical illness. Recent data challenge the appropriateness of providing standard amounts of calories and protein during acute critical illness. Restricting calorie and protein intakes seemed beneficial, suggesting a role for metabolic pathways such as autophagy, a potential key mechanism in safeguarding cellular integrity, notably in the muscle, during critical illness. However, the optimal calorie and protein supply at the acute phase of severe critical illness remains unknown. NUTRIREA-3 will be the first trial to compare standard calorie and protein feeding complying with guidelines to low-calorie low-protein feeding. We hypothesised that nutritional support with calorie and protein restriction during acute critical illness decreased day 90 mortality and/or dependency on intensive care unit (ICU) management in mechanically ventilated patients receiving vasoactive amine therapy for shock, compared with standard calorie and protein targets. Methods and analysis NUTRIREA-3 is a randomised, controlled, multicentre, open-label trial comparing two parallel groups of patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation and vasoactive amine therapy for shock and given early nutritional support according to one of two strategies: early calorie-protein restriction (6 kcal/kg/day-0.2–0.4 g/kg/day) or standard calorie-protein targets (25 kcal/kg/day, 1.0–1.3 g/kg/day) at the acute phase defined as the first 7 days in the ICU. We will include 3044 patients in 61 French ICUs. Two primary end-points will be evaluated: day 90 mortality and time to ICU discharge readiness. The trial will be considered positive if significant between-group differences are found for one or both alternative primary endpoints. Secondary outcomes include hospital-acquired infections and nutritional, clinical and functional outcomes. Ethics and dissemination The NUTRIREA-3 study has been approved by the appropriate ethics committee. Patients are included after informed consent. Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals. Trial registration number NCT03573739

    Enteral versus parenteral early nutrition in ventilated adults with shock : a randomised, controlled, multicentre, open-label, parallel-group study (NUTRIREA-2)

    No full text
    International audienceBackgroundWhether the route of early feeding affects outcomes of patients with severe critical illnesses is controversial. We hypothesised that outcomes were better with early first-line enteral nutrition than with early first-line parenteral nutrition.MethodsIn this randomised, controlled, multicentre, open-label, parallel-group study (NUTRIREA-2 trial) done at 44 French intensive-care units (ICUs), adults (18 years or older) receiving invasive mechanical ventilation and vasopressor support for shock were randomly assigned (1:1) to either parenteral nutrition or enteral nutrition, both targeting normocaloric goals (20–25 kcal/kg per day), within 24 h after intubation. Randomisation was stratified by centre using permutation blocks of variable sizes. Given that route of nutrition cannot be masked, blinding of the physicians and nurses was not feasible. Patients receiving parenteral nutrition could be switched to enteral nutrition after at least 72 h in the event of shock resolution (no vasopressor support for 24 consecutive hours and arterial lactate <2 mmol/L). The primary endpoint was mortality on day 28 after randomisation in the intention-to-treat-population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01802099.FindingsAfter the second interim analysis, the independent Data Safety and Monitoring Board deemed that completing patient enrolment was unlikely to significantly change the results of the trial and recommended stopping patient recruitment. Between March 22, 2013, and June 30, 2015, 2410 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned; 1202 to the enteral group and 1208 to the parenteral group. By day 28, 443 (37%) of 1202 patients in the enteral group and 422 (35%) of 1208 patients in the parenteral group had died (absolute difference estimate 2·0%; [95% CI −1·9 to 5·8]; p=0·33). Cumulative incidence of patients with ICU-acquired infections did not differ between the enteral group (173 [14%]) and the parenteral group (194 [16%]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·89 [95% CI 0·72–1·09]; p=0·25). Compared with the parenteral group, the enteral group had higher cumulative incidences of patients with vomiting (406 [34%] vs 246 [20%]; HR 1·89 [1·62–2·20]; p<0·0001), diarrhoea (432 [36%] vs 393 [33%]; 1·20 [1·05–1·37]; p=0·009), bowel ischaemia (19 [2%] vs five [<1%]; 3·84 [1·43–10·3]; p=0·007), and acute colonic pseudo-obstruction (11 [1%] vs three [<1%]; 3·7 [1·03–13·2; p=0·04).InterpretationIn critically ill adults with shock, early isocaloric enteral nutrition did not reduce mortality or the risk of secondary infections but was associated with a greater risk of digestive complications compared with early isocaloric parenteral nutrition.FundingLa Roche-sur-Yon Departmental Hospital and French Ministry of Health.Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved
    corecore