Over the last decade, chronic critical illness (CCI) has emerged as an epidemic in intensive care unit (ICU) survivors worldwide. Advances in ICU technology and implementation of evidence-based care bundles have significantly decreased early deaths and have allowed patients to survive previously lethal multiple organ failure (MOF). Many MOF survivors, however, experience a persistent dysregulated immune response that is causing an increasingly predominant clinical phenotype called the persistent inflammation, immunosuppression, and catabolism syndrome (PICS). The elderly are especially vulnerable; thus, as the population ages the prevalence of this CCI/PICS clinical trajectory will undoubtedly grow. Unfortunately, there are no proven therapies to prevent PICS, and multimodality interventions will be required. The purpose of this review is to: (1) discuss CCI as it relates to PICS, (2) identify the burden on healthcare and poor outcomes of these patients, and (3) describe possible nutrition interventions for the CCI/PICS phenotype.

In health, arginine is considered a nonessential amino acid but can become an essential amino acid (ie, conditionally essential amino acid) during periods of metabolic or traumatic stress as endogenous arginine supply is inadequate to meet physiologic demands. Arginine depletion in critical illness is associated with impairments in microcirculatory blood flow, impaired wound healing, and T-cell dysfunction. The purpose of this review is to (1) describe arginine metabolism and role in health and critical illness, (2) describe the relationship between arginine and asymmetric dimethylarginine, and (3) review studies of supplemental arginine in critically ill patients.

No abstract

Background Malnutrition is underrecognized and underdiagnosed, despite high prevalence rates and associated poor clinical outcomes. The involvement of clinical nutrition experts, especially physicians, in the care of high‐risk patients with malnutrition remains low despite evidence demonstrating lower complication rates with nutrition support team (NST) management. To facilitate solutions, a survey was designed to elucidate the nature of NSTs and physician involvement and identify needs for novel nutrition support care models. Methods This survey assessed demographics of NSTs, factors contributing to the success of NSTs, elements of nutrition education, and other barriers to professional growth. Results Of 255 respondents, 235 complete surveys were analyzed. The geographic distribution of respondents correlated with population concentrations of the United States (r = 90.8%, p < .0001). Most responding physicians (46/57; 80.7%) reported being a member of NSTs, compared with 56.5% (88/156) of dietitians. Of those not practicing in NSTs (N = 81/235, 34.4%), 12.3% (10/81) reported an NST was previously present at their institution but had been disbanded. Regarding NSTs, financial concerns were common (115/235; 48.9%), followed by leadership (72/235; 30.6%), and healthcare professional (HCP) interest (55/235; 23.4%). A majority (173/235; 73.6%) of all respondents wanted additional training in nutrition but reported insufficient protected time, ability to travel, or support from administrators or other HCPs. Conclusion Core actions resulting from this survey focused on formalizing physician roles, increasing interdisciplinary nutrition support expertise, utilizing cost‐effective screening for malnutrition, and implementing intervention protocols. Additional actions included increasing funding for clinical practice, education, and research, all within an expanded portfolio of pragmatic nutrition support care models.