Enteral nutrition (EN) is widely used in intensive care units around the world, but the optimal dosing strategy during the first week of critical illness is still controversial. Numerous studies in the past decade have provided conflicting recommendations regarding the roles of trophic and permissive/intentional underfeeding strategies. Further complicating effective medical decision making is the widespread, yet unintentional and persistent underdelivery of prescribed energy and protein, in addition to the trend for recommending ever-higher amounts of protein delivery. We postulate that the key to appropriate enteral strategy lies within an accurate and patient-specific assessment. Patients with a baseline high nutrition risk and those with increased nutrition demands, such as those with wounds, surgery, or burns, likely require full nutrition support, in contrast with medical patients, such as those with acute respiratory distress syndrome, who may selectively be appropriate for trophic strategies. In this analysis, we review several key trials for and against full EN in the first week of critical illness, as well as key issues such as the role of autophagy and immunonutrition in enteral dose selection.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.