Cargando…

Continuous versus Intermittent Enteral Tube Feeding for Critically Ill Patients: A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial

The appropriate strategy for enteral feeding remains a matter of debate. We hypothesized that continuous enteral feeding would result in higher rates of achieving target nutrition during the first 7 days compared with intermittent enteral feeding. We conducted an unblinded, single-center, parallel-g...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lee, Hong-Yeul, Lee, Jung-Kyu, Kim, Hye-Jin, Ju, Dal-Lae, Lee, Sang-Min, Lee, Jinwoo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8839656/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35277023
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/nu14030664
_version_ 1784650422762340352
author Lee, Hong-Yeul
Lee, Jung-Kyu
Kim, Hye-Jin
Ju, Dal-Lae
Lee, Sang-Min
Lee, Jinwoo
author_facet Lee, Hong-Yeul
Lee, Jung-Kyu
Kim, Hye-Jin
Ju, Dal-Lae
Lee, Sang-Min
Lee, Jinwoo
author_sort Lee, Hong-Yeul
collection PubMed
description The appropriate strategy for enteral feeding remains a matter of debate. We hypothesized that continuous enteral feeding would result in higher rates of achieving target nutrition during the first 7 days compared with intermittent enteral feeding. We conducted an unblinded, single-center, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial involving adult patients admitted to the medical intensive care unit who required mechanical ventilation to determine the efficacy and safety of continuous enteral feeding for critically ill patients compared with intermittent enteral feeding. The primary endpoint was the achievement of ≥80% of the target nutrition requirement during the first 7 days after starting enteral feeding. A total of 99 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis (intermittent enteral feeding group, n = 49; continuous enteral feeding group, n = 50). The intermittent enteral feeding group and continuous enteral feeding group received 227 days and 226 days of enteral feeding, respectively. The achievement of ≥80% of the target nutrition requirement occurred significantly more frequently in the continuous enteral feeding group than in the intermittent enteral feeding group (65.0% versus 52.4%, respectively; relative risk, 1.24; 95% confidence interval, 1.06–1.45; p = 0.008). For patients undergoing mechanical ventilation, continuous enteral feeding significantly improved the achievement of target nutrition requirements.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8839656
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88396562022-02-13 Continuous versus Intermittent Enteral Tube Feeding for Critically Ill Patients: A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial Lee, Hong-Yeul Lee, Jung-Kyu Kim, Hye-Jin Ju, Dal-Lae Lee, Sang-Min Lee, Jinwoo Nutrients Article The appropriate strategy for enteral feeding remains a matter of debate. We hypothesized that continuous enteral feeding would result in higher rates of achieving target nutrition during the first 7 days compared with intermittent enteral feeding. We conducted an unblinded, single-center, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial involving adult patients admitted to the medical intensive care unit who required mechanical ventilation to determine the efficacy and safety of continuous enteral feeding for critically ill patients compared with intermittent enteral feeding. The primary endpoint was the achievement of ≥80% of the target nutrition requirement during the first 7 days after starting enteral feeding. A total of 99 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis (intermittent enteral feeding group, n = 49; continuous enteral feeding group, n = 50). The intermittent enteral feeding group and continuous enteral feeding group received 227 days and 226 days of enteral feeding, respectively. The achievement of ≥80% of the target nutrition requirement occurred significantly more frequently in the continuous enteral feeding group than in the intermittent enteral feeding group (65.0% versus 52.4%, respectively; relative risk, 1.24; 95% confidence interval, 1.06–1.45; p = 0.008). For patients undergoing mechanical ventilation, continuous enteral feeding significantly improved the achievement of target nutrition requirements. MDPI 2022-02-04 /pmc/articles/PMC8839656/ /pubmed/35277023 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/nu14030664 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Lee, Hong-Yeul
Lee, Jung-Kyu
Kim, Hye-Jin
Ju, Dal-Lae
Lee, Sang-Min
Lee, Jinwoo
Continuous versus Intermittent Enteral Tube Feeding for Critically Ill Patients: A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial
title Continuous versus Intermittent Enteral Tube Feeding for Critically Ill Patients: A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial
title_full Continuous versus Intermittent Enteral Tube Feeding for Critically Ill Patients: A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial
title_fullStr Continuous versus Intermittent Enteral Tube Feeding for Critically Ill Patients: A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial
title_full_unstemmed Continuous versus Intermittent Enteral Tube Feeding for Critically Ill Patients: A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial
title_short Continuous versus Intermittent Enteral Tube Feeding for Critically Ill Patients: A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial
title_sort continuous versus intermittent enteral tube feeding for critically ill patients: a prospective, randomized controlled trial
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8839656/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35277023
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/nu14030664
work_keys_str_mv AT leehongyeul continuousversusintermittententeraltubefeedingforcriticallyillpatientsaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT leejungkyu continuousversusintermittententeraltubefeedingforcriticallyillpatientsaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT kimhyejin continuousversusintermittententeraltubefeedingforcriticallyillpatientsaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT judallae continuousversusintermittententeraltubefeedingforcriticallyillpatientsaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT leesangmin continuousversusintermittententeraltubefeedingforcriticallyillpatientsaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT leejinwoo continuousversusintermittententeraltubefeedingforcriticallyillpatientsaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledtrial