Effects of permissive hypocaloric vs standard enteral feeding on gastrointestinal function and outcomes in sepsis.

Abstract

BACKGROUNDIntestinal mucosal barrier injury and gastrointestinal dysfunction are important causes of sepsis. However, few studies have investigated the effects of enteral underfeeding on gastrointestinal function in sepsis. Moreover, no consensus on goal enteral caloric intake has been reached in sepsis. AIMTo investigate the effects of different goal caloric requirements of enteral nutrition on the gastrointestinal function and outcomes in the acute phase of sepsis.METHODSPatients were randomly assigned to receive 30% (defined as group A), 60% (group B), or 100% (group C) of goal caloric requirements of enteral nutrition in this prospective pilot clinical trial. The acute gastrointestinal injury (AGI) grades, incidence of feeding intolerance (FI), daily caloric intake, nutritional and inflammatory markers, and biomarkers of mucosal barrier function were collected during the first 7 d of enteral feeding. The clinical severity and outcome variables were also recorded.RESULTSA total of 54 septic patients were enrolled. The days to goal calorie of group C (2.55 ± 0.82) were significantly longer than those of group A (3.50 ± 1.51; P = 0.046) or B (4.85 ± 1.68; P < 0.001). The FI incidence of group C (16.5%) was higher than that of group A (5.0%) or B (8.7%) (P = 0.009). No difference in the incidence of FI symptoms was found between groups A and B. The serum levels of barrier function biomarkers of group B were significantly lower than those of group A (P < 0.05) on the 7th day of feeding. The prealbumin and IL-6 levels of group A were lower than those of group B (P < 0.05) on the 7th day of feeding. No significant differences in the clinical outcome variables or 28-d mortality were found among the three groups.CONCLUSIONEarly moderate enteral underfeeding (60% of goal requirements) could improve the intestinal barrier function and nutritional and inflammatory status without increasing the incidence of FI symptoms in sepsis. However, further large-scale prospective clinical trials and animal studies are required to test our findings. Moreover, the effects of different protein intake on gastrointestinal function and outcomes should also be investigated in future work.