Evaluating the Impact of Nutrition Support on Clinical Outcomes in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19: A Retrospective Study

Background: Patients with COVID-19 experience prolonged ICU stays. The rate of malnutrition in hospitalized patients remains controversial as well as the appropriate nutrition therapy for these patients. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the impact of nutrition support on clinical outcomes in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Method(s): This was a retrospective chart review involving 48 adults, critically ill patients admitted with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Data extracted included demographic, anthropometric, medical history, biochemical tests, medications, nutrition support protocol, clinical outcomes, length of stay, and ventilator status. We tested associations between aspects of nutrition support (such as early versus delayed feeding, adequacy, and patient positioning) and clinical outcomes (ICU length of stay, weight status, malnutrition status, refeeding syndrome, and ventilator days) using Chi-square, and t-tests, with significance established at the level of p <= 0.05. Result(s): Thirty-eight percent (18) of the patients met the criteria for malnutrition using the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) tool. Approximately 83% of these patients did not have a documented diagnosis of malnutrition in the electronic medical record. More than half of the patients in the study (58.3%) were placed in prone position as part of their treatment and only 7% of these had documented signs of feeding intolerance. None of the patients were switched to total parenteral nutrition (TPN). Only 37% of the patients received adequate protein within the first week of nutrition support while 98% had adequate or exceeded caloric needs. There was no difference in percent weight loss among patients who received inadequate protein compared to those who had adequate protein. Inadequate protein intake was associated with shorter ICU stays (p = 0.04) and fewer ventilator days (p = 0.01) compared to those with adequate protein. Patients who received inadequate or exceeded their calories needs also had shorter ICU stays and fewer ventilator days (p > 0.05). In the context of this study, shorter ICU stays translated into fewer days of life, as 98% of the studied population died before ICU discharge. There were no associations between early nutrition support and selected biochemical parameters. Conclusion(s): The rate of malnutrition was remarkable and largely undocumented. Most patients did not meet the minimum estimated protein needs. Studies with larger sample sizes are needed to examine appropriate protein needs and the effect of nutrition support in patients with COVID-19. Diagnosing and documenting malnutrition warrants heightened attention.

Initiating Home Parenteral Nutrition Therapy in a Patient at High Risk of Refeeding Syndrome After COVID-19 Infection

Background: An emerging finding about COVID-19 is its effect on nutrition and weight loss. The COVID-19 symptoms of fatigue, altered taste or smell, and lack of appetite are well known. But COVID-19 may have a more profound effect on clinical nutrition status. Two recent studies have identified that approximately one-third of ambulatory COVID-19 patients are at risk of experiencing weight loss >= 5% (Anker, et al;di Filippo, et al). The case study presented here discusses home start total parenteral nutrition (TPN) in a patient recently diagnosed with COVID-19 at high risk for refeeding syndrome. Method(s): N/A Results: Case Study: A 92-year-old patient was diagnosed with COVID-19 on June 8, 2022. Over the next week, she was hospitalized twice to manage symptoms of acute mental status changes, lethargy, aphasia, hypotension, and loss of appetite. The patient received nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, remdesivir, and bebtelovimab to treat COVID-19 at different times between June 9, 2022, and June 18, 2022. She remained COVID positive and continued to deteriorate clinically. On June 20, 2022, the patient began receiving 24/7 homecare, including intravenous (IV) fluids of dextrose 5% in normal saline (D5NS) 1000 mL daily for three days. She continued to experience loss of appetite and had no bowel movement for 3 days. On June 23, 2022, she was referred to this specialty infusion provider to initiate TPN therapy in the home setting. The patient's BMI was 18.2 kg/m2. Lab results revealed potassium 3.0 mmol/L, phosphate 1.6 mg/dL, and magnesium 1.6 mg/dL. High risk of refeeding syndrome was identified by the level of hypophosphatemia and hypokalemia. The specialty infusion provider's registered dietitian recommended to discontinue D5NS and begin NS with added potassium, phosphate, and magnesium. Thiamine 200mg daily was added to prevent Wernicke's encephalopathy. The patient's clinical status and lab values were monitored closely each day until her electrolyte levels stabilized (Table 1). Home TPN therapy was initiated on June 28, 2022, with <10% dextrose and 50% calorie requirement with 85% protein and 1.0 g/kg lipids. Three-day calorie count and nutrition education were performed four days post TPN initiation. Oral intake met only 25% of estimated needs. Over several days, theTPN formula was gradually increased to goal calories and the infusion cycle was slowly decreased. The following week, the patient's oral intake improved to 60%-75% of estimated needs. Her constipation resolved, and she showed improvement in functional status and mobility. Her appetite drastically improved when the TPN was cycled. Another three-day calorie count was performed when TPN calories reached goals. Oral intake demonstrated 100% estimated calorie and protein needs. TPN therapy was ultimately discontinued on July 14, 2022. As of September 30, 2022, the patient has stabilized at her pre-COVID weight of 45 kg with full recovery of appetite, function, and cognition. Discussion(s): The ASPEN Consensus Recommendations for Refeeding Syndrome (da Silva, et al) describe the repletion of electrolyte levels before introducing calories to prevent end-organ damage associated with refeeding syndrome (respiratory muscle dysfunction, decreased cardiac contractility, cardiac arrhythmias, and encephalopathy). Conclusion(s): This case study highlights the successful initiation of home TPN therapy in a patient at high risk of refeeding syndrome post COVID-19 infection. Although home start TPN and the risk of refeeding syndrome are not new concepts, they must be considered in the setting of COVID-19. Given the effects COVID-19 has on taste, smell, and appetite and the recent finding that one-third of patients with COVID infection may experience weight loss of >= 5%, nutrition support and patient education are vital components of overall patient care. (Figure Presented).

Nutritional Status, Refeeding Syndrome and Some Associated Factors of Patients at COVID-19 Hospital in Vietnam.

Multisystem inflammatory syndrome is associated with COVID-19 and can result in reduced food intake, increased muscle catabolism, and electrolyte imbalance. Therefore COVID-19 patients are at high risk of being malnourished and of refeeding syndrome. The present study aimed to determine the prevalence and correlates of malnutrition and refeeding syndrome (RS) among COVID-19 patients in Hanoi, Vietnam. This prospective cohort study analyzed data from 1207 patients who were treated at the COVID-19 hospital of Hanoi Medical University (HMUH COVID-19) between September 2021 and March 2022. Nutritional status was evaluated by the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) and laboratory markers. GLIM-defined malnutrition was found in 614 (50.9%) patients. Among those with malnutrition, 380 (31.5%) and 234 (19.4%) had moderate and severe malnutrition, respectively. The prevalence of risk of RS was 346 (28.7%). Those with severe and critical COVID symptoms are more likely to be at risk of RS compared to those with mild or moderate COVID, and having severe and critical COVID-19 infection increased the incidence of RS by 2.47 times, compared to mild and moderate disease. There was an association between levels of COVID-19, older ages, comorbidities, the inability of eating independently, hypoalbuminemia and hyponatremia with malnutrition. The proportion of COVID-19 patients who suffered from malnutrition was high. These results underscore the importance of early nutritional screening and assessment in COVID-19 patients, especially those with severe and critical infection.

Is nasojejunal feeding as effective as we think? An evaluation of nasojejunal feeding in the Intensive Care Unit

Early enteral feeding is important in maintaining the integrity of the gastrointestinal tract mucosal barrier and associated with less bacterial translocation and decreased stimulation of the systemic inflammatory response and subsequent improved outcomes in intensive care (ICU) patients. Enteral feeding by nasogastric (NG) tubes is the preferred route of nutritional support for most ICU patients. However, ICU patients with delayed gastric emptying and poor intestinal motility may not tolerate gastric feeding and may therefore benefit from post-pyloric feeding via nasojejunal (NJ) tubes1. We reviewed the effectiveness of 35 NJ tube placement in 24 patients on ICU between January and March 2021. The M:F ratio was 4:1, median age 69 years (30–80 years) and 54% of patients were non-White British. 10 patients (42%) had diabetes and 54% had COVID-19 as part of their admitting diagnoses. The median BMI was 25 (range 20 – 32.3) and none of the patients were identified as high risk for refeeding syndrome at the time of NJ tube insertion. Nutritional information was unavailable on 5 patients. Of the remaining 19 patients, 26% of patients (n=5) were commenced on parenteral nutrition (PN) within 48 hours of NJ insertion. Only 1 patient was able to meet their nutritional requirements enterally via NJ tube at 5 days;a further 2 patients had their nutritional requirements met with supplemental PN. In 8 of 22 referrals the indication for NJ tube insertion was because an NG tube could not be passed. The evaluation revealed discrepancies in adherence to protocols for high gastric residual volumes and prokinetic use. Documentation surrounding decision making, requesting and inserting an NJ tube was poor and probably reflects the complexity of the patients, involvement of multiple clinical teams, and various documentation modalities (i.e., verbal, written and different electronic systems). There was clinical dispute regarding the indication for NJ tube insertion in 23% of cases (documented in 3 of 13 referrals for NJ tube insertion). Where documentation was available 43% of patients (n=10) had an NJ tube placed on the day of request;the median time from request to insertion was 1 day (range 0-10). 5 patients had more than one NJ tube inserted (median 3;range 2–5). There was variation in experience and expertise of the endoscopists placing the NJ tubes. NJ tube feeding is considered to be less expensive and have less complications than PN2. However, our evaluation has revealed a range of issues relating to both the insertion and use of NJ tubes in an ICU setting. The true resource ‘cost’ of NJ tube insertion is probably underestimated in the literature and the complications of PN probably overestimated in the context of modern ICU and nutrition support team clinical practices. We suspect that our clinical experience is not unique and that more research is needed in this area. We are using this work to educate clinical teams, standardise documentation, provide better support and supervision for endoscopists, and raise awareness of the benefit and need for supplemental PN where nutritional requirements are not consistently reached enterally. 1 Schröder S, Hülst S V, Claussen M et al. Postpyloric feeding tubes for surgical intensive care patients. Anaesthetist 2011;60 (3): 214-20. 2 Lochs H, Dejong C, Hammarqvist F et al. ESPEN Guidelines on enteral nutrition: Gastroenterology. Clin Nutr 2006;25(20: 260-74.

Refeeding Syndrome in Emergency Department Boarders: How COVID-19 Can Reshape Patient Care in the Emergency Department.

Emergency departments (EDs) in the United States are the primary drivers of hospital admissions. As the nation continues to experience unrestrained spread of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), EDs, hospitals, and testing centers are overwhelmed with patients. The consequence of "boarding" admitted patients in EDs leads not only to longer ED wait times for all patients but also delays the medical practice of intensivists and internists while patients await an inpatient bed. Here, we describe the case of an ED boarder with severe COVID-19 who developed refeeding syndrome while boarding in the ED, ultimately requiring in-depth electrolyte and renal management by the ED team before intensive care unit admission.

[Place of biomarkers in the renutrition of patients with serious Covid-19 infection: discussion around a clinical case]. / Place des biomarqueurs dans la renutrition des patients ayant une infection grave à Covid-19 : discussion autour d'un cas clinique.

Covid-19 infection is a potentially serious disease. Overweight, obesity, and diabetes are comorbidities frequently found in the severe form of the disease. Appropriate nutritional management of the patient is an integral part of care. We will discuss the renutrition of a 76-year-old, obese (BMI = 35kg/m2), malnourished patient, according to the 2021 Haute Autorité de santé criteria, with Covid-19 infection, admitted to the intensive care unit at the Bordeaux University Hospital for an acute respiratory distress syndrome. Adaptation of nutritional intakes was achieved by clinical and biological monitoring. A refeeding syndrome was treated on the first day of hospitalization in the intensive care unit. After thiamine supplementation and when kalemia and phosphatemia have been normalized, renutrition was started. Parenteral nutrition as a complement to oral nutrition was used. Parenteral nutrition was well tolerated; recommended caloric and protein intakes were achieved by the fourth day of hospitalization. The clinical evolution was favorable. In conclusion, patients with Covid-19 infection should be considered malnourished when admitted to the intensive care unit. Macro and micronutrient intakes adapted to metabolically stressed patients are essential. Biological monitoring including monitoring of ionogram, phosphate, uremia, creatinine, liver function tests and blood glucose is essential in the nutritional management of patients with serious Covid-19 infection.

A guide to enteral nutrition in intensive care units: 10 expert tips for the daily practice.

The preferential use of the oral/enteral route in critically ill patients over gut rest is uniformly recommended and applied. This article provides practical guidance on enteral nutrition in compliance with recent American and European guidelines. Low-dose enteral nutrition can be safely started within 48 h after admission, even during treatment with small or moderate doses of vasopressor agents. A percutaneous access should be used when enteral nutrition is anticipated for ≥ 4 weeks. Energy delivery should not be calculated to match energy expenditure before day 4-7, and the use of energy-dense formulas can be restricted to cases of inability to tolerate full-volume isocaloric enteral nutrition or to patients who require fluid restriction. Low-dose protein (max 0.8 g/kg/day) can be provided during the early phase of critical illness, while a protein target of > 1.2 g/kg/day could be considered during the rehabilitation phase. The occurrence of refeeding syndrome should be assessed by daily measurement of plasma phosphate, and a phosphate drop of 30% should be managed by reduction of enteral feeding rate and high-dose thiamine. Vomiting and increased gastric residual volume may indicate gastric intolerance, while sudden abdominal pain, distension, gastrointestinal paralysis, or rising abdominal pressure may indicate lower gastrointestinal intolerance.

[Nutritional support for critically ill patients suffering from SARS-CoV-2 infection]. / Prise en charge nutritionnelle des patients de réanimation ayant une infection au SARS-CoV-2.

Patients with severe cases of COVID-19 are at high nutritional risk during their ICU stay. Prolonged immobilization associated with an exacerbated systemic inflammatory response is a major provider of ICU-acquired muscle weakness. Early enteral nutrition is recommended to gradually reach the energy target of 25 kcal/kg/day and protein target of 1.3 g/kg/day around D4. The occurrence of a Refeeding syndrome should be closely monitored. In case of feeding intolerance refractory to a prokinetic treatment, complementary or total parenteral nutrition is advised, favouring new generation mixed lipid emulsions (containing fish oil) and regular monitoring of triglyceridemia. Nutrition care of critically ill patients should be carried out with limited procedures that may pose a risk of contamination for the healthcare staff.