Changes in serum albumin concentrations over 7 days in medical inpatients with and without nutritional support. A secondary post-hoc analysis of a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Serum albumin concentrations are frequently used to monitor nutritional therapy in the hospital setting but supporting studies are largely lacking. Within this secondary analysis of a randomized nutritional trial (EFFORT), we assessed whether nutritional support affects short-term changes in serum albumin concentrations and whether an increase in albumin concentration has prognostic implications regarding clinical outcome and response to treatment. METHODS: We analyzed patients with available serum albumin concentrations at baseline and day 7 included in EFFORT, a Swiss-wide multicenter randomized clinical trial that compared individualized nutritional therapy with usual hospital food (control group). RESULTS: Albumin concentrations increased in 320 of 763 (41.9%) included patients (mean age 73.3 years (SD ± 12.9), 53.6% males) with no difference between patients receiving nutritional support and controls. Compared with patients that showed a decrease in albumin concentrations over 7 days, those with an increase had a lower 180-day mortality [74/320 (23.1%) vs. 158/443 (35.7%); adjusted odds ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.90; p = 0.012] and a shorter length of hospital stay [11.2 ± 7.3 vs. 8.8 ± 5.6 days, adjusted difference -2.2 days (95%CI -3.1 to -1.2)]. Patients with and without a decrease over 7 days had a similar response to nutritional support. CONCLUSION: Results from this secondary analysis indicate that nutritional support did not increase short-term concentrations of albumin over 7 days, and changes in albumin did not correlate with response to nutritional interventions. However, an increase in albumin concentrations possibly mirroring resolution of inflammation was associated with better clinical outcomes. Repeated in-hospital albumin measurements in the short-term is, thus, not indicated for monitoring of patients receiving nutritional support but provides prognostic information. TRAIL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02517476.

Association between prealbumin, all-cause mortality, and response to nutrition treatment in patients at nutrition risk: Secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Because of the shorter half-life as compared with albumin, serum prealbumin concentrations have been proposed to be useful nutrition biomarkers for the assessment of patients at nutrition risk. In a post hoc analysis of patients at nutrition risk from a randomized controlled nutrition trial, we tested the hypothesis that (1) prealbumin is associated with higher all-cause 180-day mortality rates and that (2) individualized nutrition support compared with usual-care nutrition more effectively improves survival at 30 days in patients with low prealbumin levels compared with patients with normal prealbumin levels. METHODS: We performed a prespecified cohort study in patients included in the pragmatic, Swiss, multicenter randomized controlled EFFORT trial comparing the effects of individualized nutrition support with usual care. We studied low prealbumin concentrations (<0.17 g/L) in a subgroup of 517 patients from one participating center. RESULTS: A total of 306 (59.2%) patients (mean age 71.9 years, 53.6% men) had low admission prealbumin levels (<0.17 g/L). There was a significant association between low prealbumin levels and mortality at 180 days (115/306 [37.6%] vs 47/211 [22.3%], fully adjusted hazard ratio [HR]=1.59, 95% CI 1.11-2.28; P = 0.011). Prealbumin levels significantly improved the prognostic value of the Nutritional Risk Screening total score regarding mortality prediction at short- and long-term. The difference in mortality between patients receiving individualized nutrition support and usual-care nutrition was similar for patients with low prealbumin levels compared with patients with normal prealbumin levels (HR=0.90 [95% CI=0.51-1.59] vs HR=0.88 [95% CI=0.35-2.23]) with no evidence for interaction (P = 0.823). CONCLUSION: Among medical inpatients at nutrition risk, low admission prealbumin levels correlated with different nutrition markers and higher mortality risk, but patients with low or high prealbumin levels had a similar benefit from nutrition support. Further studies should identify nutrition markers that help further personalize nutrition interventions.

Effect of micronutrient supplementation in addition to nutritional therapy on clinical outcomes of medical inpatients: results of an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing evidence from randomized controlled trials showing that different types of nutritional support interventions improve clinical outcomes in malnourished medical inpatients. Whether trials using micronutrient supplementation in addition to nutritional therapy are superior to trials without micronutrient supplementation remains unclear. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of a systematic search and meta-analysis. We searched Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and EMBASE electronic database from inception to December 15, 2020, for randomized controlled trials comparing the nutritional support interventions vs. usual care on all-cause mortality (primary endpoint) of medical inpatients with nutritional risk. We stratified trials based on whether or not micronutrient supplementation was used as part of the nutritional strategy. RESULTS: We included 23 randomized controlled trials (5 trials with and 18 trials without micronutrient supplementation) with a total of 6745 patients. Overall, mortality was significantly lower in patients receiving nutritional support compared to control group patients with an odds ratio of 0.74 (95% CI 0.59-0.94, p = 0.01). There was no difference between trials with and without micronutrient supplementation on mortality (odds ratio 0.70 (95% CI 0.46-1.08) vs. 0.77 (95% CI 0.57-1.04), I2 = 0%, p for subgroup difference = 0.73). Similarly, no differences in effect were found regarding non-elective readmissions and length of hospital stay. CONCLUSIONS: While nutritional support reduces mortality and improves other clinical outcomes, we did not find evidence that trials using micronutrient supplementation in addition to nutritional therapy were superior to trials with no supplementation. The role of micronutrient supplementation in addition to nutritional support needs further research.

Nutritional trials using high protein strategies and long duration of support show strongest clinical effects on mortality.: Results of an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing evidence from randomized-controlled trials demonstrating that nutritional support improves clinical outcomes in the population of malnourished medical inpatients. We investigated associations of trial characteristics including clinical setting, duration of intervention, individualization of nutritional support and amount of energy and protein, and effects on clinical outcomes in an updated meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched Cochrane Library, MEDLINE and EMBASE, from inception to December 15, 2020. Randomized-controlled trials investigating the effect of oral and enteral nutritional support interventions, when compared to usual care, on clinical outcomes of malnourished non-critically ill medical inpatients were included. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. The primary endpoint was all cause-mortality within 12-months. RESULTS: We included 29 randomized-controlled trials with a total of 7,166 patients. Heterogeneity across RCTs was high, with overall moderate study quality and mostly moderate or unclear risk of bias. Overall, there was an almost 30%-reduction in mortality in patients receiving nutritional support compared to patients not receiving nutritional support (253/2960 [8.5%] vs. 336/2976 [11.3%]) with an odds ratio of 0.72 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.91, p = 0.006). The most important predictors for the effect of nutritional trials on mortality were high protein strategies (odds ratio 0.57 vs. 0.93, I2 = 86.3%, p for heterogenity = 0.007) and long-term nutritional interventions (odds ratio 0.53 vs. 0.85, I2 = 76.2%, p for heterogenity = 0.040). Nutritional support also reduced unplanned hospital readmissions and length of hospital stay. CONCLUSIONS: There is increasing evidence from randomized trials showing that nutritional support significantly reduces mortality, unplanned hospital readmissions and length of stay in medical inpatients at nutritional risk, despite heterogeneity and varying methodological quality among trials. Trials with high-protein strategies and long-lasting nutritional support interventions were most effective.

Overview of procalcitonin assays and procalcitonin-guided protocols for the management of patients with infections and sepsis.

INTRODUCTION: Procalcitonin is a surrogate infection blood marker whose levels help estimate the likelihood of bacterial infections and correlate with their resolution. Recent trials have revealed the benefits of inclusion of procalcitonin in antibiotic stewardship protocols for initiation and discontinuation of antimicrobial therapy. Areas covered: Procalcitonin-guided antibiotic stewardship protocols have shown appreciable reductions in antibiotic use and duration of therapy in respiratory infections, sepsis, and other infections, with positive effects on clinical outcomes. Multiple fully automated and sensitive procalcitonin assays are routinely used in clinical practice. Utilization of these assays requires consideration of the clinical setting and knowledge of assay characteristics, particularly assay sensitivities, reproducibility, and performance across routinely used cut-off ranges. The authors provide an overview of the strengths and limitations of currently available procalcitonin assays and antibiotic therapy algorithms incorporating procalcitonin currently used in different clinical settings and in patients with different underlying infections. Expert commentary: Use of sensitive procalcitonin measurements in clinical algorithms can reduce antimicrobial overuse, decreasing the risk of side effects and controlling emerging bacterial multi-resistance. Before use in clinical practice, it is important to carefully assess the quality of novel PCT assays and rigorously evaluate them in target patient populations across clinically relevant cut-off ranges.