Nutrition in Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis: A Multicenter Review.

BACKGROUND: Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) are severe exfoliative diseases treated in burn centers due to large skin losses. Literature on SJS/TEN refers to parenteral nutrition (PN) as the preferred route of nutrition support. This study describes nutrition support interventions in SJS/TEN patients admitted to burn centers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seven burn centers participated in this Institutional Review Board-exempted retrospective chart review of adults with SJS/TEN admitted from 2000-2012. RESULTS: This analysis included 171 patients with SJS/TEN. Median total body surface area involvement was 35% (n = 145; interquartile range [IQR], 16%-62%). The majority required mechanical ventilation (n = 105). Based on indirect calorimetry, measured energy needs were 24.2 kcal/kg of admit weight (n = 58; IQR, 19.4-29.9). Thirty-one patients did not require enteral nutrition (EN) and started oral intake on hospital day 1 (IQR, 1-2), and 81% required EN support due to inadequate oral intake and remained on EN until day 16 (median hospital day, 16; IQR, 9-25). High-protein enteral formulas predominated. PN was rarely used (n = 12, 7%). Most patients were discharged home (57%), with 14% still requiring EN. CONCLUSIONS: Nutrition support should be considered in patients with SJS/TEN due to increased metabolic needs and an inability to meet these needs orally. Most SJS/TEN patients continued on EN and did not require escalation to PN.

Utility of screening for diabetes in a burn center: hemoglobin A1c, Diabetes Risk Test, or simple history?

OBJECTIVE: Rates of diabetes mellitus (DM) are increasing. Early identification and treatment of hyperglycemia in the critical care setting can decrease morbidity and mortality. Many burn centers measure hemoglobin A1c (A1c). This study evaluates the prevalence of pre-existing DM and the utility of using A1c for identifying DM compared with a non-invasive risk assessment. METHODS: Adult patients admitted to our regional ABA-verified burn center from July 2008 to July 2009 had A1c levels evaluated and were asked to complete the American Diabetes Association Diabetes Risk Test (DRT). RESULTS: Forty-one patients consented to participate: 24 patients with burn (19 male) and 17 patients with non-burns (10 male). Non-burn patients had greater BMIs (BMI 32 vs. 28, p=0.093) and had a higher rate of DM prior to admission (35% vs. 17%, p=0.159) than the burn patients. These differences were not statistically significant. Most patients (23/41) were at high risk for developing DM based on the DRT. Patients with pre-existing DM were significantly more likely to have elevated A1c levels (>6.5%) compared with those without pre-existing DM (60% vs. 0%, p<0.001). Compared with history of DM, DRT had a poor positive predictive value of 36% and 50% (burn and non-burn respectively) but a 100% negative predictive value for DM for both groups. CONCLUSION: DM and obesity were more common in non-burn patients than in burn patients. A history of DM provides a simple, accurate method for identifying patients with DM. Use of A1c in the ICU provides little additional data for diagnosis of DM and does not impact patient management.

Compliance with nutrition support guidelines in acutely burned patients.

BACKGROUND: Adequate and timely provision of nutritional support is a crucial component of care of the critically ill burn patient. The goal of this study was to assess a single center's consistency with Society of Critical Care Medicine/American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (SCCM/ASPEN) guidelines for nutritional support in critically ill patients. METHODS: Acutely burned patients >45kg in weight admitted to a regional burn center during a two-year period and who required 5 or more days of full enteral nutritional support were eligible for inclusion in this retrospective review. Specific outcomes evaluated include time from admission to feeding tube placement and enteral feeding initiation and percent of nutritional goal received within the first week of hospital stay. Descriptive statistics were used for all analyses. IRB approval was obtained. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients were included in this retrospective review. Median age of patients was 44.9 years (IQR: 24.2-55.1), and median burn injury size was 30% (IQR: 19-47). Median time to feeding tube placement was 31.1h post admission (IQR: 23.6-50.2h), while median time to initiation of EN was 47.9h post admission (IQR: 32.4-59.9h). The median time required for patients to reach 60% of caloric goal was 3 days post-admission (IQR: 3-4.5). CONCLUSION: The median time for initiation of enteral nutrition was within the SCCM/ASPEN guidelines for initial nutrition in the critically ill patient. This project identified a 16h time lag between placement of enteral access and initiation of enteral nutrition. Development of a protocol for feeding tube placement and enteral nutrition management may optimize early nutritional support in the acutely injured burn patient.

Actual burn nutrition care practices: an update.

In 1989, Williamson published a survey of nutrition care practices in burn centers. Nutrition practices have evolved since then; we conducted a study to determine the current scope of nutrition care in burn centers. With IRB approval, a 64 question survey was emailed to 103 burn centers listed in the Burn Care Resources in North America. Follow-up emails were sent to those who did not respond within 2 weeks. Sixty-five centers (63%) responded and included 66% of currently verified burn centers. Due to incomplete surveys, most questions had 45 to 50 responses. The centers averaged 246 annual admissions and all admitted non-burn patients. Eighty percent of dietitians had >5 years burn experience (vs 17% in 1989) and 90% also worked in other intensive care settings. Most dietitians reported advanced training or education (83%). Nutrition assessment, support and monitoring methods have changed though most centers continue to use serum proteins for assessment. Indirect calorimetry use has increased with most centers (78%) adding a 'stress factor' of 10 to 30% above measured energy needs. More centers provided specialized formulas including high-protein (82 vs 8.8%) and immune-enhancing (53 vs 12.3%) than in 1989. All gave a variety of vitamin and mineral supplements. Anabolic steroid and glutamine use was common (92 and 69%). Eighty percent of centers used glucose protocols with 54% having a goal of

Comparison of urine urea nitrogen collection times in critically ill patients.

Twenty-four-hour urine urea nitrogen (UUN) collections are used to assess nitrogen loss in critically ill patients but are often difficult to obtain accurately. This prospective study compared 6- and 12-hour UUN collections with 24-hour UUN collections in critically ill patients receiving continuous nutrition support. ICU patients admitted from September 1999 through January 2003 who had UUN collections as part of routine care were recruited into the study. Patients were not receiving oral diets, were receiving continuous parenteral or enteral nutrition, and had indwelling urinary catheters. We excluded patients with hepatic or renal failure. Urine samples were collected every 6 hours starting at 6:00 am and kept refrigerated until the 24-hour collection was complete. Samples were analyzed using an automated urease enzymatic reaction. Samples were multiplied by a factor of 4 (6-hour samples) or 2 (12-hour samples) to estimate 24-hour totals and then compared with actual 24-hour totals. Twenty-four patients (18 men) completed the study; 21 patients had 6-hour samples (84 samples), and 24 patients had 12-hour samples (24 samples). Estimated 24-hour UUN from 6-hour (14.7-15.7 g/d) and 12-hour (15.2 g/d) samples did not differ significantly (p > .5) from actual 24-hour totals (15.1 g/d). Shortened UUN collection times may be used to estimate 24-hour nitrogen losses in critically ill patients receiving continuous nutrition support.

Caloric requirements in patients with necrotizing fasciitis.

Patients with necrotizing fasciitis (NF) and other soft tissue infections are often treated in burn centers due to the extent of wound care and surgical intervention needed. Sepsis and surgery increase metabolic needs and may limit oral intake and necessitate enteral (TEN) or parenteral (TPN) nutrition. We reviewed the records of patients admitted with necrotizing fasciitis or surgical soft tissue infections from January 1993 to June 1998 who had indirect calorimetry (IC) measurements performed. Records were also reviewed for surgical/medical management and nutritional intervention. Twenty-six patients were admitted with 17 of these having IC measurements (133 total IC measurements). The IC group had more surgeries (mean 4.9 versus 2.7) and 82% required mechanical ventilation (mean 17.9 days). Energy expenditure showed a moderate but significant increase in energy needs (mean 23.8 kcal/kg/day, 124% BEE) with large variations (10.7-42.4 kcal/kg/day, 60%-199% BEE) in individual energy requirements. Caloric intake averaged 73% of needs based on IC (range 53%-104%). Nearly all patients (94%) required TEN (82%) and/or TPN (41%) nutrition for a mean of 24 days (range 1-68 days). NF presents a broad range of metabolic and surgical needs. Our data indicates patients with NF have increased energy requirements and suggests provision of calories at 124% basal or 25 kcal/kg actual wt/d; but due to the large individual variation, routine assessment using IC is recommended. Clinicians need to recognize the likely need for nutritional support and possibly lengthy clinical course for these patients.