[Malnutrition in internal medicine : Screening, assessment and importance]. / Mangelernährung in der Inneren Medizin : Screening, Assessment und Bedeutung.

Disease-related malnutrition has a strong influence on the further course of the disease and mortality, especially in chronically ill patients. In recent years it could be shown in large randomized studies that an individual nutrition therapy could significantly and relevantly improve the clinical outcome of patients in internal medicine with a risk of malnutrition, both in hospital and in aftercare. Therefore, due to the increasing proportion of multimorbid patients the significance of malnutrition and its treatment is becoming increasingly more important in the practice and in research. Nutritional medicine should nowadays be considered as an effective and integral component of a holistic treatment in internal medicine; however, further research is necessary in order to investigate new nutritional biomarkers and for a better integration of an evidence-based personalized nutritional medicine into routine clinical practice.

Inflammation and Nutrition: Friend or Foe?

The importance of the interplay between inflammation and nutrition has generated much interest in recent times. Inflammation has been identified as a key driver for disease-related malnutrition, leading to anorexia, reduced food intake, muscle catabolism, and insulin resistance, which are stimulating a catabolic state. Interesting recent data suggest that inflammation also modulates the response to nutritional treatment. Studies have demonstrated that patients with high inflammation show no response to nutritional interventions, while patients with lower levels of inflammation do. This may explain the contradictory results of nutritional trials to date. Several studies of heterogeneous patient populations, or in the critically ill or advanced cancer patients, have not found significant benefits on clinical outcome. Vice versa, several dietary patterns and nutrients with pro- or anti-inflammatory properties have been identified, demonstrating that nutrition influences inflammation. Within this review, we summarize and discuss recent advances in both the role of inflammation in malnutrition and the effect of nutrition on inflammation.

Nutritional issues concerning general medical ward patients: feeding patients recovering from critical illness.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: ICU survivors often spend long periods of time in general wards following transfer from ICU in which they are still nutritionally compromised. This brief review will focus on the feeding of patients recovering from critical illness, as no formal recommendations or guidelines on nutrition management are available for this specific situation. RECENT FINDINGS: While feeding should start in the ICU, it is important to continue and adapt nutritional plans on the ward to support individuals recovering from critical illness. This process is highly complex - suboptimal feeding may contribute significantly to higher morbidity and mortality, and seriously hinder recovery from illness. Recently, consensus diagnostic criteria for malnutrition have been defined and large-scale trials have advanced our understanding of the pathophysiological pathways underlying malnutrition. They have also helped further develop treatment algorithms. However, we must continue to identify specific clinical parameters and blood biomarkers to further personalize therapy for malnourished patients. Better understanding of such factors may help us adapt nutritional plans more efficiently. SUMMARY: Adequate nutrition is a vigorous component of treatment in the post-ICU period and can enhance recovery and improve clinical outcome. To better personalize nutritional treatment because not every patient benefits from support in the same manner, it is important to further investigate biomarkers with a possible prognostic value.

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.

Low T3 Syndrome on Admission and Response to Nutritional Support in Malnourished Medical Inpatients.

CONTEXT: During illness, deiodination of thyroxine (T4) to triiodothyronine (T3) is downregulated. This is called "low T3 syndrome", an adaptive metabolic mechanism to reduce energy expenditure and prevent catabolism. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate the prognostic role of low T3 syndrome in patients at nutritional risk regarding mortality, clinical outcomes, and response to nutritional support. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of the Effect of Early Nutritional Support on Frailty, Functional Outcomes, and Recovery of Malnourished Medical Inpatients Trial (EFFORT), a randomized controlled, Swiss, multicenter trial comparing effects of individualized nutritional support with usual care in adult medical inpatients at nutritional risk. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality over 30, 180 days, and 5 years. RESULTS: We had complete data including fT3 concentration of 801/2028 (39.5%) patients from the initial trial. Of these 492 (61.4%) had low T3 syndrome (fT3 < 3.2 pmol/L). Low T3 syndrome was associated with higher mortality over 30 days (adjusted hazard ratio 1.97, 95% CI 1.17-3.31, P = .011) and other adverse clinical outcomes. Nutritional support only lowered mortality in the group of patients with low T3 syndrome but not in those without low T3 syndrome (adjusted odds ratio of nutritional support of 0.82 [95% CI 0.47-1.41] vs 1.47 [95% CI 0.55-3.94]). This finding, however, was not significant in interaction analysis (P for interaction = .401). CONCLUSION: Our secondary analysis of a randomized trial suggests that medical inpatients at nutritional risk with low T3 syndrome have a substantial increase in mortality and may show a more pronounced beneficial response to nutritional support interventions.

Nutrition issues in the general medical ward patient: From general screening to specific diagnosis and individualized treatment.

Disease-related malnutrition in patients in the general medical ward remains a complex syndrome, which contributes to high morbidity and mortality, and seriously interferes with recovery from acute illness. Recently, there have been important advances in the development of consensus diagnostic criteria for malnutrition, and through the recent completion of large-scale trials, the understanding of pathophysiological pathways and evidence-based treatment algorithms to provide nutrition care to patients at risk for malnutrition in the hospital setting has advanced. There is need to identify more specific clinical parameters and blood biomarkers, which allow a more personalized approach to the malnourished patients, because not all patients show the same response to nutrition interventions. Recent studies have suggested that some nutrition biomarkers of inflammation, kidney function and muscle health, among others, predict treatment response to nutrition interventions and may help to personalize treatments. In addition to advancing the science, there is need for more education of students and treating teams in the hospital to improve the screening of patients at hospital admission regarding nutrition risk with the start of individualized nutrition support interventions, thereby bringing optimal nutrition care to the bedside.

Nutritional support after hospital discharge improves long-term mortality in malnourished adult medical patients: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: In patients with malnutrition there is an increased long-term risk for mortality beyond the preciding hospital stay. We investigated the effects of postdischarge nutritional support in the outpatient setting on all-cause mortality in the populaton of malnourished medical patients in a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE, from inception to December 21, 2022. Randomized-controlled trials investigating nutritional support in medical patients following hospital discharge vs. control group (usual care, placebo and no nutritional support) were included. Data were independently extracted by two authors and were pooled using random effects model. Our primary outcome was all cause-mortality up to 12-months (end of intervention) of hospital discharge. RESULTS: We included 14 randomized-controlled trials with a total of 2438 participants and mostly moderate trial quality. Compared to the control group, patients receiving outpatient nutritional support had lower mortality (13 trials, odds ratio [OR] 0.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.48 to 0.84, p = 0.001, I2 = 1%). Nutritional support was also associated with a significant increase in the mean daily intake of energy (568 kcal, 95% CI 24 to 1,113, p = 0.04), proteins (24 g, 95% CI 7 to 41), p = 0.005) and body weight (1.1 kg, 95% CI 0.6 to 1.7), p < 0.001). No differences were found on hospital readmissions and handgrip strength. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials with mostly moderate trial quality suggests that nutritional support in the outpatient setting significantly increases nutritional intake as well as body weight, and importantly improves survival. Further large-scale and high-quality intervention trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Handgrip Strength Values Depend on Tumor Entity and Predict 180-Day Mortality in Malnourished Cancer Patients.

BACKGROUND: Cancer-related malnutrition is a prevalent condition associated with a loss of muscle mass and impaired functional status, leading to immunodeficiency, impaired quality of life and adverse clinical outcomes. Handgrip strength (HGS) is a practical measure to assess muscle strength in individual patients during clinical practice. However, HGS reference values refer to populations of healthy people, and population-specific values, such as those in the population of cancer patients, still need to be defined. METHODS: Within a secondary analysis of a previous randomized controlled nutritional trial focusing on hospitalized cancer patients at risk for malnutrition, we investigated sex-specific HGS values stratified by age and tumor entity. Additionally, we examined the association between HGS and 180-day all-cause mortality. RESULTS: We included data from 628 cancer patients, which were collected from eight hospitals in Switzerland. Depending on the age of patients, HGS varied among female patients from 7 kg to 26 kg and among male patients from 20.5 kg to 44 kg. An incremental decrease in handgrip strength by 10 kg resulted in a 50% increase in 180-day all-cause mortality (odds ratio 1.52 (95%CI 1.19 to 1.94), p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our data provide evidence of the prognostic implications of HGS measurement in cancer patients and validate the prognostic value of handgrip strength in regard to long-term mortality. In addition, our results provide expected HGS values in the population of hospitalized malnourished cancer patients, which may allow better interpretation of values in individual patients.

Prospective validation of five malnutrition screening and assessment instruments among medical inpatients: Secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Screening for malnutrition upon hospital admission is the first crucial step for proper nutritional assessment and treatment. While several nutritional screening and assessment instruments exist, there is a lack of head-to-head validation of these instruments. We studied the ability of five different nutrition screening and assessment instruments to predict 1-year mortality and response to nutritional treatment in participants of the EFFORT randomized trial. METHODS: In this secondary analysis of a Swiss-wide multicenter, randomized clinical trial comparing individualized nutritional support with usual care nutrition in medical inpatients, we prospectively classified patients as low, intermediate, and high nutritional risk based on five nutritional screening and assessment instruments (NRS 2002, SGA, SNAQ, MNA and MUST). RESULTS: Overall mortality at 1-year in the 1866 included patients was 30.4%. There were significant correlations and a significant concordance between all instruments with r-values ranging from 0.23 to 0.55 and kappa values ranging from 0.10 to 0.36. While high nutritional risk was associated with higher mortality in all instruments, SGA and MNA showed the strongest association with adjusted odds ratios of 3.17 (95%CI, 2.18 to 4.61, p < 0.001) and 3.45 (95%CI, 2.28 to 5.22, p < 0.001). When comparing mortality in intervention group patients to control group patients stratified by severity of malnutrition, there was overall no clear trend towards more benefit in patients with more severe malnutrition, with NRS 2002 and SGA showing the most pronounced relationship between the severity of malnutrition and reduction in mortality as a response to nutritional support. CONCLUSION: Among all five screening and assessment instruments, higher nutritional risk was associated with higher risk for mortality and adverse clinical outcome, but not with more or less treatment response from nutritional support with differences among scores. Adding more specific parameters to these instruments is important when using them to decide for or against nutritional support interventions in an individual patient. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02517476.