A Randomized Trial of Enteral Glutamine for Treatment of Burn Injuries.

BACKGROUND: Glutamine is thought to have beneficial effects on the metabolic and stress response to severe injury. Clinical trials involving patients with burns and other critically ill patients have shown conflicting results regarding the benefits and risks of glutamine supplementation. METHODS: In a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, we assigned patients with deep second- or third-degree burns (affecting ≥10% to ≥20% of total body-surface area, depending on age) within 72 hours after hospital admission to receive 0.5 g per kilogram of body weight per day of enterally delivered glutamine or placebo. Trial agents were given every 4 hours through a feeding tube or three or four times a day by mouth until 7 days after the last skin grafting procedure, discharge from the acute care unit, or 3 months after admission, whichever came first. The primary outcome was the time to discharge alive from the hospital, with data censored at 90 days. We calculated subdistribution hazard ratios for discharge alive, which took into account death as a competing risk. RESULTS: A total of 1209 patients with severe burns (mean burn size, 33% of total body-surface area) underwent randomization, and 1200 were included in the analysis (596 patients in the glutamine group and 604 in the placebo group). The median time to discharge alive from the hospital was 40 days (interquartile range, 24 to 87) in the glutamine group and 38 days (interquartile range, 22 to 75) in the placebo group (subdistribution hazard ratio for discharge alive, 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 1.04; P = 0.17). Mortality at 6 months was 17.2% in the glutamine group and 16.2% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for death, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.80 to 1.41). No substantial between-group differences in serious adverse events were observed. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe burns, supplemental glutamine did not reduce the time to discharge alive from the hospital. (Funded by the U.S. Department of Defense and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research; RE-ENERGIZE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00985205.).

Expert consensus report on lipid mediators: Role in resolution of inflammation and muscle preservation.

This meeting report presents a consensus on the biological aspects of lipid emulsions in parenteral nutrition, emphasizing the unanimous support for the integration of lipid emulsions, particularly those containing fish oil, owing to their many potential benefits beyond caloric provision. Lipid emulsions have evolved from simple energy sources to complex formulations designed to improve safety profiles and offer therapeutic benefits. The consensus highlights the critical role of omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs), notably eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), found in fish oil and other marine oils, for their anti-inflammatory properties, muscle mass preservation, and as precursors to the specialized pro-resolving mediators (SPMs). SPMs play a significant role in immune modulation, tissue repair, and the active resolution of inflammation without impairing host defense mechanisms. The panel's agreement underscores the importance of incorporating fish oil within clinical practices to facilitate recovery in conditions like surgery, critical illness, or immobility, while cautioning against therapies that might disrupt natural inflammation resolution processes. This consensus not only reaffirms the role of specific lipid components in enhancing patient outcomes, but also suggests a shift towards nutrition-based therapeutic strategies in clinical settings, advocating for the proactive evidence-based use of lipid emulsions enriched with omega-3 PUFAs. Furthermore, we should seek to apply our knowledge concerning DHA, EPA, and their SPM derivatives, to produce more informative randomized controlled trial protocols, thus allowing more authoritative clinical recommendations.

The effect of higher protein dosing in critically ill patients with high nutritional risk (EFFORT Protein): an international, multicentre, pragmatic, registry-based randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: On the basis of low-quality evidence, international critical care nutrition guidelines recommend a wide range of protein doses. The effect of delivering high-dose protein during critical illness is unknown. We aimed to test the hypothesis that a higher dose of protein provided to critically ill patients would improve their clinical outcomes. METHODS: This international, investigator-initiated, pragmatic, registry-based, single-blinded, randomised trial was undertaken in 85 intensive care units (ICUs) across 16 countries. We enrolled nutritionally high-risk adults (≥18 years) undergoing mechanical ventilation to compare prescribing high-dose protein (≥2·2 g/kg per day) with usual dose protein (≤1·2 g/kg per day) started within 96 h of ICU admission and continued for up to 28 days or death or transition to oral feeding. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1) to high-dose protein or usual dose protein, stratified by site. As site personnel were involved in both prescribing and delivering protein dose, it was not possible to blind clinicians, but patients were not made aware of the treatment assignment. The primary efficacy outcome was time-to-discharge-alive from hospital up to 60 days after ICU admission and the secondary outcome was 60-day morality. Patients were analysed in the group to which they were randomly assigned regardless of study compliance, although patients who dropped out of the study before receiving the study intervention were excluded. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03160547. FINDINGS: Between Jan 17, 2018, and Dec 3, 2021, 1329 patients were randomised and 1301 (97·9%) were included in the analysis (645 in the high-dose protein group and 656 in usual dose group). By 60 days after randomisation, the cumulative incidence of alive hospital discharge was 46·1% (95 CI 42·0%-50·1%) in the high-dose compared with 50·2% (46·0%-54·3%) in the usual dose protein group (hazard ratio 0·91, 95% CI 0·77-1·07; p=0·27). The 60-day mortality rate was 34·6% (222 of 642) in the high dose protein group compared with 32·1% (208 of 648) in the usual dose protein group (relative risk 1·08, 95% CI 0·92-1·26). There appeared to be a subgroup effect with higher protein provision being particularly harmful in patients with acute kidney injury and higher organ failure scores at baseline. INTERPRETATION: Delivery of higher doses of protein to mechanically ventilated critically ill patients did not improve the time-to-discharge-alive from hospital and might have worsened outcomes for patients with acute kidney injury and high organ failure scores. FUNDING: None.

Vitamin C for all?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Vitamin C can be a potential adjunctive treatment option for critically ill individuals due to its pleiotropic effects as electron donor in many enzymatic reactions throughout the body. Recently, several important randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating vitamin C in critically ill patients have been published. RECENT FINDINGS: Two recent large RCTs administering high-dose vitamin C to patients with sepsis and COVID-19 showed signs of harm. Though performed at high standard, these trials had several limitations. Recent studies in cardiac surgery and burns showed decreased cardiac enzymes and improved clinical outcomes after cardiac surgery, and decreased fluid requirements, reduced wound healing time and in-hospital mortality after burns. Vitamin C may hold benefit in the management of other ischemia/reperfusion injury populations, including postcardiac arrest patients and after solid organ transplantation. Currently, covering basal vitamin C requirements during critical illness is recommended, though the exact dose remains to be determined. SUMMARY: Future work should address optimal vitamin C timing, since early versus late drug administration are likely distinct, and duration of therapy, where withdrawal-induced injury is possible. Additionally accurate assessment of body stores with determination of individual vitamin requirements is crucial to ascertain patient and subgroups most likely to benefit from vitamin C.

Micronutrients as therapy in critical illness.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Recent large-scale randomized controlled trials (RCTs) challenged current beliefs about the potential role of micronutrients to attenuate the inflammatory response and improve clinical outcomes of critically ill patients. The purpose of this narrative review is to provide an overview and critical discussion about most recent clinical trials, which evaluated the clinical significance of a vitamin C, vitamin D, or selenium administration in critically ill patients. RECENT FINDINGS: None of the most recent large-scale RCTs could demonstrate any clinical benefits for a micronutrient administration in ICU patients, whereas a recent RCT indicated harmful effects, if high dose vitamin C was administered in septic patients. Following meta-analyses could not confirm harmful effects for high dose vitamin C in general critically ill patients and indicated benefits in the subgroup of general ICU patients with higher mortality risk. For vitamin D, the most recent large-scale RCT could not demonstrate clinical benefits for critically ill patients, whereas another large-scale RCT is still ongoing. The aggregated and meta-analyzed evidence highlighted a potential role for intravenous vitamin D administration, which encourages further research. In high-risk cardiac surgery patients, a perioperative application of high-dose selenium was unable to improve patients' outcome. The observed increase of selenium levels in the patients' blood did not translate into an increase of antioxidative or anti-inflammatory enzymes, which illuminates the urgent need for more research to identify potential confounding factors. SUMMARY: Current data received from most recent large-scale RCTs could not demonstrate clinically meaningful effects of an intervention with either vitamin C, vitamin D, or selenium in critically ill patients. More attention is needed to carefully identify potential confounding factors and to better evaluate the role of timing, duration, and combined strategies.

Enteral nutrition in septic shock: a call for a paradigm shift.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to identify contemporary evidence evaluating enteral nutrition in patients with septic shock, outline risk factors for enteral feeding intolerance (EFI), describe the conundrum of initiating enteral nutrition in patients with septic shock, appraise current EFI definitions, and identify bedside monitors for guiding enteral nutrition therapy. RECENT FINDINGS: The NUTRIREA-2 and NUTRIREA-3 trial results have better informed the dose of enteral nutrition in critically ill patients with circulatory shock. In both trials, patients with predominant septic shock randomized to receive early standard-dose nutrition had more gastrointestinal complications. Compared to other contemporary RCTs that included patients with circulatory shock, patients in the NUTRIREA-2 and NUTRIREA-3 trials had higher bowel ischemia rates, were sicker, and received full-dose enteral nutrition while receiving high baseline dose of vasopressor. These findings suggest severity of illness, vasopressor dose, and enteral nutrition dose impact outcomes. SUMMARY: The provision of early enteral nutrition preserves gut barrier functions; however, these benefits are counterbalanced by potential complications of introducing luminal nutrients into a hypo-perfused gut, including bowel ischemia. Findings from the NUTRIREA2 and NUTRIREA-3 trials substantiate a 'less is more' enteral nutrition dose strategy during the early acute phase of critical illness. In the absence of bedside tools to guide the initiation and advancement of enteral nutrition in patients with septic shock, the benefit of introducing enteral nutrition on preserving gut barrier function must be weighed against the risk of harm by considering dose of vasopressor, dose of enteral nutrition, and severity of illness.

The role of lipid emulsions containing omega-3 fatty acids for medical and surgical critical care patients.

In critical illness the regulation of inflammation and oxidative stress can improve patient outcomes, and thus omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) have been used as part of parenteral nutrition (PN) owing to their potential anti-inflammatory effects. The international lipids in PN Summit, encompassed discussions and the production of consensus guidelines concerning PN intravenous lipid emulsion (ILE) use in critical care. The Lipid Summit participants agreed that the inclusion of fish oil in ILEs is associated with meaningful clinical benefits without signals of harm, based on a strong biological rationale and current clinical evidence. Decisions concerning ILE choice should be made based on current evidence, thus addressing clinical requirements for guidance, particularly as further definitive evidence seems unlikely to occur. In addition, a future of individualized ICU care is envisioned, yielding better clinical outcomes. This approach will require the greater use of intelligent study designs incorporating the use of biomarkers of omega-3 derivatives, inflammatory-resolving processes, and/or muscle protein breakdown.

Enhanced exclusive enteral nutrition delivery during the first 7 days is associated with decreased 28-day mortality in critically ill patients with normal lactate level: a post hoc analysis of a multicenter randomized trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Exclusive enteral nutrition (EN) is often observed during the first week of ICU admission because of the extra costs and safety considerations for early parenteral nutrition. This study aimed to assess the association between nutrition intake and 28-day mortality in critically ill patients receiving exclusive EN. METHODS: This is a post hoc analysis of a cluster-randomized clinical trial that assesses the effect of implementing a feeding protocol on mortality in critically ill patients. Patients who stayed in the ICUs for at least 7 days and received exclusive EN were included in this analysis. Multivariable Cox hazard regression models and restricted cubic spline models were used to assess the relationship between the different doses of EN delivery and 28-day mortality. Subgroups with varying lactate levels at enrollment were additionally analyzed to address the potential confounding effect brought in by the presence of shock-related hypoperfusion. RESULTS: Overall, 1322 patients were included in the analysis. The median (interquartile range) daily energy and protein delivery during the first week of enrollment were 14.6 (10.3-19.6) kcal/kg and 0.6 (0.4-0.8) g/kg, respectively. An increase of 5 kcal/kg energy delivery was associated with a significant reduction (approximately 14%) in 28-day mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 0.865, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.768-0.974, P = 0.016). For protein intake, a 0.2 g/kg increase was associated with a similar mortality reduction with an adjusted HR of 0.868 (95% CI 0.770-0.979). However, the benefits associated with enhanced nutrition delivery could be observed in patients with lactate concentration ≤ 2 mmol/L (adjusted HR = 0.804 (95% CI 0.674-0.960) for energy delivery and adjusted HR = 0.804 (95% CI 0.672-0.962) for protein delivery, respectively), but not in those > 2 mmol/L. CONCLUSIONS: During the first week of critical illness, enhanced nutrition delivery is associated with reduced mortality in critically ill patients receiving exclusive EN, only for those with lactate concentration ≤ 2 mmol/L. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN12233792, registered on November 24, 2017.

The effects of higher versus lower protein delivery in critically ill patients: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with trial sequential analysis.

BACKGROUND: A recent large multicentre trial found no difference in clinical outcomes but identified a possibility of increased mortality rates in patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) receiving higher protein. These alarming findings highlighted the urgent need to conduct an updated systematic review and meta-analysis to inform clinical practice. METHODS: From personal files, citation searching, and three databases searched up to 29-5-2023, we included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of adult critically ill patients that compared higher vs lower protein delivery with similar energy delivery between groups and reported clinical and/or patient-centred outcomes. We conducted random-effect meta-analyses and subsequently trial sequential analyses (TSA) to control for type-1 and type-2 errors. The main subgroup analysis investigated studies with and without combined early physical rehabilitation intervention. A subgroup analysis of AKI vs no/not known AKI was also conducted. RESULTS: Twenty-three RCTs (n = 3303) with protein delivery of 1.49 ± 0.48 vs 0.92 ± 0.30 g/kg/d were included. Higher protein delivery was not associated with overall mortality (risk ratio [RR]: 0.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.88-1.11; I2 = 0%; 21 studies; low certainty) and other clinical outcomes. In 2 small studies, higher protein combined with early physical rehabilitation showed a trend towards improved self-reported quality-of-life physical function measurements at day-90 (standardized mean difference 0.40, 95% CI - 0.04 to 0.84; I2 = 30%). In the AKI subgroup, higher protein delivery significantly increased mortality (RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.11-1.82; I2 = 0%; 3 studies; confirmed by TSA with high certainty, and the number needed to harm is 7). Higher protein delivery also significantly increased serum urea (mean difference 2.31 mmol/L, 95% CI 1.64-2.97; I2 = 0%; 7 studies). CONCLUSION: Higher, compared with lower protein delivery, does not appear to affect clinical outcomes in general critically ill patients but may increase mortality rates in patients with AKI. Further investigation of the combined early physical rehabilitation intervention in non-AKI patients is warranted. PROSPERO ID: CRD42023441059.

The long-term intercorrelation between post-burn pain, anxiety, and depression: a post hoc analysis of the "RE-ENERGIZE" double-blind, randomized, multicenter placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite the growing prevalence of burn survivors, a gap persists in our understanding of the correlation between acute burn trauma and the long-term impact on psychosocial health. This study set out to investigate the prevalence of long-term pain and symptoms of anxiety and depression in survivors of extensive burns, comparing this to the general population, and identify injury and demographic-related factors predisposing individuals to psychosocial compromise. METHODS: RE-ENERGIZE was an international, double-blinded, randomized-controlled trial that enrolled 1200 patients with partial- or full-thickness burns that required surgical treatment. For the post hoc analysis, we excluded participants who did not complete the Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) questionnaire. Normative data were taken from the 2021 National Health Interview Survey dataset. Propensity score matching was performed using the nearest-neighbor 1-to-1 method, and the two cohorts were compared in terms of chronic pain, and symptoms of anxiety and depression. A multivariable analysis was performed on the burns cohort to identify factors predicting post-discharge pain and symptoms of anxiety and depression. RESULTS: A total of 600 burn patients and 26,666 general population adults were included in this study. Following propensity score matching, both groups comprised 478 participants each, who were predominately male, white, overweight and between 20 and 60 years old. Compared to the general population, burn patients were significantly more likely to report the presence of moderate and a lot of pain (p = 0.002). Symptoms of anxiety were significantly higher in the burn population in two of four levels (most of the time; some of the time; p < 0.0001 for both). Responders in the burn population were significantly less likely to report the absence of depressive symptoms (p < 0.0001). Burn patients were also significantly more likely to report that their mental health affects their social life. TBSA, history of depression, and female sex were identified as independently associated factors for pain, anxiety, and depressive symptoms. The presence of chronic pain and anxiety symptoms independently predicted for symptoms of depression. CONCLUSIONS: Analyzing the largest multicenter cohort of patients with extensive burns, we find that burn injury is associated with chronic pain, and symptoms of anxiety and depression. In addition, TBSA-burned and history of depression directly correlate with the prevalence of chronic pain, and symptoms of anxiety and depression. Finally, pain, and symptoms of anxiety and depression are interrelated and may have interactive effects on the process of recovery following burn injury. Burn patients would, therefore, benefit from a multidisciplinary team approach with early mobilization of pain and mental health experts, in order to promptly prevent the development of psychosocial challenges and their consequences.

Hemocompatibility-related Adverse Events in Patients With Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support: The Scoring Haemostasis Events and Assessment for Risk (SHEAR) Score.

Evaluation of treatment outcomes in patients supported by temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) currently relies mainly on mortality, which may not sufficiently address other patient benefits or harms. Bleeding and thrombosis are major contributors to mortality. Still, current bleeding scores are not designed for critically ill patients undergoing tMCS, only consider selected populations, and do not account for the high heterogeneity among bleeding and thrombotic adverse events. To improve clinical management, a group of European experts has proposed a revised scoring system based on the MOMENTUM 3 Hemocompatibility Score and the Society of Cardiac Angiography and Interventions (SCAI)classification of cardiogenic shock. The new system termed the Scoring Haemostasis Events and Assessment for Risk (SHEAR) score, is divided into a baseline characterization stage and four escalating scoring stages encompassing all aspects of clinical relevance. This report summarizes the literature on hemocompatibility-related adverse events associated with tMCS, including bleeding, stroke, vascular access complications, hemolysis, thrombosis, and device failure. The SHEAR score provides a simple and rapid bedside scoring system aiming to provide a univocal tool to increase physician awareness of hemocompatibility complications at baseline and beyond, improve clinical research, and enable the capture of device-related complications that will inform relevant outcomes beyond mortality.

Statin loading before coronary artery bypass grafting: a randomized trial.

AIMS: Evidence suggests that a high-dose statin loading before a percutaneous coronary revascularization improves outcomes in patients receiving long-term statins. This study aimed to analyse the effects of such an additional statin therapy before surgical revascularization. METHODS AND RESULTS: This investigator-initiated, randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled trial was conducted from November 2012 to April 2019 at 14 centres in Germany. Adult patients (n = 2635) with a long-term statin treatment (≥30 days) who were scheduled for isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) were randomly assigned to receive a statin-loading therapy or placebo at 12 and 2 h prior to surgery using a web-based system. The primary outcome of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) was a composite consisting of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), and a cerebrovascular event occuring within 30 days after surgery. Key secondary endpoints included a composite of cardiac death and MI, myocardial injury, and death within 12 months. Non-statistically relevant differences were found in the modified intention-to-treat analysis (2406 patients; 1203 per group) between the statin (13.9%) and placebo groups (14.9%) for the primary outcome [odds ratio (OR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74-1.18; P = 0.562] or any of its individual components. Secondary endpoints including cardiac death and MI (12.1% vs. 13.5%; OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.69-1.12; P = 0.300), the area under the troponin T-release curve (median 0.398 vs. 0.394 ng/ml, P = 0.333), and death at 12 months (3.1% vs. 2.9%; P = 0.825) were comparable between treatment arms. CONCLUSION: Additional statin loading before CABG failed to reduce the rate of MACCE occuring within 30 days of surgery.

Potassium Supplementation and Prevention of Atrial Fibrillation After Cardiac Surgery: The TIGHT K Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Supplementing potassium in an effort to maintain high-normal serum concentrations is a widespread strategy used to prevent atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery (AFACS), but is not evidence-based, carries risks, and is costly. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a lower serum potassium concentration trigger for supplementation is noninferior to a high-normal trigger. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This open-label, noninferiority, randomized clinical trial was conducted at 23 cardiac surgical centers in the United Kingdom and Germany. Between October 20, 2020, and November 16, 2023, patients with no history of atrial dysrhythmias scheduled for isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery were enrolled. The last study patient was discharged from the hospital on December 11, 2023. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to a strategy of tight or relaxed potassium control (only supplementing if serum potassium concentration fell below 4.5 mEq/L or 3.6 mEq/L, respectively). Patients wore an ambulatory heart rhythm monitor, which was analyzed by a core laboratory masked to treatment assignment. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The prespecified primary end point was clinically detected and electrocardiographically confirmed new-onset AFACS in the first 120 hours after CABG surgery or until hospital discharge, whichever occurred first. All primary outcome events were validated by an event validation committee, which was masked to treatment assignment. Noninferiority of relaxed potassium control was defined as a risk difference for new-onset AFACS with associated upper bound of a 1-sided 97.5% CI of less than 10%. Secondary outcomes included other heart rhythm-related events, clinical outcomes, and cost related to the intervention. RESULTS: A total of 1690 patients (mean age, 65 years; 256 [15%] females) were randomized. The primary end point occurred in 26.2% of patients (n = 219) in the tight group and 27.8% of patients (n = 231) in the relaxed group, which is a risk difference of 1.7% (95% CI, -2.6% to 5.9%). There was no difference between the groups in the incidence of at least 1 AFACS episode detected by any means or by ambulatory heart rhythm monitor alone, non-AFACS dysrhythmias, in-patient mortality, or length of stay. Per-patient cost for purchasing and administering potassium was significantly lower in the relaxed group (mean difference, $111.89 [95% CI, $103.60-$120.19]; P <.001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: For AFACS prophylaxis, supplementation only when serum potassium concentration fell below 3.6 mEq/L was noninferior to the current widespread practice of supplementing potassium to maintain a serum potassium concentration greater than or equal to 4.5 mEq/L. The lower threshold of supplementation was not associated with any increase in dysrhythmias or adverse clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04053816.

Nutrition support for patients on mechanical circulatory support.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: No specific guidelines on medical nutrition therapy (MNT) in patients on different types of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices yet exist and overall evidence is limited. The purpose of this narrative review is to provide an overview about current existing evidence, which might be of underrecognized importance for the patients' short-term and long-term clinical and functional outcomes. RECENT FINDINGS: Patients on MCS inherit substantial metabolic, endocrinologic, inflammatory, and immunologic alterations, and together with the specificities of MCS therapy, technical modalities of respective devices, and concomitant medication, the consideration of individualized MNT approaches is indicated in routine clinical practice. Exemplarily, the evaluation of the patients' individual nutrition status, determination of nutrition targets, progressive increase of energy and protein supply throughout the different phases of disease, prevention of micronutrient deficiencies, implementation of nutrition protocols, appropriate monitoring strategies, and continuous quality improvement are essential elements of MNT in patients on MCS. SUMMARY: The importance of MNT for patients on MCS still often remains underrecognized, which might be of particular relevance in view of the significant metabolic alterations, the long treatment period, and severity of illness in these patients. Further research on more targeted MNT approaches in those patients is urgently needed for the generation of evidence-based guidelines for this specific cohort of critically ill patients.

The Efficacy of Glutamine Supplementation in Severe Adult Burn Patients: A Systematic Review With Trial Sequential Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Evidence supporting glutamine supplementation in severe adult burn patients has created a state of uncertainty due to the variability in the treatment effect reported across small and large randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We aimed to systematically review the effect of glutamine supplementation on mortality in severe adult burn patients. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane Central were searched from inception to February 10, 2023. STUDY SELECTION: RCTs evaluating the effect of enteral or IV glutamine supplementation alone in severe adult burn patients were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently extracted data on study characteristics, burn injury characteristics, description of the intervention between groups, adverse events, and clinical outcomes. DATA SYNTHESIS: Random effects meta-analyses were performed to estimate the pooled risk ratio (RR). Trial sequential analyses (TSA) for mortality and infectious complications were performed. Ten RCTs (1,577 patients) were included. We observed no significant effect of glutamine supplementation on overall mortality (RR, 0.65, 95% CI, 0.33-1.28; p = 0.21), infectious complications (RR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.63-1.09; p = 0.18), or other secondary outcomes. In subgroup analyses, we observed no significant effects based on administration route or burn severity. We did observe a significant subgroup effect between single and multicenter RCTs in which glutamine significantly reduced mortality and infectious complications in singe-center RCTs but not in multicenter RCTs. However, TSA showed that the pooled results of single-center RCTs were type 1 errors and further trials would be futile. CONCLUSIONS: Glutamine supplementation, regardless of administration, does not appear to improve clinical outcomes in severely adult burned patients.

Vitamin C in critical illness: end of the story or still a place?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Critical illness is associated with decreased micronutrient levels, including vitamin C, an essential antioxidant for systemic inflammation. This review discusses the most recent evidence of high-dose vitamin C monotherapy in critically ill adults. RECENT FINDINGS: Three randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) were published in 2022. A pilot study including 40 patients with septic shock could not detect significant differences in outcome parameters after administering vitamin C. A multicenter study with 124 septic patients showed no significant difference in 28-day mortality, while vitamin C was associated with an increased risk of acute kidney dysfunction. The LOVIT trial, an international prospective RCT in 872 septic patients, revealed an increased risk of the composite endpoint persistent organ dysfunction plus death at day 28 in the high-dose vitamin C group. Six systematic reviews and meta-analyses (SRMA), including up to 4740 patients published before and 2 SRMA publications including these RCTs showed divergent results on clinical endpoints including mortality. SUMMARY: The use of high-dose intravenous vitamin C cannot be recommended for the septic critically ill in clinical practice since the LOVIT trial. Further research is needed to evaluate its potential role in other critically ill patients.

The impact of higher protein dosing on outcomes in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury: a post hoc analysis of the EFFORT protein trial.

BACKGROUND: Based on low-quality evidence, current nutrition guidelines recommend the delivery of high-dose protein in critically ill patients. The EFFORT Protein trial showed that higher protein dose is not associated with improved outcomes, whereas the effects in critically ill patients who developed acute kidney injury (AKI) need further evaluation. The overall aim is to evaluate the effects of high-dose protein in critically ill patients who developed different stages of AKI. METHODS: In this post hoc analysis of the EFFORT Protein trial, we investigated the effect of high versus usual protein dose (≥ 2.2 vs. ≤ 1.2 g/kg body weight/day) on time-to-discharge alive from the hospital (TTDA) and 60-day mortality and in different subgroups in critically ill patients with AKI as defined by the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) criteria within 7 days of ICU admission. The associations of protein dose with incidence and duration of kidney replacement therapy (KRT) were also investigated. RESULTS: Of the 1329 randomized patients, 312 developed AKI and were included in this analysis (163 in the high and 149 in the usual protein dose group). High protein was associated with a slower time-to-discharge alive from the hospital (TTDA) (hazard ratio 0.5, 95% CI 0.4-0.8) and higher 60-day mortality (relative risk 1.4 (95% CI 1.1-1.8). Effect modification was not statistically significant for any subgroup, and no subgroups suggested a beneficial effect of higher protein, although the harmful effect of higher protein target appeared to disappear in patients who received kidney replacement therapy (KRT). Protein dose was not significantly associated with the incidence of AKI and KRT or duration of KRT. CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill patients with AKI, high protein may be associated with worse outcomes in all AKI stages. Recommendation of higher protein dosing in AKI patients should be carefully re-evaluated to avoid potential harmful effects especially in patients who were not treated with KRT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03160547) on May 17th 2017.

[The Role of the Percutaneous Impella Pump in Anesthesia and Intensive Care]. / Die Rolle der perkutanen Impella-Pumpe in der Anästhesie und Intensivmedizin.

The use of temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) devices and in particular the increasing use of the Impella device family has gained significant interest over the last two decades. Nowadays, its use plays a well-established key role in both the treatment of cardiogenic shock, and as a preventive and protective therapeutic option during high-risk procedures in both cardiac surgery and cardiology, such as complex percutaneous interventions (protected PCI). Thus, it is not surprising that the Impella device is more and more present in the perioperative setting and especially in patients on intensive care units. Despite the numerous advantages such as cardiac resting and hemodynamic stabilization, potential adverse events exist, which may lead to severe, but preventable complications, so that adequate education, early recognition of such events and a subsequent adequate management are crucial in patients with tMCS. This article provides an overview especially for anesthesiologists and intensivists focusing on technical basics, indications and contraindications for its use with special focus on the intra- and postoperative management. Furthermore, troubleshooting for most common complications for patients on Impella support is provided.

Critical Appraisal of a Systematic Review: A Concise Review.

OBJECTIVES: Concise definitive review of how to read and critically appraise a systematic review. DATA SOURCES: None. STUDY SELECTION: Current literature describing the conduct, reporting, and appraisal of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. DATA EXTRACTION: Best practices for conducting, reporting, and appraising systematic review were summarized. DATA SYNTHESIS: A systematic review is a review of a clearly formulated question that uses systematic and explicit methods to identify, select, and critically appraise relevant original research, and to collect and analyze data from the studies that are included in the review. Critical appraisal methods address both the credibility (quality of conduct) and rate the confidence in the quality of summarized evidence from a systematic review. The A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews-2 tool is a widely used practical tool to appraise the conduct of a systematic review. Confidence in estimates of effect is determined by assessing for risk of bias, inconsistency of results, imprecision, indirectness of evidence, and publication bias. CONCLUSIONS: Systematic reviews are transparent and reproducible summaries of research and conclusions drawn from them are only as credible and reliable as their development process and the studies which form the systematic review. Applying evidence from a systematic review to patient care considers whether the results can be directly applied, whether all important outcomes have been considered, and if the benefits are worth potential harms and costs.

IV Vitamin C in Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of IV vitamin C on outcomes in critically ill patients. DATA SOURCES: Systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials testing IV vitamin C in critically ill patients. DATA ABSTRACTION: Two independent reviewers abstracted patient characteristics, treatment details, and clinical outcomes. DATA SYNTHESIS: Fifteen studies involving 2,490 patients were identified. Compared with placebo, IV vitamin C administration is associated with a trend toward reduced overall mortality (relative risk, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.75-1.00; p = 0.06; test for heterogeneity I2 = 6%). High-dose IV vitamin C was associated with a significant reduction in overall mortality (relative risk, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.52-0.96; p = 0.03), whereas low-dose IV vitamin C had no effect (relative risk, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.79-1.07; p = 0.46; test for subgroup differences, p = 0.14). IV vitamin C monotherapy was associated with a significant reduction in overall mortality (relative risk, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.49-0.83; p = 0.006), whereas there was no effect with IV vitamin C combined therapy. No trial reported an increase in adverse events related to IV vitamin C. CONCLUSIONS: IV vitamin C administration appears safe and may be associated with a trend toward reduction in overall mortality. High-dose IV vitamin C monotherapy may be associated with improved overall mortality, and further randomized controlled trials are warranted.