Ogilvie’s Syndrome - A Complication of Severe COVID-19 Infection

@#A higher rate of gastrointestinal complications has been shown in COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit than their counterparts without COVID-19. Ogilvie’s syndrome or acute colonic pseudo-obstruction is described as colonic distension without mechanical obstruction, usually caused by infections, opioid use, renal dysfunction, and electrolyte imbalance. We report a patient with Ogilvie’s syndrome probably secondary to COVID-19. The patient was a 51-year-old man diagnosed as category 5 COVID-19, requiring intensive care treatment and mechanical ventilation. He developed transverse colonic perforation following large bowel dilatation, for which laparotomy and colectomy were done. Unfortunately, he succumbed to death due to intrabdominal sepsis with multiorgan failure. Possible pathogenesis of ileus in severe COVID-19 infection includes viral-induced autonomic nervous system dysfunction, viral-induced gut inflammation mediated by ACE-2 receptors located on the enterocytes, and ischaemic endothelialitis.

Relationship of energy and protein adequacy with 60-day mortality in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients: A prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The effect of provision of full feeding or permissive underfeeding on mortality in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) is still controversial. This study investigated the relationship of energy and protein intakes with 60-day mortality, and the extent to which ICU length of stay and nutritional risk status influenced this relationship. METHODS: This is a prospective observational study conducted among critically ill patients aged ≥18 years, intubated and mechanically ventilated within 48 h of ICU admission and stayed in the ICU for at least 72 h. Information on baseline characteristics and nutritional risk status (the modified Nutrition Risk in Critically ill [NUTRIC] score) was collected on day 1. Nutritional intake was recorded daily until death, discharge, or until the twelfth evaluable days. Mortality status was assessed on day 60 based on the patient's hospital record. Patients were divided into 3 groups a) received <2/3 of prescribed energy and protein (both <2/3), b) received ≥2/3 of prescribed energy and protein (both ≥2/3) and c) either energy or protein received were ≥2/3 of prescribed (either ≥2/3). The relationship between the three groups with 60-day mortality was examined by using logistic regression with adjustment for potential confounders. Sensitivity analysis was performed to examine the influence of ICU length of stay (≥7 days) and nutritional risk status. RESULTS: Data were collected from 154 mechanically ventilated patients (age, 51.3 ± 15.7 years; body mass index, 26.5 ± 6.7 kg/m2; 54% male). The mean modified NUTRIC score was 5.7 ± 1.9, with 56% of the patients at high nutritional risk. The patients received 64.5 ± 21.6% of the amount of energy and 56.4 ± 20.6% of the amount of protein prescribed. Provision of energy and protein at ≥2/3 compared with <2/3 of the prescribed amounts was associated with a trend towards increased 60-day mortality (Adjusted odds ratio [Adj OR] 2.23; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92-5.38; p = 0.074). No difference in mortality status was found between energy and protein provision at either ≥2/3 compared with <2/3 of the prescribed amounts (Adj OR 1.61, 95% CI, 0.58-4.45; p = 0.357). Nutritional risk status, not ICU length of stay, influenced the relationship between nutritional adequacy and 60-day mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Energy and protein adequacy of ≥2/3 of the prescribed amounts were associated with a trend towards increased 60-day mortality among mechanically ventilated critically ill patients. However, neither energy nor protein adequacy alone at ≥ or <2/3 adequacy affect 60-day mortality. Increased mortality was associated with provision of energy and protein at ≥2/3 of the prescribed amounts, which only affected patients with low nutritional risk.

Enhanced Protein-Energy Provision via the Enteral Route in Critically Ill Patients (PEP uP Protocol): A Review of Evidence.

Nutrition support is an integral part of care among critically ill patients. However, critically ill patients are commonly underfed, leading to consequences such as increased length of hospital and intensive care unit stay, time on mechanical ventilation, infectious complications, and mortality. Nevertheless, the prevalence of underfeeding has not resolved since the first description of this problem more than 15 years ago. This may be due to the traditional conservative feeding approaches. A novel feeding protocol (the Enhanced Protein-Energy Provision via the Enteral Route Feeding Protocol in Critically Ill Patients [PEP uP] protocol) was proposed and proven to improve feeding adequacy significantly. However, some of the components in the protocol are controversial and subject to debate. This article is a review of the supporting evidences and some of the controversy associated with each component of the PEP uP protocol.