Modified NUTRIC Score as a Predictor of All-cause Mortality in Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Purpose: The purpose of our meta-analysis was to look at the impact of modified nutrition risk in the critically ill (mNUTRIC) on mortality in patients with critical illness. Materials and methods: Literature relevant to this meta-analysis was searched in PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library till 26 August 2023. Prospective or retrospective studies, patients >18 years of age, studies that reported on mortality and mNUTRIC (mNUTRIC cut-off score) were included. The QUIPS tool was used to evaluate the risk for bias in prognostic factors. Results: A total of 31 studies on mNUTRIC score, involving 13,271 patients were included. The summary area under the curve (sAUC) of 0.80 (95% CI: 0.76-0.83) illustrates the mNUTRIC score's strong discrimination. The pooled sensitivity was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.74-0.84) and pooled specificity was 0.68 (95% CI: 0.63-0.73). We found no discernible variation in the mNUTRIC's prediction accuracy among cut-off values of <5 and >5 in our subgroup analysis and sAUC values were 0.82 (95% CI: 0.78-0.85) and 0.78 (95% CI: 0.74-0.81), respectively. Conclusion: We observed that mNUTRIC can discriminate between critically ill individuals and predict their mortality. Prospero: CRD42023460292. How to cite this article: Prakash J, Verma S, Shrivastava P, Saran K, Kumari A, Raj K, et al. Modified NUTRIC Score as a Predictor of All-cause Mortality in Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Indian J Crit Care Med 2024;28(5):495-503.

Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index and Risk of Mortality in Critically Ill Patients With Acute Kidney Injury: A Multicenter Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: Malnutrition is associated with adverse outcomes in acute or chronic diseases. However, the prediction value of the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) has not been well studied. METHODS: Data was extracted from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care III (MIMIC-III) and the electronic intensive care unit database. We used two nutritional indicators, the GNRI and the modified Nutrition Risk in Critically ill (NUTRIC) score, to evaluate the relationship between the nutritional status of patients with AKI and prognosis. The outcome is in-hospital mortality and 90-day mortality. The prediction accuracy of GNRI was compared with the NUTRIC score. RESULTS: A total of 4,575 participants with AKI were enrolled in this study. The median age of 68 (interquartile range, 56-79) years, and 1,142 (25.0%) patients experienced in-hospital mortality, and 1,238 (27.1%) patients experienced 90-day mortality. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis indicated that lower GNRI levels and high NUTRIC score are associated with lower in-hospital and 90-day survival of patients with AKI (P < .001 by log-rank test). After multivariate adjustment, Cox regression analysis demonstrated a 2-fold increased risk of in-hospital (hazard ratio = 2.019, 95% confidence interval: 1.699-2.400, P < .001) and 90-day (hazard ratio = 2.023, 95% confidence interval: 1.715-2.387, P < .001) mortality in the low GNRI group. Moreover, the multivariate-adjusted Cox model containing GNRI had higher prediction accuracy for the prognosis of patients with AKI than that with NUTRIC score (AUCGNRI model vs. AUCNUTRIC model for in-hospital mortality = 0.738 vs. 0.726, AUCGNRI model vs. AUCNUTRIC model for 90-day mortality = 0.748 vs. 0.726). In addition, the prediction value of GNRI was validated by the electronic intensive care unit database (7,881 patients with AKI) with satisfying performance (AUCGNRI model = 0.680). CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrated that GNRI is strongly associated with survival in patients in the intensive care unit coexisting with AKI, and the GNRI has a superior predictive value than the NUTRIC score.

The prognostic value of modified NUTRIC score for patients in cardiothoracic surgery recovery unit: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Malnutrition is highly prevalent in critically ill patients. The modified Nutrition Risk in the Critically ill (mNUTRIC) score has been introduced to evaluate the nutritional risk of patients in an intensive care unit (ICU). The mNUTRIC score is a predictive factor of mortality for patients in a medical or mixed ICU, whereas the relationship between mNUTRIC and prognosis of patients in a cardiothoracic surgery recovery unit (CSRU) is unclear and related researches are limited. METHODS: We conducted this retrospective cohort study to explore the value of mNUTRIC score in CSRU patients. We identified totally 4059 patients from the Multiparameter Intelligent Monitoring in Intensive Care III (MIMIC III) database. RESULTS: The optimal cut-off value of mNUTRIC score was 4 and a total of 1498 (36.9%) patients were considered to be at high nutritional risk (mNUTRIC ≥ 4). A multivariate logistic regression model indicated that patients at high nutritional risk have higher hospital mortality compared to those at low nutritional risk (odds ratio = 2.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.32-4.70, p = 0.005]. Furthermore, a Cox regression model was established adjusted for age, white blood cell and body mass index. The Kaplan-Meier curve indicated that patients at high nutritional risk have poorer 365-days [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.30-2.37, p < 0.001] and 1000-days (HR = 2.30, 95% CI = 1.87-2.83, p < 0.001) overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: The mNUTRIC score could not only predict hospital mortality, but also be an independent prognostic factor for long-term survival in CSRU patients. More well-designed clinical trials are needed to verify and update our findings.

Prognostic factors for 30-days mortality in eighty years aged and older critically ill patients: a single center retrospective cohort study

Background/aim: Nowadays, with the rise in average life expectancy, the rate of hospitalization of the older population in intensive care unit (ICU) is gradually increasing. Unfortunately, there are no ideal combination of prognostic factors predicting the mortality in older patients admitted to the ICU. In the present study, we aim to determine the prognostic factors and their impacts on short-time mortality in older critically ill patients. Materials and methods: This retrospective cohort study was performed between January 2019 and February 2020. We included 133 patients aged ≥80 years and hospitalized ≥24 h in the ICU. Results: A total of 133 critically ill patients enrolled in the present study. And, the median age of the patients was 85 (80­106) years. 30-days and overall ICU mortality rates were found 30.1% and 34.6%, respectively. The patients were grouped as survivors (n = 94) and nonsurvivors (n = 39). Hospital length of stay before the ICU admission was found significantly longer in nonsurvivors (p = 0.001). Sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation-II (APACHE-II) score were significantly higher in nonsurvivors (p < 0.001, p < 0.001). Also, blood lactate level and glucose level were respectively significantly higher in nonsurvivors (p < 0.001, p = 0.006). We found that modified nutrition risk in critically ill (mNUTRIC) score and prehospital clinical frailty scale (CFS) were independent prognostic factors for the older critically ill patients (HR = 9.19, 95% CI=1.47­57.32, p = 0.018, HR = 20.16, 95% CI = 2.63­54.07, p =0.004). Conclusion: mNUTRIC score and prehospital CFS score were the most important prognostic factors in the admission of older patients to intensive care units.

The association between nutritional adequacy and 28-day mortality in the critically ill is not modified by their baseline nutritional status and disease severity.

BACKGROUND: During the initial phase of critical illness, the association between the dose of nutrition support and mortality risk may vary among patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) because the prevalence of malnutrition varies widely (28 to 78%), and not all ICU patients are severely ill. Therefore, we hypothesized that a prognostic model that integrates nutritional status and disease severity could accurately predict mortality risk and classify critically ill patients into low- and high-risk groups. Additionally, in critically ill patients placed on exclusive nutritional support (ENS), we hypothesized that their risk categories could modify the association between dose of nutrition support and mortality risk. METHODS: A prognostic model that predicts 28-day mortality was built from a prospective cohort study of 440 patients. The association between dose of nutrition support and mortality risk was evaluated in a subgroup of 252 mechanically ventilated patients via logistic regressions, stratified by low- and high-risk groups, and days of exclusive nutritional support (ENS) [short-term (≤ 6 days) vs. longer-term (≥ 7 days)]. Only the first 6 days of ENS was evaluated for a fair comparison. RESULTS: The prognostic model demonstrated good discrimination [AUC 0.78 (95% CI 0.73-0.82), and a bias-corrected calibration curve suggested fair accuracy. In high-risk patients with short-term ENS (≤ 6 days), each 10% increase in goal energy and protein intake was associated with an increased adjusted odds (95% CI) of 28-day mortality [1.60 (1.19-2.15) and 1.47 (1.12-1.86), respectively]. In contrast, each 10% increase in goal protein intake during the first 6 days of ENS in high-risk patients with longer-term ENS (≥ 7 days) was associated with a lower adjusted odds of 28-day mortality [0.75 (0.57-0.99)]. Despite the opposing associations, the mean predicted mortality risks and prevalence of malnutrition between short- and longer-term ENS patients were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Combining baseline nutritional status and disease severity in a prognostic model could accurately predict 28-day mortality. However, the association between the dose of nutrition support during the first 6 days of ENS and 28-day mortality was independent of baseline disease severity and nutritional status.

The Association Between Malnutrition and High Protein Treatment on Outcomes in Critically Ill Patients: A Post Hoc Analysis of the EFFORT Protein Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Preexisting malnutrition in critically ill patients is associated with adverse clinical outcomes. Malnutrition can be diagnosed with the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition using parameters such as weight loss, muscle wasting, and BMI. International critical care nutrition guidelines recommend high protein treatment to improve clinical outcomes in critically ill patients diagnosed with preexisting malnutrition. However, this recommendation is based on expert opinion. RESEARCH QUESTION: In critically ill patients, what is the association between preexisting malnutrition and time to discharge alive (TTDA), and does high protein treatment modify this association? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This multicenter randomized controlled trial involving 16 countries was designed to investigate the effects of high vs usual protein treatment in 1,301 critically ill patients. The primary outcome was TTDA. Multivariable regression was used to identify if preexisting malnutrition was associated with TTDA and if protein delivery modified their association. RESULTS: The prevalence of preexisting malnutrition was 43.8%, and the cumulative incidence of live hospital discharge by day 60 was 41.2% vs 52.9% in the groups with and without preexisting malnutrition, respectively. The average protein delivery in the high vs usual treatment groups was 1.6 g/kg per day vs 0.9 g/kg per day. Preexisting malnutrition was independently associated with slower TTDA (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.67-0.98). However, high protein treatment in patients with and without preexisting malnutrition was not associated with TTDA (adjusted hazard ratios of 0.84 [95% CI, 0.63-1.11] and 0.97 [95% CI, 0.77-1.21]). Furthermore, no effect modification was observed (ratio of adjusted hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.58-1.20). INTERPRETATION: Malnutrition was associated with slower TTDA, but high protein treatment did not modify the association. These findings challenge current international critical care nutrition guidelines. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT03160547; URL: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov.

Nutritional risk and morbidity and mortality in intensive care unit patients with Coronavirus disease 2019.

INTRODUCTION: The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) spread rapidly, with 37 million cases and more than 699,000 deaths. Among intensive care unit (ICU) patients with COVID-19, a high incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) has been observed, ranging from 50 to 80%; furthermore, 85.9% were calculated to have high nutritional risk, which doubled their odds of death. The aim of the present study was to evaluate possible associations between nutritional risk, acute kidney injury, and morbidity and mortality in patients with COVID-19 admitted to an ICU. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of adult and older-adult patients hospitalized for >24 h in an ICU. The exposure was diagnosis of COVID-19, while the outcomes were mortality, acute kidney injury, dialysis, mechanical ventilation, and vasopressor use. The association of nutritional risk with outcomes was evaluated. The sample consisted of two secondary datasets. Individuals aged <18 years, those with dialytic chronic kidney disease, pregnant women, and those diagnosed with brain death were excluded. RESULTS: The sample consisted of 192 patients: 101 in the exposure group (positive for COVID-19) and 91 in the control group (no COVID-19 diagnosis). The COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 groups differed significantly in the variables weight, body mass index (BMI), nutritional risk, mNUTRIC-S score, and length of ICU stay. Our results suggest that the optimal mNUTRIC-S score cutoff to predict nutritional risk is <5 points. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 has a significant impact on patients' kidney function, increasing the incidence of AKI and the likelihood of death. Nutritional risk is a major factor in the mortality of patients with COVID-19. Therefore, use of the mNUTRIC-S scale could contribute to assessment of prognosis in this patient population.

Early enteral nutrition in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest under target temperature management was associated with a lower 7-day bacteremia rate: A post-hoc analysis of a retrospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Early enteral nutrition (EN) is a nutritional strategy for reducing the incidence of in-hospital infections. However, the benefits of early EN, under targeted temperature management (TTM) in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA), remain unclear. We aimed to evaluate the effect of early EN on the infective complications of OHCA patients who underwent TTM. METHODS: We retrospectively searched the clinical databases of two adult emergency tertiary referral hospitals in southern Taiwan and identified patients admitted for OHCA who underwent TTM between 2017 and 2022. The 85 enrolled patients were divided into two groups based on timing: early EN (EN within 48 h of admission) and delayed EN (EN > 48 h after admission). Clinical outcomes of 7-day infective complications between the two groups were analyzed. RESULTS: Early EN was provided to 57 (67 %) of 85 patients and delayed EN was provided to the remaining 28 (33 %) patients. No significant differences in baseline patient characteristics were observed between the two groups. In addition, no differences in clinical outcomes were observed, except that the early EN group had a lower 7-day bacteremia rate (5.3 % vs. 26.9 %, p = 0.013). Gram-negative bacteria were the major pathogen among the 7-day infective complications. CONCLUSION: In OHCA patients treated with TTM, early EN was associated with a lower 7-day bacteremia rate. Furthermore, the application of early EN in this population was well tolerated without significant adverse events.

Reducing In-Hospital and 60-Day Mortality in Critically Ill Patients after Surgery with Strict Nutritional Supplementation: A Prospective, Single-Labeled, Randomized Controlled Trial.

Malnutrition in critically ill patients is a global concern, especially those who undergo abdominal surgery, as it is associated to higher infectious complications, prolonged hospital stays, and increased morbidity. Despite the importance of proper nutrition, guidelines remain broad, and practical implementation is often inadequate. We aimed to assess the effects of strict nutritional provision and investigate the appropriate target for nutrition support. A prospective, randomized controlled trial was conducted in critically ill patients admitted to intensive care units following abdominal surgery. The intervention group received targeted protein and calories, with consultation from a nutritional support team upon admission. In total, 181 patients in the intervention and 144 in the control group were analyzed. The intervention group demonstrated improved nutrition provision and subsequently better clinical outcomes, including a reduced 60-day mortality (4.4 versus 15.3, p = 0.001), postoperative complications (24.9 versus 47.2, p < 0.001), and in-hospital mortality (5 versus 17.4, p < 0.001). High modified nutrition risk in the critically ill scores [odds ratio (OR) = 2.658, 95% CI = 1.498-4.716] were associated with increased 60-day mortality, while active nutritional intervention (OR = 0.312, 95% CI = 0.111-0.873) was associated with lower mortality rates. Notably, the provision of targeted energy and protein alone did not exhibit a significant association with mortality outcomes.

Optimal Nutritional Support Strategy Based on the Association between Modified NUTRIC Score and 28-Day Mortality in Critically Ill Patients: A Prospective Study.

Malnutrition in critically ill patients is closely linked with clinical outcomes. During acute inflammatory states, nutrition cannot reverse the loss of body cell mass completely. Studies on nutritional screening and strategy considering metabolic changes have not yet been conducted. We aimed to identify nutrition strategies using the modified Nutrition Risk in the Critically ill (mNUTIRC) score. Nutrition support data, laboratory nutrition indicators, and prognosis indices were prospectively collected on the 2nd and 7th day after admission. It was to identify the effect of the changes on the metabolic status and critical target of nutrition intervention. To discriminate the high-risk group of malnutrition, receiver operating characteristic curves were plotted. Risk factors associated with 28 day-mortality were evaluated using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression. A total of 490 and 266 patients were analyzed on the 2nd and 7th day, respectively. Only the mNUTRIC score showed significant differences in nutritional risk stratification. The use of vasopressors, hypoprotein supply (<1.0 g/kg/day), high mNUTRIC score, and hypoalbuminemia (<2.5 mg/dL) in the recovery phase were strongly associated with a 28-day mortality. The implementation of the mNUTRIC score and protein supply in the post-acute phase is critical to improve 28-day mortality in critically ill patients.

Prognostic performance of the NRS2002, NUTRIC, and modified NUTRIC to identify high nutritional risk in severe acute pancreatitis patients.

Background: Acute pancreatitis (AP) is the most common gastrointestinal disease requiring hospital admission. AP patients are categorized as mild, moderately severe, and severe AP (SAP). For SAP patients, malnutrition increases susceptibility to infection and mortality. The Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS 2002), the Nutrition Risk in Critically Ill (NUTRIC) score and modified Nutrition Risk in Critically Ill (mNUTRIC) are nutritional risk screening tools of critically ill patients and have not been validated in patients with SAP. It is essential to evaluate the prognostic performance of these nutritional risk screening tools. Materials and methods: A retrospective study was designed to validate the NRS 2002, NUTRIC, and mNUTRIC when applied to SAP patients. Receiver operating characteristic curves were plotted to investigate the predictive ability of clinical outcomes by comparing areas under the curve (AUC). Appropriate cut-offs were calculated by using Youden's index. Patients were identified as being at high nutritional risk according to the calculated cut-off values. The effects of different scoring systems on mortalities were calculated using the Cox proportional hazards model. Logistic regression was used to assess the association between the energy provision and 28-day mortality. Results: From January 2013 to December 2019, 234 SAP patients were included and analyzed. Patients categorized as high nutritional risk by the NRS 2002 (12.6% versus 1.9% for 28-day and 20.5% versus 3.7% for 90-day), NUTRIC (16.2% versus 0.0% for 28-day and 27.0% versus 0.0% for 90-day), and mNUTRIC (16.4% versus 0.0% for 28-day and 26.4% versus 0.8% for 90-day) had significant higher mortality than those categorized as low nutritional risk. The NUTRIC (AUC: 0.861 for 28-day mortality and 0.871 for 90-day mortality, both cut-off value ≥3) and mNUTRIC (AUC: 0.838 for 28-day and 0.828 for 90-day mortality, both cut-off value ≥3) showed better predictive ability of the 28- and 90-day mortality than the NRS 2002 (AUC: 0.706 for 28-day mortality and 0.695 for 90-day mortality, both cut-off value ≥5). Conclusion: The NRS 2002, NUTRIC, and mNUTRIC scores were predictors for the 28- and 90-day mortalities. The NUTRIC and mNUTRIC showed better predictive ability compared with the NRS 2002 when applied to SAP patients.

Evaluation of the effectiveness of the modified nutrition risk in the critically ill (mNUTRIC) score in critically ill patients affected by COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU).

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is a very harmful pandemic, and its recovery process is highly influenced by nutritional status; however, an appropriate nutritional scale has not yet been proposed for these patients. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the modified Nutrition Risk in the Critically ill (mNUTRIC) score in critically ill patients affected by COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study performed on 204 critically ill patients affected by COVID-19 admitted to the ICU wards. Evaluated indicators include the mNUTRIC Score as well as demographic, and biochemical indicators. RESULTS: A high percentage of COVID-19 patients (67.2%) had severe disease. Hospital and ICU stay (p > 0.001) and PH (p > 0.001) values were significantly lower in non-survivors than in survivors. mNUTRIC score (p > 0.001), PCO2 (p = 0.003), and CRP levels (p = 0.021) were significantly higher in non-survivors than survivors. mNUTRIC score had a direct correlation with age (p > 0.001), AST (p = 0.000), LDH (p = 0.026), and CRP (p = 0.014) and an inverse correlation with hospital duration (p = 0.031), albumin (p = 0.003) and PH (p < 0.001). Furthermore, there was a non-significant correlation between the mNUTRIC score and mortality chance (OR = 1.085, 95%CI [0.83, 1.42], p = 0.552). While, patients with more severe COVID-19 disease (OR = 8.057, 95%CI [1.33, 48.64], p = 0.023) and higher PCO2 (OR = 1.042, 95%CI [1.01, 1.08], p = 0.023) levels had higher odds of mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings revealed that COVID-19 patients with higher CRP levels and lower PH had higher mortality and poor nutritional condition. Moreover, there was a non-significant association between the mNUTRIC score and mortality chance.

Nutritional risk, not obesity, is associated with mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: Despite the identification of obesity as a risk factor for higher rates of hospital and Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admissions and complications due to COVID-19, the association between obesity and mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients remains controversial, and the nutritional risk is little considered. Hence, our study sought to evaluate the association between obesity, nutritional risk, and mortality in critically ill patients diagnosed with COVID-19. METHODS: Retrospective study were condutcted including adult critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to an ICU between April 2020 and March 2021. Clinical and laboratory data were collected from electronic medical records. Obesity was classified by body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m2. A mNUTRIC score of ≥ 5 indicated high nutritional risk. Multiple Cox Regression was used to estimate the association between mNUTRIC, obesity, and mortality. RESULTS: From 71 patients aged 59 (± 15) years, 71.8 % were male. The frequencies of obesity (58.7 %) and death (49.3 %) were high, but obesity was not associated with mortality. Based on mNUTRIC, 85.9 % of patients were at high nutritional risk, presenting a higher frequency of mortality than patients at low nutritional risk (50.8 % vs 40.0 %; p = 0.014). Multiple Cox Regression showed that for each unit increase in mNUTRIC score the probability of death almost doubled, regardless of the presence of obesity (HR = 1.74; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A higher nutritional risk was positively associated with mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients, regardless of obesity, showing the importance of early identification of nutritional risk for appropriate nutritional interventions in this population.

The modified NUTRIC score (mNUTRIC) is associated with increased 28-day mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients: Internal validation of a prediction model.

BACKGROUND: High prevalence of malnutrition was found in critically ill COVID-19 patients. The modified Nutrition Risk in the Critically ill (mNUTRIC) score is frequently used for nutritional risk assessment in intensive care unit (ICU) COVID-19 patients. The aim of this study was to investigate the role of mNUTRIC score to predict 28-day mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU. METHODS: A cohort of consecutive COVID-19 critically ill patients admitted to ICU was retrospectively evaluated and the nutritional risk was assessed with the use of mNUTRIC score. A multivariable Cox regression model to predict 28-day mortality was therefore developed including the mNUTRIC as a covariate. Internal validation was performed using the bootstrap resampling technique to reduce possible bias in the estimated risks. The performance of the prediction model was assessed via calibration and discrimination. RESULTS: A total of 98 critically ill COVID-19 patients with a median age of 66 years (56-73 IQR), 81 (82.7%) males were included in this study. A high nutritional risk (mNUTRIC ≥5 points) was observed in 41.8% of our critically ill COVID-19 patients while a low nutritional risk (mNUTRIC <5 points) was observed in 58.2%. Forty-five patients (45.9%) died within 28 days after ICU admission. In multivariable model after internal validation, mNUTRIC ≥5 (optimism adjusted HR 2.38, 95% CI 1.08-5.25, p = 0.02) and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein values (CRP) (optimism adjusted HR 1.02, 95% CI 1.01-1.07, p = 0.005) were independent predictors of 28-day mortality. CONCLUSIONS: A high prevalence of malnutrition as revealed by mNUTRIC was found in our critically ill COVID-19 patients once admitted in ICU. After adjustment for covariables, mNUTRIC ≥5 and CRP levels were independently associated with 28-day mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients. The final model revealed good discrimination and calibration. Nutritional risk assessment is essential for the management of critically ill COVID-19 patients as well as for outcome prediction.

Comparison between Nutric Score and modified nutric score to assess ICU mortality in critically ill patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: NUTrition Risk in the Critically ill (NUTRIC score) and modified Nutric score (mNUTRIC score) have been validated as screening tool for quantifying risk of adverse outcome in patients admitted in intensive care department. They differ for the measurement of IL-6 levels. In patients with COVID-19 disease the inflammatory response plays a crucial role leading to cytochine storm responsible of multiple organ damage. In this population, levels of IL-6 have been measured as indicator of inflammatory status. Aim of the study is to compare prognostic performance of both scores in predicting ICU mortality between patients with COVID-19 disease. METHODS: A single centre, retrospective, cohort study on patients admitted in ICU with confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 was performed. Prognostic performance of NUTRIC score and mNUTRIC score were assessed and compared for discriminative abilities for ICU-mortality. RESULTS: 43 patients were enrolled, age 64 (55; 70), BMI 28 ± 4. Mean NUTRIC score was 2.5 ± 1, mNUTRIC was 2.6 ± 1.1. Mortality was 39.5%, all patients had low nutritional risk according to both scores (≤5 and ≤ 4 for NUTRIC and mNUTRIC score respectively). The discriminative ability of Nutric Score for ICU mortality was 0.675 (95% CI: 0.524-0.825), while that of mNutric score was 0.655 (0.513-0.861), p = 0.667. CONCLUSIONS: Prognostic performance of Nutric score and mNutric score is comparable, but the discriminative ability is low even in patients with high inflammatory status as in COVID-19 affected population. These scores may not be appropriate in patients with COVID-19 for the determination of nutritional risk.

Nutrition support for critically ill patients.

Nutrition support is an important aspect of the management of critically ill patients. This review highlights the emerging evidence on critical care nutrition and focuses on the pathophysiologic interplay between critical illness, the gastrointestinal tract, and nutrition support and the evidence on the best route, dose, and timing of nutrition. Although indirect calorimetry is recommended to measure energy expenditure, predictive equations are commonly used but are limited by their inaccuracy in individual patients. The current evidence supports early enteral nutrition (EN) in most patients, with a gradual increase in the daily dose over the first week. Delayed EN is warranted in patients with severe shock. According to recent trials, parenteral nutrition seems to be as effective as EN and may be started if adequate EN is not achieved by the first week of critical illness. A high protein dose has been recommended, but the best timing is unclear. Immuno-nutrition should not be routinely provided to critically ill patients. Patients receiving artificial nutrition should be monitored for metabolic derangements. Additional adequately powered studies are still needed to resolve many unanswered questions.

Nutritional risk and therapy for severe and critical COVID-19 patients: A multicenter retrospective observational study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the nutritional risk and therapy in severe and critical patients with COVID-19. METHODS: A total of 523 patients enrolled from four hospitals in Wuhan, China. The inclusion time was from January 2, 2020 to February 15. Clinical characteristics and laboratory values were obtained from electronic medical records, nursing records, and related examinations. RESULTS: Of these patients, 211 (40.3%) were admitted to the ICU and 115 deaths (22.0%). Patients admitted to the ICU had lower BMI and plasma protein levels. The median Nutrition risk in critically ill (NUTRIC) score of 211 patients in the ICU was 5 (4, 6) and Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS) score was 5 (3, 6). The ratio of parenteral nutrition (PN) therapy in non-survivors was greater than that in survivors, and the time to start nutrition therapy was later than that in survivors. The NUTRIC score can independently predict the risk of death in the hospital (OR = 1.197, 95%CI: 1.091-1.445, p = 0.006) and high NRS score patients have a higher risk of poor outcome in the ICU (OR = 1.880, 95%CI: 1.151-3.070, p = 0.012). After adjusted age and sex, for each standard deviation increase in BMI, the risk of in-hospital death was reduced by 13% (HR = 0.871, 95%CI: 0.795-0.955, p = 0.003), and the risk of ICU transfer was reduced by 7% (HR = 0.932, 95%CI:0.885-0.981, p = 0.007). The in-hospital survival time of patients with albumin level ≤35 g/L was significantly decreased (15.9 d, 95% CI: 13.7-16.3, vs 24.2 d, 95% CI: 22.3-29.7, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Severe and critical patients with COVID-19 have a high risk of malnutrition. Low BMI and protein levels were significantly associated with adverse events. Early nutritional risk screening and therapy for patients with COVID-19 are necessary.

Prevalence and outcomes of malnutrition among hospitalized COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Malnutrition is inevitable in patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) due to its effect on the gastrointestinal system, immune system, and high metabolic activity. However, the prevalence of malnutrition and its outcomes is uncertain. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence and outcome of malnutrition among patients with COVID-19. METHOD: A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed/Medline; Science direct and LILACS from December 29, 2019 to September, 2020 without language restriction. All observational studies reporting the prevalence of malnutrition were included while case reports and reviews were excluded. The data were extracted with two independent authors with a customized format and the disagreements were resolved by the other authors. The methodological quality of included studies was evaluated using a standardized critical appraisal tool. RESULTS: A total of 511 articles were identified from different databases and 27 articles were selected for evaluation after the successive screening. Fourteen articles with 4187 participants were included. The pooled prevalence of malnutrition among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 was 49.11% (95% CI: 31.67 to 66.54). The odd of mortality among patients COVID-19 with malnutrition was 10 times more likely as compared to those who were well-nourished. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of malnutrition and mortality associated with malnutrition among COVID-19 hospitalized patients was very high which entails a mitigating strategy by different stakeholders to prevent and manage malnutrition and its outcomes. REGISTRATION: This systematic review was registered in Prospero's international prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42020215396).

Associations of measured resting energy expenditure with predictive equations, NUTRIC score, and patient outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Indirect calorimetry is the reference method for measuring resting energy expenditure (REE), but the necessary equipment and technical expertise are not always available. Meanwhile, the NUTrition Risk in the Critically ill (NUTRIC) scale is designed to identify patients who would benefit from nutrition therapy, but no data are available regarding the association of NUTRIC scores with REE. Several predictive formulas are available as alternatives to indirect calorimetry for calculation of energy requirements, but they have not been compared in a homogeneous group of critically ill patients. The purpose of the study is to examine the correlations between energy expenditure and NUTRIC scores or patient outcomes, and to compare measured REE with estimations of energy expenditure. METHODS: In this observational, prospective study, indirect calorimetry was performed on 50 mechanically ventilated patients. Energy expenditure was also estimated with the bodyweight-based, Faisy-Fagon, and Penn-State PSUm equations. RESULTS: REE was higher in patients who survived treatment than in those who died, and was positively correlated with length of stay and duration of ventilation. NUTRIC scores did not correlate with REE. The Faisy-Fagon equation overestimated expenditure, whereas PSUm was unbiased and accurate. Calculations based on 25 kcal/kg bodyweight/day overestimated expenditure, whereas 23 kcal/kg/day produced unbiased estimates with greater accuracy than PSUm. CONCLUSION: REE was positively associated with patient outcomes. Energy expenditure was accurately predicted by calculations of 23 kcal/kg bodyweight/day.

Nutritional assessment and comparison of nutritional indices in predicting adverse outcomes in patients undergoing left ventricular assist device implantation.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative malnutrition has been correlated to postoperative complications in patients with advanced heart failure undergoing placement of a left ventricular assist device (LVAD). We sought to determine whether nutritional risk scores could identify a subset of patients with an LVAD who were at high risk of adverse events. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all patients undergoing LVAD placement at a single center. The prognostic nutritional index (PNI), nutritional risk index (NRI), and nutrition risk in the critically ill (NUTRIC) score were calculated retrospectively from data abstracted from chart review. The primary endpoint was a composite of mortality and other adverse events associated with LVAD implantation. We used χ2 or Fisher exact tests to compare these three indices against the primary outcome. RESULTS: A total of 41 patients with a mean age of 57.2 ± 13.7 y and a mean body mass index of 29.3 ± 6.3 kg/m2 underwent LVAD placement between 2011 and 2019. The composite outcome at 1 y occurred in 31 (76%) patients. Preoperatively, 3 patients were identified as at high nutritional risk by the PNI score and 39 by the NRI score but none by the NUTRIC score. Most patients received nutritional interventions. The nutritional risk scores did not differ significantly between patients who experienced the composite outcome and those who did not. CONCLUSIONS: The NRI, NUTRIC, and PNI scores did not identify a subset of patients at high risk for the composite outcome. Further studies are needed to determine how to better assess the true nutritional risk of the LVAD population. However, until better risk stratification is available, all patients with an LVAD should be consider at high risk and given appropriate nutritional interventions.