Starting early enteral nutrition safely in patients with shock on vasopressors

“Shock is a common critical illness characterized by microcirculatory disorders and insufficient tissue perfusion. Patients with shock and hemodynamic instability generally require vasopressors to maintain the target mean arterial pressure. Enteral nutrition (EN) is an important therapeutic intervention in critically ill patients and has unique benefits for intestinal recovery. However, the initiation of early EN in patients with shock receiving vasopressors remains controversial.”
“It remains a therapeutic challenge in critical care nutrition therapy to determine the initiation time of EN in patients with shock receiving vasopressors and the safe threshold region for initiating EN with vasopressors. Therefore, the current review aimed to summarize the evidence on the optimal and safe timing of early EN initiation in patients with shock receiving vasopressors to improve clinical practice.”

Continue reading

Article of interest: Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2021

Evans L, Rhodes A, Alhazzani W, et al. Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2021. Crit Care Med. 2021 Nov 1;49(11): e1063-e1143.

Full-text for Emory users.

Methods: The panel consisted of five sections: hemodynamics, infection, adjunctive therapies, metabolic, and ventilation. Population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) questions were reviewed and updated as needed, and evidence profiles were generated. Each subgroup generated a list of questions, searched for best available evidence, and then followed the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the quality of evidence from high to very low, and to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or best practice statement when applicable.

Results: The Surviving Sepsis Guideline panel provided 93 statements on early management and resuscitation of patients with sepsis or septic shock. Overall, 32 were strong recommendations, 39 were weak recommendations, and 18 were best-practice statements. No recommendation was provided for four questions.

Continue reading