Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Health Economics, School of Public Health, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Department of Health Services Research, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Clin Nutr. 2020 Feb;39(2):460-467. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2019.02.020. Epub 2019 Feb 15.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Despite extensive research on early enteral nutrition (EEN), it remains unclear whether EEN is effective for patients with shock requiring vasopressors. This study aimed to compare outcomes between EEN and late enteral nutrition (LEN) in ventilated patients with shock requiring low-, medium-, or high-dose noradrenaline.
Using a national inpatient database in Japan, we identified ventilated patients admitted to intensive care units who had shock requiring catecholamines (noradrenaline or dobutamine) from July 2010 to March 2016. We defined patients who started enteral nutrition within 2 days after starting mechanical ventilation as EEN group and the others as LEN group. Propensity score matching was performed between patients undergoing EEN and LEN in each of the low- (<0.1 μg/kg/min), medium- (0.1-0.3 μg/kg/min), and high-dose (≥0.3 μg/kg/min) noradrenaline groups.
We identified 52,563 eligible patients during the 69-month study period, including 38,488, 11,042, and 3033 patients in the low-, medium-, and high-dose noradrenaline groups, respectively. One-to-two propensity score matching created 5,969, 2,162, and 477 one-to-two matched pairs in the low-, medium-, and high-dose noradrenaline groups, respectively. The 28-day mortality rate was significantly lower in the EEN than LEN group in the low-dose noradrenaline group (risk difference, -2.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -4.5% to -1.3%) and in the medium-dose noradrenaline group (risk difference, -6.8%; 95% CI, -9.6% to -4.0%). In the high-dose noradrenaline group, 28-day mortality did not differ significantly between the EEN and LEN groups (absolute risk difference, -1.4%; 95% CI, -7.4%-4.7%).
Although the size of the subgroup requiring high-dose noradrenaline may have been too small to demonstrate a significant difference, the results suggest that EEN was associated with a reduction in mortality in ventilated adults treated with low- or medium-dose noradrenaline but not in those requiring high-dose noradrenaline.
尽管已经对早期肠内营养(EEN)进行了广泛的研究,但EEN 是否对需要血管加压药的休克患者有效仍不清楚。本研究旨在比较需要低、中、高剂量去甲肾上腺素的机械通气休克患者中 EEN 与晚期肠内营养(LEN)的结局。
利用日本全国住院患者数据库,我们确定了 2010 年 7 月至 2016 年 3 月期间入住重症监护病房并需要儿茶酚胺(去甲肾上腺素或多巴酚丁胺)治疗的机械通气休克患者。我们将机械通气后 2 天内开始肠内营养的患者定义为 EEN 组,其他患者定义为 LEN 组。在每个低剂量(<0.1μg/kg/min)、中剂量(0.1-0.3μg/kg/min)和高剂量(≥0.3μg/kg/min)去甲肾上腺素组中,对 EEN 和 LEN 患者进行倾向评分匹配。
在 69 个月的研究期间,我们共确定了 52563 名符合条件的患者,其中低剂量、中剂量和高剂量去甲肾上腺素组分别有 38488、11042 和 3033 名患者。1:2 倾向评分匹配在低剂量、中剂量和高剂量去甲肾上腺素组分别创建了 5969、2162 和 477 对 1:2 匹配对。低剂量去甲肾上腺素组(风险差异,-2.9%;95%置信区间 [CI],-4.5%至-1.3%)和中剂量去甲肾上腺素组(风险差异,-6.8%;95% CI,-9.6%至-4.0%)中,EEN 组 28 天死亡率显著低于 LEN 组。在高剂量去甲肾上腺素组,EEN 组和 LEN 组 28 天死亡率无显著差异(绝对风险差异,-1.4%;95% CI,-7.4%至-4.7%)。
尽管需要高剂量去甲肾上腺素的亚组可能太小,无法显示出显著差异,但结果表明,EEN 与接受低剂量或中剂量去甲肾上腺素治疗的机械通气成人死亡率降低相关,但与需要高剂量去甲肾上腺素的患者无关。