Published online Aug 7, 2021. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v27.i29.4900
Peer-review started: March 28, 2021
First decision: June 3, 2021
Revised: June 9, 2021
Accepted: July 13, 2021
Article in press: July 13, 2021
Published online: August 7, 2021
Processing time: 129 Days and 0.7 Hours
Intestinal mucosal barrier injury and gastrointestinal dysfunction are important causes of sepsis. However, few studies have investigated the effects of enteral underfeeding on gastrointestinal function in sepsis. Moreover, no consensus on goal enteral caloric intake has been reached in sepsis.
To investigate the effects of different goal caloric requirements of enteral nutrition on the gastrointestinal function and outcomes in the acute phase of sepsis.
Patients were randomly assigned to receive 30% (defined as group A), 60% (group B), or 100% (group C) of goal caloric requirements of enteral nutrition in this prospective pilot clinical trial. The acute gastrointestinal injury (AGI) grades, incidence of feeding intolerance (FI), daily caloric intake, nutritional and inflammatory markers, and biomarkers of mucosal barrier function were collected during the first 7 d of enteral feeding. The clinical severity and outcome variables were also recorded.
A total of 54 septic patients were enrolled. The days to goal calorie of group C (2.55 ± 0.82) were significantly longer than those of group A (3.50 ± 1.51; P = 0.046) or B (4.85 ± 1.68; P < 0.001). The FI incidence of group C (16.5%) was higher than that of group A (5.0%) or B (8.7%) (P = 0.009). No difference in the incidence of FI symptoms was found between groups A and B. The serum levels of barrier function biomarkers of group B were significantly lower than those of group A (P < 0.05) on the 7th day of feeding. The prealbumin and IL-6 levels of group A were lower than those of group B (P < 0.05) on the 7th day of feeding. No significant differences in the clinical outcome variables or 28-d mortality were found among the three groups.
Early moderate enteral underfeeding (60% of goal requirements) could improve the intestinal barrier function and nutritional and inflammatory status without increasing the incidence of FI symptoms in sepsis. However, further large-scale prospective clinical trials and animal studies are required to test our findings. Moreover, the effects of different protein intake on gastrointestinal function and outcomes should also be investigated in future work.
Core Tip: Few studies have investigated the effects of enteral underfeeding on gastrointestinal function in sepsis. Moreover, no consensus on goal enteral caloric intake has been reached in sepsis. In this study, we investigated the effects of different goal caloric requirements (30%, 60%, and 100%) of enteral nutrition on the gastrointestinal (including intestinal mucosal barrier) function in the acute phase of sepsis. We found that early moderate enteral underfeeding (60% of goal requirements) could improve the intestinal barrier function and nutritional and inflammatory status without increasing the incidence of feeding intolerance symptoms in sepsis.