Enteral Nutrition

BackgroundNutritional support is crucial in critically ill patients to enhance recovery, reduce infections, and improve outcomes. This meta-analysis compared early enteral nutrition (EEN) and early parenteral nutrition (EPN) to evaluate their efficacy in adult critically ill patients.MethodsA systematic review of 14 studies involving 7618 patients was conducted, including randomized controlled trials, prospective cohorts, and retrospective analyses. The primary outcomes were mortality and infectious complications, while secondary outcomes included intensive care unit length of stay (ICU-LOS), hospital length of stay (H-LOS), mechanical ventilation days, and gastrointestinal (GI) complications.ResultsThe results showed no significant difference in mortality between EEN and EPN (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.93-1.14). EEN reduced bloodstream infections (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.57-0.93), ICU-LOS (MD -0.18 days, 95% CI -0.33 to -0.04), and H-LOS (MD -1.15 days, 95% CI -1.38 to -0.93). However, EEN was associated with higher GI complications, such as vomiting and diarrhea (OR 2.25, 95% CI 1.97-2.58), while mechanical ventilation days showed no significant difference.ConclusionsThese findings support prioritizing EEN in critically ill patients with functional gastrointestinal systems to improve infection control and recovery while emphasizing the importance of careful monitoring to mitigate gastrointestinal complications.

BackgroundNutritional management has become an integral part of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) care, with growing evidence supporting specific dietary interventions alongside pharmacologic therapy. However, clinical guidance remains fragmented due to heterogeneous study designs and variable endpoints.ObjectivesThis review critically examines the current evidence on dietary strategies and oral nutritional supplementation (ONS) in both Crohn's Disease (CD) and Ulcerative Colitis (UC), highlighting their clinical applications, mechanisms of action, and limitations.MethodsA comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases, analyzing studies on various dietary approaches and ONS in IBD.ResultsExclusive Enteral Nutrition (EEN) is a first-line therapy in pediatric CD, while partial enteral nutrition (PEN) and the Crohn's Disease Exclusion Diet (CDED) show promising efficacy and better adherence in both children and adults. Whole-food-based interventions, including the Mediterranean Diet, Specific Carbohydrate Diet, plant-based diets, and emerging strategies such as CD-TREAT and the Tasty & Healthy diet, have demonstrated varying levels of benefit in disease maintenance and symptom control. Targeted exclusion diets-such as low-FODMAP, low-emulsifier, and low-sulfur diets-may relieve functional symptoms and influence inflammatory activity, although evidence remains preliminary. ONS plays a pivotal role in addressing malnutrition and improving outcomes in perioperative and hospitalized patients.ConclusionsDietary interventions and ONS represent valuable therapeutic tools in IBD management. Future research should prioritize standardized, well-powered clinical trials and personalized nutritional approaches to better define their role within integrated care pathways.

Purpose of reviewGastrointestinal (GI) dysfunction significantly impacts patient outcomes in septic shock, complicating clinical management due to its central role in systemic inflammation, barrier integrity, and nutrient assimilation. This review summarizes the evolving understanding of GI dysfunction during septic shock and provides an updated framework for clinical management.Recent findingsNew insights from recent studies focus on individualized nutritional strategies over standardized calorie-driven targets, highlighting risks associated with aggressive enteral nutrition, such as exacerbation of gut ischemia and bowel distension, and microbial dysbiosis. Maintaining splanchnic perfusion, monitoring GI dysfunction with standardized tools, and advancing nutritional support progressively based on patient-specific gastrointestinal tolerance are current strategies. Novel adjunctive therapies targeting gut permeability and microbiome restoration have been proposed, yet robust clinical data remain limited.SummaryClinical management should prioritize hemodynamic stabilization and organ support rather than immediately targeting any nutritional goals. Monitoring GI function systematically and tailoring nutritional interventions may prevent complications and support recovery. Future research should validate monitoring tools, refine individual patient assessment, and evaluate novel therapeutic interventions to improve patient-centered outcomes in septic shock.

BackgroundHead and neck cancer represents the seventh most common cancer diagnosis globally. Maintaining sufficient nutrition is important for preventing malnutrition (undernutrition) and muscle wasting, which contribute to worse outcomes, although many patients are unable to maintain adequate oral intake throughout treatment. This guideline provides practice guidance on nutrition care for patients with head and neck cancer.MethodsAn interdisciplinary team developed key questions and scanned results from a systematic search of the PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Central databases back to 2001. Recommendations were created for key questions concerning timing and duration of nutrition support (early vs delayed enteral nutrition [EN], postoperative feeding, and perioperative dietitian intervention), frequency of dietitian and speech pathology consultations, nutrition screening and assessment, macronutrient requirements, enteral access devices, adjunctive strategies (appetite stimulants and continuation of oral intake alongside EN), specialized nutrients (arginine, glutamine, ω-3, and immunonutrition), and interdisciplinary care.ResultsNinety-two studies were included. Recommendations were made supporting early initiation of EN when oral intake is inadequate, nutrition within 24 h after surgery, weekly consultation with a dietitian during radiotherapy, malnutrition screening and assessment with validated tools, interdisciplinary models of care, dietitian involvement before and after surgery, and when to consider use of specialized nutrients. Recommendations are also provided for protein intake (1.2-1.5 g/kg/day) and energy intake (≥30 kcal/kg/day).ConclusionThis guideline provides guidance for the nutrition care of patients with head and neck cancer, identifies research gaps, and calls for standardized outcome reporting to further the state of the evidence. This paper was approved by the ASPEN Board of Directors.