Early use of supplemental parenteral nutrition in critically ill patients: Results of an international multicenter observational study*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of using supplemental parenteral nutrition compared to early enteral nutrition alone on nutritional and clinical outcomes. DESIGN: A multicenter, observational study. SETTING: Two hundred twenty-six intensive care units from 29 Countries. PATIENTS: Mechanically ventilated critically ill adult patients that remained in the intensive care unit for >72 hrs and received early enteral nutrition within 48 hrs from admission. INTERVENTIONS: Data were collected on patient characteristics and daily nutrition practices for up to 12 days. Patient outcomes were recorded after 60 days. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We compared the outcomes of patients who received early enteral nutrition alone, early enteral nutrition + early parenteral nutrition, and early enteral nutrition + late parenteral nutrition (after 48 hrs of admission). Cox regression analyses were conducted to determine the effect of feeding strategy, adjusted for other confounding variables, on time to being discharged alive from hospital. A total of 2,920 patients were included in this study; 2562 (87.7%) in the early enteral nutrition group, 188 (6.4%) in the early parenteral nutrition group, and 170 (5.8%) in the late parenteral nutrition group. Adequacy of calories and protein was highest in the early parenteral nutrition group (81.2% and 80.1%, respectively) and lowest in the early enteral nutrition group (63.4% and 59.3%) (p < .0001). The 60-day mortality rate was 27.8% in the early enteral nutrition group, 34.6% in the early parenteral nutrition group, and 35.3% in the late parenteral nutrition group (p = .02). The rate of patients discharged alive from hospital was slower in the group that received early parenteral nutrition (unadjusted hazard ratio 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.59-0.96) and late parenteral nutrition (hazard ratio 0.64, 95% confidence interval 0.51-0.81) (p = .0003) compared to early enteral nutrition. These findings persisted after adjusting for known confounders. CONCLUSIONS: The supplemental use of parenteral nutrition may improve provision of calories and protein but is not associated with any clinical benefit.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".