• Fengchan Xi, Ning Li, Yanxia Geng, Tao Gao, Juanjuan Zhang, Tanshan Jun, Zhiliang Lin, Weiqin Li, Weiming Zhu, Wenkui Yu, and Jieshou Li.
• Hepato Gastroenterol. 2014 May 1; 61 (131): 606-12.

AbstractAlthough different studies suggest that early enteral nutrition (EEN) has benefits in reducing infectious complications, there is no data that addresses whether delayed enteral nutrition (EN) is detrimental and if it may have effects on inflammatory responses and immune function. Forty-five critically ill patients with long fasting were randomly allocated in two groups according to the type of nutritional support. The first group included patients assuming a standard enteral nutrition (EN, n = 22) and the second group assuming a parenteral nutrition (PN, n = 23). The daily nutritional amount was 25 kcal (105 kJ)/kg for all patients. The inflammatory markers white blood cells (WBC), C-reactive protein (CRP), TNF-α, IL-1-β, IL-6, IL-4, IL- 10 and the immune T-lymphocyte sub-populations CD3+, CD4+, CD8+, and HLA-DR+ were evaluated at day 1, and after 2, 3 and 7 days. IL-4, IL-10, CD3+, CD4+, CD8+ and the CD4+/CD8+ ratio were not statistically different between the two groups. WBC and TNF-α in EN patients were higher than those in PN after 3 and 7 days (P < 0.05). CRP and IL-6 levels were higher in EN patients than those assuming a PN after 2 and 3 days (P < 0.05). HLA-DR levels in patients assuming an EN were found higher than those in PN at day 7 (P < 0.05). Delayed EN for critically ill patients with long-term fasting increased systemic inflammatory responses, whereas EN could modify immune function, therefore reducing hospital stay and costs.

33 keywords...

hide…