Parenteral nutrition in the intensive care unit: cautious use improves outcome.

Critical illness is characterised by nutritional and metabolic disorders, resulting in increased muscle catabolism, fat-free mass loss, and hyperglycaemia. The objective of the nutritional support is to limit fat-free mass loss, which has negative consequences on clinical outcome and recovery. Early enteral nutrition is recommended by current guidelines as the first choice feeding route in ICU patients. However, enteral nutrition alone is frequently associated with insufficient coverage of the energy requirements, and subsequently energy deficit is correlated to worsened clinical outcome. Controlled trials have demonstrated that, in case of failure or contraindications to full enteral nutrition, parenteral nutrition administration on top of insufficient enteral nutrition within the first four days after admission could improve the clinical outcome, and may attenuate fat-free mass loss. Parenteral nutrition is cautious if all-in-one solutions are used, glycaemia controlled, and overnutrition avoided. Conversely, the systematic use of parenteral nutrition in the ICU patients without clear indication is not recommended during the first 48 hours. Specific methods, such as thigh ultra-sound imaging, 3rd lumbar vertebra-targeted computerised tomography and bioimpedance electrical analysis, may be helpful in the future to monitor fat-free mass during the ICU stay. Clinical studies are warranted to demonstrate whether an optimal nutritional management during the ICU stay promotes muscle mass and function, the recovery after critical illness and reduces the overall costs.

Alcohol drinking, the metabolic syndrome and diabetes in a population with high mean alcohol consumption.

AIMS: To investigate the relationship of alcohol consumption with the metabolic syndrome and diabetes in a population-based study with high mean alcohol consumption. Few data exist on these conditions in high-risk drinkers. METHODS: In 6172 adults aged 35-75 years, alcohol consumption was categorized as 0, 1-6, 7-13, 14-20, 21-27, 28-34 and ≥ 35 drinks/week or as non-drinkers (0), low-risk (1-13), medium-to-high-risk (14-34) and very-high-risk (≥ 35) drinkers. Alcohol consumption was objectively confirmed by biochemical tests. In multivariate analysis, we assessed the relationship of alcohol consumption with adjusted prevalence of the metabolic syndrome, diabetes and insulin resistance, determined with the homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR). RESULTS: Seventy-three per cent of participants consumed alcohol, 16% were medium-to-high-risk drinkers and 2% very-high-risk drinkers. In multivariate analysis, the prevalence of the metabolic syndrome, diabetes and mean HOMA-IR decreased with low-risk drinking and increased with high-risk drinking. Adjusted prevalence of the metabolic syndrome was 24% in non-drinkers, 19% in low-risk (P<0.001 vs. non-drinkers), 20% in medium-to-high-risk and 29% in very-high-risk drinkers (P=0.005 vs. low-risk). Adjusted prevalence of diabetes was 6.0% in non-drinkers, 3.6% in low-risk (P<0.001 vs. non-drinkers), 3.8% in medium-to-high-risk and 6.7% in very-high-risk drinkers (P=0.046 vs. low-risk). Adjusted HOMA-IR was 2.47 in non-drinkers, 2.14 in low-risk (P<0.001 vs. non-drinkers), 2.27 in medium-to-high-risk and 2.53 in very-high-risk drinkers (P=0.04 vs. low-risk). These relationships did not differ according to beverage types. CONCLUSIONS: Alcohol has a U-shaped relationship with the metabolic syndrome, diabetes and HOMA-IR, without differences between beverage types.