Patel, Jayshil J

AbstractThe dual burden of undernutrition and overnutrition requires a greater understanding and commitment to physician training and specialization in nutrition support. Despite the significant healthcare need and existence of organizations focused on nutrition support such as the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN), physician involvement in the nutrition care of high‐risk patients remains low. In an ASPEN survey of members, inadequate training among physicians was reported along with significant barriers to involvement in nutrition support, such as insufficient protected time, reduced reimbursement and financial support, inadequate support from administrators or supervisors, as well as a nationwide reduction in number of nutrition support teams. These changes in the healthcare landscape prompted the ASPEN Physician Engagement Committee to develop a critical review focused on domains of nutrition risk assessment, enteral and parenteral access and support, scholarly activities, board certification, administrative responsibilities, education and training opportunities, coding, and reimbursement. The aim of this critical review is to capacitate physicians to engage in nutrition support and enhance their acumen in clinical nutrition to improve patient care and enrich personal and professional development.

Abstract The landmark NUTRIREA‐2 and NUTRIREA‐3 trials compared the route and dose of nutrition, respectively, in critically ill patients with circulatory shock. The results of both trials support a “less‐is‐more” paradigm shift in the early acute phase of critical illness. In this review, the authors outline and appraise the results of the NUTRIREA‐2 and NUTRIREA‐3 trials, introduce the concept of identifying the “sweet spot” for nutrition dose based on severity of illness/nutrition risk and nutrition dose, and identify the unintended consequences of delivering full‐dose nutrition in sicker critically ill patients during the early acute phase of critical illness.

AbstractThere is evidence that significant quality problems arise as patients transitions in care from one setting to another. Attention to nutrition during transitions of care is important to avoid complication. During the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition 2022 preconference course, nutrition during transition of care from pediatric to adult care, from the intensive care unit to the hospital floors and from the hospital to home was addressed.

AbstractBackgroundMalnutrition is underrecognized and underdiagnosed, despite high prevalence rates and associated poor clinical outcomes. The involvement of clinical nutrition experts, especially physicians, in the care of high‐risk patients with malnutrition remains low despite evidence demonstrating lower complication rates with nutrition support team (NST) management. To facilitate solutions, a survey was designed to elucidate the nature of NSTs and physician involvement and identify needs for novel nutrition support care models.MethodsThis survey assessed demographics of NSTs, factors contributing to the success of NSTs, elements of nutrition education, and other barriers to professional growth.ResultsOf 255 respondents, 235 complete surveys were analyzed. The geographic distribution of respondents correlated with population concentrations of the United States (r = 90.8%, p < .0001). Most responding physicians (46/57; 80.7%) reported being a member of NSTs, compared with 56.5% (88/156) of dietitians. Of those not practicing in NSTs (N = 81/235, 34.4%), 12.3% (10/81) reported an NST was previously present at their institution but had been disbanded. Regarding NSTs, financial concerns were common (115/235; 48.9%), followed by leadership (72/235; 30.6%), and healthcare professional (HCP) interest (55/235; 23.4%). A majority (173/235; 73.6%) of all respondents wanted additional training in nutrition but reported insufficient protected time, ability to travel, or support from administrators or other HCPs.ConclusionCore actions resulting from this survey focused on formalizing physician roles, increasing interdisciplinary nutrition support expertise, utilizing cost‐effective screening for malnutrition, and implementing intervention protocols. Additional actions included increasing funding for clinical practice, education, and research, all within an expanded portfolio of pragmatic nutrition support care models.

Abstract Advances in treatment of malignancy including novel pharmacologic therapies and surgical interventions has led to significant improvement in survival. As cancer becomes a chronic disease, nutrition interventions play an increasingly important role in short‐ and long‐term outcomes. The current manuscript presents a case of a 66‐year‐old male with new diagnosis of pancreatic cancer diagnosed incidentally in the setting of COVID‐19. Expert panelists in the field of nutrition discuss optimal strategies for diagnosis of malnutrition along with preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative optimization of nutrition. This discussion focuses on the use of probiotics, immune‐modulating nutrition, fish oil, specialized proresolving mediators, and use of enteral and parenteral nutrition support.

AbstractThe worldwide increase in the prevalence of obesity and adiposity‐related comorbidities has required a novel approach to cardiometabolic risk mitigation focused on the key mechanistic drivers of disease. The current manuscript presents the case of a 74‐year‐old male with obesity complicated by coronary artery disease, hypertriglyceridemia, hypertension, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, obstructive sleep apnea, and type 2 diabetes. Expert panelists discuss optimal diagnostic and treatment strategies focused on lifestyle modifications including dietary interventions such as the Mediterranean dietary pattern, medications that target multiple drivers of disease, as well as procedural options.

AbstractDespite a mounting evidentiary base, controversies surrounding critical care nutrition support persist. Anchored by a case of a 60‐year‐old male with esophageal cancer who develops acute hypoxemic respiratory failure and septic shock, five panelists from the American Society of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN) 2021 Pre‐Conference discuss key clinical dilemmas in critical care nutrition, including hierarchy of evidence, bedside evaluation of malnutrition, optimal protein dose, use of fiber, and therapies targeting gut function and gut microbiota .

Abstract The purpose of this scoping review by the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN) Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID‐19) Nutrition Task Force was to examine nutrition research applicable to the COVID‐19 pandemic. The rapid pace of emerging scientific information has prompted this activity to discover research/knowledge gaps. This methodology adhered with recommendations from the Joanna Briggs Institute. There were 2301 citations imported. Of these, there were 439 articles fully abstracted, with 23 main topic areas identified across 24 article types and sourced across 61 countries and 51 specialties in 8 settings and among 14 populations. Epidemiological/mechanistic relationships between nutrition and COVID‐19 were reviewed and results mapped to the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, and Time (PICO‐T) questions. The aggregated data were analyzed by clinical stage: pre–COVID‐19, acute COVID‐19, and chronic/post–COVID‐19. Research gaps were discovered for all PICO‐T questions. Nutrition topics meriting urgent research included food insecurity/societal infrastructure and transcultural factors (pre–COVID‐19); cardiometabolic‐based chronic disease, pediatrics, nutrition support, and hospital infrastructure (acute COVID‐19); registered dietitian nutritionist counseling (chronic/post–COVID‐19); and malnutrition and management (all stages). The paucity of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was particularly glaring. Knowledge gaps were discovered for PICO‐T questions on pediatrics, micronutrients, bariatric surgery, and transcultural factors (pre–COVID‐19); enteral nutrition, protein‐energy requirements, and glycemic control with nutrition (acute COVID‐19); and home enteral and parenteral nutrition support (chronic/post–COVID‐19). In conclusion, multiple critical areas for urgent nutrition research were identified, particularly using RCT design, to improve nutrition care for patients before, during, and after COVID‐19.

AbstractVasodilatory shock, as observed in postoperative states and sepsis, is hallmarked by low systemic vascular resistance and low blood pressure compensated by increased cardiac output. Gasotransmitters, such as nitric oxide and hydrogen sulfide, are implicated in the development and perpetuation of vasodilatory shock. Established therapies do not target these physiologic drivers of vasodilation. Due to their nontoxic and pleotropic effects, micronutrients are being used as rescue therapy in postoperative vasoplegia and septic shock. Here, we outline the pathophysiology of vasodilatory shock, describe the rationale for vitamin B12 (hydroxocobalamin) in vasodilatory shock, and identify literature evaluating its use in vasoplegic states.