Smith, Kathryn

Background: Enteral phosphate replacement offers multiple advantages over intravenous phosphate replacement, but optimal dosing and administration are unclear. Objective: This study aimed to compare 2 different dosing strategies (PRE vs POST) of enteral phosphate replacement for mild hypophosphatemia (serum phosphorus = 2.1-2.5 mg/dL) and to evaluate our dosing strategy for moderate hypophosphatemia (serum phosphorus = 1.5-2 mg/dL) in critically ill patients. Methods: This single-center quasiexperimental, institutional review board–approved study was conducted in adult patients admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) who received enteral phosphate replacement with a follow-up serum phosphorus level obtained within 24 hours of replacement. Patients were excluded if they had diabetic ketoacidosis, acute kidney injury, or received total parenteral nutrition or targeted temperature management. The mild PRE and POST groups received 48 and 72 mmol of enteral phosphate, respectively. The moderate group received 72 mmol of enteral phosphate. Effectiveness outcomes included normalization of serum phosphorus, defined as 2.6 to 4.5 mg/dL, and median change in phosphorus concentration. Safety outcomes included the incidence of new onset diarrhea and hyperphosphatemia (serum phosphorus >4.5 mg/dL) within 24 hours after phosphate replacement. Results: Of the 138 patients included, the median age was 59 (44-70) years and 69.6% were admitted to the surgical trauma ICU. Normalization of serum phosphorus occurred in 55 (58.2%) patients in mild PRE and 44 (72.7%) patients in mild POST ( P = 0.13). Change in serum phosphorus was 0.4 (0.1-0.9) mg/dL in mild PRE vs 0.7 (0.3-1.2) mg/dL in mild POST ( P = 0.06). Normalization occurred in 39 (66.7%) patients in the moderate group with a change in serum phosphorus of 1.0 (0.6-1.6) mg/dL. Rates of new onset diarrhea and hyperphosphatemia were not significantly different between groups. Conclusion and Relevance: Enteral phosphate replacement appears safe and effective in critically ill patients with mild-to-moderate hypophosphatemia and may serve as an alternative to intravenous phosphate.

Study ObjectiveHigh‐dose intravenous vitamin C is a potential treatment option for patients with sepsis and may interfere with point‐of‐care (POC) blood glucose (BG) testing. This study aimed to determine if vitamin C dosing used for sepsis affected POC BG level results.DesignProspective observational pilot study.SettingIntensive care unit in a large academic tertiary care medical center.PatientsFive consecutive critically ill adults hospitalized between April 1 and June 1, 2017, who received two or more doses of intravenous vitamin C 1500 mg for the treatment of sepsis and had at least two paired POC BG levels and laboratory venous BG levels measured within 1 hour of each other during vitamin C therapy.Measurements and Main ResultsThe performance of POC BG level measurement was compared with the reference method of laboratory BG level measurement. The concordance to minimum accuracy criteria for BG meters set forth by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 15197:2013, the measurement of agreement between POC BG level and laboratory BG level using the Bland‐Altman method, and the clinical accuracy through Parkes error grid analysis were assessed. A total of 16 paired POC and laboratory BG level measurements from the five patients were included. The accuracy of POC BG with laboratory BG level measurements during vitamin C administration according to ISO 15197:2013 criteria was 81.3%, which did not meet the minimum accuracy criteria of 95%. The Bland‐Altman analysis showed a mean difference between POC and laboratory BG levels of 8.9 mg/dl, and the Parkes error grid analysis showed that the differences between POC and laboratory BG level measurements would not have resulted in a change in clinical action.ConclusionThe accuracy and agreement of POC and laboratory BG level measurements in critically ill patients receiving vitamin C were consistent with previously published reports in critically ill patients not receiving vitamin C and did not demonstrate clinically significant interference due to vitamin C dosing for sepsis.