These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [A prospective randomized controlled study on the curative effects of enteral immunonutrition support therapy in adult burn patients at nutritional risk].
    Author: Lou JQ, Li Q, Cui QW, Zhang P, Sun H, Tang H, Zhuang MM, Sun Y.
    Journal: Zhonghua Shao Shang Yu Chuang Mian Xiu Fu Za Zhi; 2022 Aug 20; 38(8):722-734. PubMed ID: 36058695.
    Abstract:
    Objective: To explore the effects of enteral immunonutrition support therapy on nutritional metabolism, immune function, and inflammatory response in adult burn patients at nutritional risk as assessed by the modified 2nd nutrition risk screening (NRS) 2002. Methods: A prospective randomized controlled study was conducted. From December 2019 to January 2022, 500 adult patients who were admitted to the Affiliated Huaihai Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University and had nutritional risk assessed by the modified 2nd NRS 2002 were recruited into the study. According to burn severity, the patients were divided into common burn patients (n=450) and severe burn patients (n=50). According to the random number table, the patients with common burn were divided into common burn diet nutrition group and common burn diet enteral immunonutrition group, with 225 patients in each group, and the patients with severe burn were divided into severe burn diet enteral non-immunonutrition group and severe burn diet enteral immunonutrition group, with 25 patients in each group. The patients in each group were given the corresponding nutritional support therapies on the basis of routine burn treatment. On post injury day (PID) 1, 3, 7, 14, and 21, the total energy intake and total protein intake of the patients in 4 groups were recorded, the plasma prealbumin, albumin, transferrin, serum immunoglobulin A (IgA), IgG, IgM, peripheral blood CD3 positive T cell percentage, CD4 positive T cell count, CD8 positive T cell count, the ratio of CD4 positive T cells to CD8 positive T cells, natural killer cell percentage, plasma interleukin-6 (IL-6), free mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) copy number, and soluble triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells-1 (sTREM-1) of the patients in 4 groups were detected, and the nitrogen balance of the patients in 4 groups on the day was calculated. On PID 7, 14, and 21, the modified 2nd NRS 2002 scores of the patients in 4 groups were reassessed. The sepsis incidence during treatment and the length of hospital stay of the patients in 4 groups and the length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay of the patients in the 2 severe burn groups were recorded. Data were statistically analyzed with chi-square test, Fisher's exact probability test, Mann-Whitney U test, independent sample t test, analysis of variance for repeated measurement, and Bonferroni correction. Results: A total of 476 patients completed the trial, with 213 patients in common burn diet nutrition group (112 males and 101 females, aged (37±19) years), 218 patients in common burn diet enteral immunonutrition group (115 males and 103 females, aged (42±16) years), 22 patients in severe burn diet enteral non-immunonutrition group (11 males and 11 females, aged (35±8) years), and 23 patients in severe burn diet enteral immunonutrition group (12 males and 11 females, aged (35±8) years). Compared with those in common burn diet nutrition group, the patients in common burn diet enteral immunonutrition group had significantly higher total energy intake on PID 1 (t=6.06, P<0.01), significantly lower total energy intake on PID 7 and significantly lower total protein intake on PID 1 (with t values of 6.17 and 4.59, respectively,P<0.01). On PID 21, the total energy intake of patients in severe burn diet enteral immunonutrition group was significantly lower than that in severe burn diet enteral non-immunonutrition group (t=2.70, P<0.01). The total protein intake of patients in severe burn diet enteral immunonutrition group and severe burn diet enteral non-immunonutrition group were similar at each time point post injury (P>0.05). Compared with those in common burn diet nutrition group, the patients in common burn diet enteral immunonutrition group had significantly higher level of prealbumin on PID 3, 7, 14, and 21 (with t values of 2.05, 2.33, 2.45, and 2.11, respectively, P<0.05), significantly higher level of albumin on PID 7, 14, and 21 (with t values of 2.30, 2.56, and 2.15, respectively, P<0.05), significantly higher level of transferrin on PID 7 and 14 (with t values of 1.99 and 2.27, respectively, P<0.05), significantly higher nitrogen balance on PID 14 and 21 (with t values of 2.51 and 2.07, respectively, P<0.05), and significantly lower modified 2nd NRS 2002 score on PID 21 (t=1.99, P<0.05). Compared with those in severe burn diet enteral non-immunonutrition group, the patients in severe burn diet enteral immunonutrition group had significantly higher level of prealbumin on PID 3, 7, 14, and 21 (with t values of 2.50, 2.64, 2.18, and 2.39, respectively, P<0.05), significantly higher level of albumin​on PID 7, 14, and 21 (with t values of 2.27, 2.39, and 2.69, respectively, P<0.05), significantly higher level of transferrin and nitrogen balance but significantly lower modified 2nd NRS 2002 score on PID 14 and 21 (with t values of 2.30, 2.35, 2.41, 2.16, 2.31, and 2.73, respectively, P<0.05). Compared with those in common burn diet nutrition group, patients in common burn diet enteral immunonutrition group had significantly higher level of IgA and IgG on PID 7, 14, and 21 (with t values of 2.19, 2.36, 2.17, 2.49, 1.97, and 2.24, respectively, P<0.05), significantly higher level of IgM on PID 21 (t=2.06, P<0.05), significantly higher percentage of CD3 positive T cells and ratio of CD4 positive T cells to CD8 positive T cells on PID 3, 7, 14, and 21 (with t values of 2.49, 2.25, 2.33, 2.41, 2.39, 2.24, 2.46, and 2.18, respectively, P<0.05), significantly higher CD4 positive T cell count (with t values of 2.15 and 2.27, respectively, P<0.05) but significantly lower CD8 positive T cell count on PID 14 and 21 (with t values of 2.58 and 2.35, P<0.05), and significantly higher percentage of natural killer cells on PID 7, 14, and 21 (with t values of 2.53, 2.21, and 2.36, respectively, P<0.05). Compared with those in severe burn diet enteral non-immunonutrition group, patients in severe burn diet immunonutrition group had significantly higher level of IgA on PID 7 and 14 (with t values of 2.15 and 2.03, respectively, P<0.05), significantly higher level of IgG on PID 7, 14, and 21 (with t values of 2.09, 2.56, and 2.15, respectively, P<0.05), significantly higher level of IgM on PID 21 (t=2.08, P<0.05), significantly higher percentage of CD3 positive T cells, CD4 positive T cell count, and percentage of natural killer cells on PID 14 and 21 (with t values of 2.52, 2.14, 2.14, 2.39, 2.56, and 2.19, respectively, P<0.05), significantly lower CD8 positive T cell count but significantly higher ratio of CD4 positive T cells to CD8 positive T cells on PID 7, 14, and 21 (with t values of 2.27, 2.81, 2.01, 2.11, 2.69, and 2.05, respectively, P<0.05). Compared with those in common burn diet nutrition group, patients in common burn diet enteral immunonutrition group had significantly lower level of IL-6 (with t values of 2.34 and 2.32, respectively, P<0.05) and significantly lower free mtDNA copy number on PID 14 and 21 (with Z values of -2.28 and -2.34,respectively, P<0.05), significantly lower level of sTREM-1 on PID 7, 14, and 21 (with t values of 2.02, 2.94, and 3.72, respectively, P<0.05). Compared with those in severe burn diet enteral non-immunonutrition group, patients in severe burn diet enteral immunonutrition group had significantly lower level of IL-6 and sTREM-1 on PID 7, 14, and 21 (with t values of 2.15, 2.29, 2.47, 2.43, 2.07, and 2.32, respectively, P<0.05), and significantly lower free mtDNA copy number on PID 14 and 21 (with Z values of -2.49 and -2.21, respectively, P<0.05). During treatment, the sepsis incidences of patients in 2 common burn groups were similar (P>0.05), the sepsis incidences of patients in 2 severe burn groups were similar (P>0.05). The length of ICU stay of patients in severe burn diet enteral immunonutrition group was (11±3) d, which was significantly shorter than (14±3) d in severe burn diet enteral non-immunonutrition group (t=3.12, P<0.01). The length of hospital stay of patients in common burn diet enteral immunonutrition group was significantly shorter than that in common burn diet nutrition group (t=3.11, P<0.01). The length of hospital stay of patients in severe burn diet enteral non-immunonutrition group was similar to that in severe burn diet enteral immunonutrition group (P>0.05). Conclusions: Enteral immunonutrition support therapy for adult burn patients at nutritional risk assessed by the modified 2nd NRS 2002 can better improve the nutritional status and the immune function of patients, reduce inflammatory response of the body, and shorten the length of hospital stay in common burn patients and the length of ICU stay in severe burn patients. 目的： 探讨应用肠内免疫营养支持治疗对二次改良营养风险筛查（NRS）2002评定结果为具有营养风险的成年烧伤患者的营养代谢、免疫功能和炎症反应的影响。 方法： 采用前瞻性随机对照研究方法。将2019年12月—2022年1月，于徐州医科大学附属淮海医院住院的500例经二次改良NRS 2002筛选为具有营养风险的成年烧伤患者纳入研究，按烧伤严重程度分为一般烧伤患者（450例）与严重烧伤患者（50例），按随机数字表法将一般烧伤患者分为一般烧伤膳食营养组和一般烧伤膳食+肠内免疫营养组，每组225例；将严重烧伤患者分为严重烧伤膳食+肠内非免疫营养组与严重烧伤膳食+肠内免疫营养组，每组25例。各组患者在常规烧伤救治基础上分别采用相应的营养支持治疗。伤后1、3、7、14、21 d，记录4组患者摄入总能量及总蛋白质摄入量；检测4组患者血浆前白蛋白、白蛋白、转铁蛋白，血清免疫球蛋白A（IgA）、IgG、IgM，外周血CD3阳性T细胞比例、CD4阳性T细胞计数、CD8阳性T细胞计数、CD4阳性T细胞与CD8阳性T细胞的比值、自然杀伤细胞比例，血浆白细胞介素6（IL-6）、游离线粒体DNA（mtDNA）拷贝数、可溶性髓系细胞触发受体1（sTREM-1）；计算4组患者当日氮平衡。于伤后7、14、21 d，重新对4组患者行二次改良NRS 2002评分。记录4组患者治疗期间脓毒症发生率及住院时间，严重烧伤2组患者住重症监护病房（ICU）时间。对数据行χ2检验、Fisher确切概率法检验、Mann-Whitney U检验、独立样本t检验、重复测量方差分析、Bonferroni校正。 结果： 476例患者顺利完成试验，其中一般烧伤膳食营养组213例［男112例、女101例，年龄（37±19）岁］、一般烧伤膳食+肠内免疫营养组218例［男115例、女103例，年龄（42±16）岁］、严重烧伤膳食+肠内非免疫营养组22例［男女各11例、年龄（35±8）岁］、严重烧伤膳食+肠内免疫营养组23例［男12例、女11例，年龄（35±8）岁］。与一般烧伤膳食营养组相比，一般烧伤膳食+肠内免疫营养组患者伤后1 d摄入总能量明显更高（t=6.06，P<0.01），伤后7 d摄入总能量、伤后1 d总蛋白质摄入量均明显更低（t值分别为6.17、4.59，P<0.01）。严重烧伤膳食+肠内免疫营养组患者伤后21 d摄入总能量明显低于严重烧伤膳食+肠内非免疫营养组（t=2.70，P<0.01）。严重烧伤2组患者伤后各时间点总蛋白质摄入量均相近（P>0.05）。与一般烧伤膳食营养组相比，一般烧伤膳食+肠内免疫营养组患者伤后3、7、14、21 d前白蛋白均明显更高（t值分别为2.05、2.33、2.45、2.11，P<0.05），伤后7、14、21 d白蛋白均明显更高（t值分别为2.30、2.56、2.15，P<0.05），伤后7、14 d转铁蛋白均明显更高（t值分别为1.99、2.27，P<0.05），伤后14、21 d氮平衡均明显更高（t值分别为2.51、2.07，P<0.05），伤后21 d二次改良NRS 2002评分明显更低（t=1.99，P<0.05）。与严重烧伤膳食+肠内非免疫营养组相比，严重烧伤膳食+肠内免疫营养组患者伤后3、7、14、21 d 前白蛋白均明显更高（t值分别为2.50、2.64、2.18、2.39，P<0.05），伤后7、14、21 d白蛋白均明显更高（t值分别为2.27、2.39、2.69，P<0.05），伤后14、21 d转铁蛋白和氮平衡均明显更高而二次改良NRS 2002评分均明显更低（t值分别为2.30、2.35，2.41、2.16，2.31、2.73，P<0.05）。与一般烧伤膳食营养组相比，一般烧伤膳食+肠内免疫营养组患者伤后7、14、21 d IgA、IgG均明显更高（t值分别为2.19、2.36、2.17，2.49、1.97、2.24，P<0.05），伤后21 d IgM明显更高（t=2.06，P<0.05），伤后3、7、14、21 d CD3阳性T细胞比例、CD4阳性T细胞与CD8阳性T细胞的比值均明显更高（t值分别为2.49、2.25、2.33、2.41，2.39、2.24、2.46、2.18，P<0.05），伤后14、21 d CD4阳性T细胞计数均明显更高（t值分别为2.15、2.27，P<0.05）而CD8阳性T细胞计数均明显更低（t值分别为2.58、2.35，P<0.05），伤后7、14、21 d自然杀伤细胞比例均明显更高（t值分别为2.53、2.21、2.36，P<0.05）。与严重烧伤膳食+肠内非免疫营养组相比，严重烧伤膳食+肠内免疫营养组患者伤后7、14 d IgA均明显更高（t值分别为2.15、2.03，P<0.05），伤后7、14、21 d IgG均明显更高（t值分别为2.09、2.56、2.15，P<0.05），伤后21 d IgM明显更高（t=2.08，P<0.05），伤后14、21 d CD3阳性T细胞比例、CD4阳性T细胞计数和自然杀伤细胞比例均明显更高（t值分别为2.52、2.14，2.14、2.39，2.56、2.19，P<0.05），伤后7、14、21 d CD8阳性T细胞计数均明显更低而CD4阳性T细胞与CD8阳性T细胞的比值均明显更高（t值分别为2.27、2.81、2.01，2.11、2.69、2.05，P<0.05）。与一般烧伤膳食营养组相比，一般烧伤膳食+肠内免疫营养组患者伤后14、21 d IL-6（t值分别为2.34、2.32，P<0.05）、游离mtDNA拷贝数均明显更低（Z值分别为-2.28、-2.34，P<0.05），伤后7、14、21 d sTREM-1均明显更低（t值分别为2.02、2.94、3.72，P<0.05）。与严重烧伤膳食+肠内非免疫营养组相比，严重烧伤膳食+肠内免疫营养组患者伤后7、14、21 d IL-6和sTREM-1均明显更低（t值分别为2.15、2.29、2.47，2.43、2.07、2.32，P<0.05），伤后14、21 d游离mtDNA拷贝数均明显更低（Z值分别为-2.49、-2.21，P<0.05）。治疗期间，一般烧伤2组患者脓毒症发生率相近（P>0.05），严重烧伤2组患者脓毒症发生率相近（P>0.05）。严重烧伤膳食+肠内免疫营养组患者住ICU时间为（11±3）d，明显短于严重烧伤膳食+肠内非免疫营养组的（14±3）d（t=3.12，P<0.01）。一般烧伤膳食+肠内免疫营养组患者住院时间明显短于一般烧伤膳食营养组（t=3.11，P<0.01），严重烧伤2组患者住院时间相近（P>0.05）。 结论： 对二次改良NRS 2002评定为具有营养风险的成年烧伤患者应用肠内免疫营养支持治疗可以更好地改善患者的营养状况和免疫功能，降低机体炎症反应，缩短一般烧伤患者住院时间和严重烧伤患者住ICU时间。.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]