Effect of Early Achievement of Energy Target by Different Nutritional Support Strategies on Nosocomial Infections in Patients Undergoing Major Abdominal Surgery: a Secondary Analysis of Two Randomized Clinical Trials.
Xuejin Gao,Li Zhang,Yupeng Zhang,Da Zhou,Tingting Gao,Yuxiu Liu,Gang Jin,Kunhua Wang,Yanbing Zhou,Qiang Chi,Hua Yang,Mengbin Li,Jianchun Yu,Huanlong Qin,Yun Tang,Xiaoting Wu,Guoli Li,Xinying Wang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/js9.0000000000000526
2023-01-01
International Journal of Surgery
Abstract:Background: The effect of early achievement of energy targets (EAETs) using different nutritional support strategies in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery is unclear. This study determined the impact of EAETs on the incidence of nosocomial infections in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery. Methods: This was a secondary analysis of two open-label randomized clinical trials. Patients from the general surgery department of 11 academic hospitals in China undergoing major abdominal surgery and at nutritional risk (Nutritional risk screening 2002 >= 3) were divided into two groups based on whether they met the 70% energy targets, the EAET (521 EAET and non-achievement of energy target (114 NAET) groups. The primary outcome was the incidence of nosocomial infections between postoperative day 3 and discharge, and the secondary outcomes were actual energy and protein intake, postoperative noninfectious complications, intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, and hospital stay. Results: Overall, 635 patients [mean (SD) age, 59.5 (11.3) years] were included. The EAET group received more mean energy between days 3 and 7 than the NAET group (22.75.0 vs. 15.1 +/- 4.8 kcal/kg/d; P<0.001). The EAET group had significantly fewer nosocomial infections than the NAET group [46/521(8.8%) vs. 21/114(18.4%); risk difference, 9.6%; 95% CI, 2.1-17.1%; P=0.004]. A significant difference was found in the mean (SD) number of noninfectious complications between the EAET and NAET groups [121/521(23.2%) vs. 38/114(33.3%); risk difference, 10.1%; 95% CI, 0.7-19.5%; P=0.024]. The nutritional status of the EAET group was significantly improved at discharge compared with the NAET group (P<0.001), and other indicators were comparable between groups. Conclusion: EAETs was associated with fewer nosocomial infections and improved clinical outcomes, regardless of the nutritional support strategy (early enteral nutrition alone or combined with early supplemental parenteral nutrition).