4.7 Review

Metabolic and nutritional support of critically ill patients: consensus and controversies

期刊

CRITICAL CARE
卷 19, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s13054-015-0737-8

关键词

-

资金

  1. Fresenius (Bad Homburg, Germany)
  2. Nestle (Vevey, Switzerland)
  3. Aguettant (Lyon, France)
  4. Baxter (Deerfield, IL, USA)
  5. B. Braun (Melsungen, Germany)
  6. Nutricia (Amsterdam, The Netherlands)
  7. Abbott (North Chicago, IL, USA)
  8. Baxter
  9. Danone (Paris, France)
  10. Fresenius
  11. Nestle
  12. Nutricia
  13. Abbott
  14. Fresenius Kabi
  15. B Braun, Cosmed (Rome, Italy)
  16. Novartis
  17. Nutricia-Numico
  18. Pfizer (New York, NY, USA)
  19. Solvay (Brussels, Belgium)
  20. Danone
  21. Grifols (Barcelona, Spain)
  22. GlaxoSmithKline (Brentford, UK)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The results of recent large-scale clinical trials have led us to review our understanding of the metabolic response to stress and the most appropriate means of managing nutrition in critically ill patients. This review presents an update in this field, identifying and discussing a number of areas for which consensus has been reached and others where controversy remains and presenting areas for future research. We discuss optimal calorie and protein intake, the incidence and management of re-feeding syndrome, the role of gastric residual volume monitoring, the place of supplemental parenteral nutrition when enteral feeding is deemed insufficient, the role of indirect calorimetry, and potential indications for several pharmaconutrients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据