Enteral vs. parenteral nutrition for the critically ill patient: a combined support should be preferred

Purpose of review Current recommendations suggest starting enteral feeding as soon as possible whenever the gastrointestinal tract is functioning. The disadvantage of enteral support is that insufficient energy and protein coverage can occur. This review focuses on some recent findings regarding the nutritional support of critically ill patients and evaluates the data presented. Recent findings An increasing nutritional deficit during a long ICU stay is associated with increased morbidity (infection rate, wound healing, mechanical ventilation, length of stay, duration of recovery), and costs. Evidence shows that enteral nutrition can result in underfeeding and that nutritional goals are frequently reached only after 1 week. Contrary to former beliefs, recent meta-analyses of ICU studies showed that parenteral nutrition is not related to a surplus mortality and may even be associated with improved survival. Summary Early enteral nutrition is recommended for critically ill patients. Supplemental parenteral nutrition combined with enteral nutrition can be considered to cover the energy and protein targets when enteral nutrition alone fails to achieve the caloric goal. Whether such a combined nutritional support provides additional benefit on the overall outcome has to be proven in further studies on clinical outcome, including physical and cognitive functioning, quality of life, cost-effectiveness, and cost-utility.