Gen Surg Vivas · surgical-critical-care
ICU nutrition in the shocked, starved surgical patient — dose, route, protein, refeeding and glucose
Fellowship viva on surgical ICU nutrition: EDEN and PermiT dosing, EPaNIC timing, NUTRIREA-2 shock gut, EFFORT protein harm in AKI, REDOXS versus GI-cancer immunonutrition, refeeding restriction and NICE-SUGAR targets.
On this page
Study tools
Target exams
Write your answer
Saved on this device. No marking — you are the marker.
Examiner probes
- Day-two post-laparotomy, fluid-resuscitated but still on low-dose noradrenaline with a distended abdomen. Start full enteral feeds, trophic feeds, or parenteral nutrition — and defend the dose with the trials?[1][3][6]
- Vasopressors escalate overnight with rising lactate and no stool. Force the enteral rate up or switch strategy — what does the shock-gut evidence say?[11]
- He develops oliguric kidney injury. What protein dose — and what happens if you prescribe 2.2 g per kg per day?[13][14]
- Glutamine and antioxidant supplements are suggested for his multiorgan failure, and immunonutrition was mentioned for his upcoming GI-cancer resection. Separate the two answers.[16][18]
- He was starved 8 days pre-operatively and his phosphate falls after feeds start. Restrict or push through — with what numbers?[21][9]
- Glucose runs 12 to 15 on steroids and sepsis. Target 81 to 108 or 180 or less — and what convinced the world to switch?[25]
Model responses
1. Trophic enteral early, no early PN — the deficit is tolerated physiology. EDEN: 1000 patients, 400 versus 1300 kcal for 6 days — vent-free days and death tied, intolerance worse on full.[1] PermiT: 894 patients, 46 versus 71 percent of requirements with equal protein — 90-day death tied with no tolerance or infection difference.[3] EPaNIC: 2312 versus 2328 — PN within 48 hours versus day 8, and day 8 won on speed, infections, cholestasis, ventilation and renal days.[6] Start EN low-volume now, advance on tolerance and perfusion, and hold PN unless EN fails toward day 8.
2. Stop forcing — shock gut ischaemiates. NUTRIREA-2 randomised 2410 ventilated shock patients to isocaloric EN versus PN: death and infections equal, but enteral raised vomiting, diarrhoea, bowel ischaemia 19 versus 5 cases, and pseudo-obstruction.[11] Bridge with PN while vasopressors escalate, examine and image the distended abdomen rather than prokineting through ischaemia, and re-attempt EN as shock resolves.
3. Usual-dose protein — high dose harms AKI. EFFORT: 2.2-plus versus 1.2-or-less g per kg per day — discharge alive 46.1 versus 50.2 percent, death 34.6 versus 32.1, harm in AKI and high failure scores.[13] AKI post-hoc: HR 0.5 for discharge alive, RR 1.4 for 60-day death across all stages, harm gone only on replacement therapy.[14] Prescribe usual dose, go lower with high SOFA, and never chase protein targets in multiorgan failure.
4. ICU cocktails harm; GI-cancer formulas help — never cross them. REDOXS: 1223 multiorgan-failure patients — glutamine trended death up with higher hospital and 6-month death, antioxidants nil.[16] But perioperative arginine, nucleotide and omega-3 formulas in GI cancer surgery cut leak (OR 0.62), infections and stay by about 2 days across 90 trials — omega-3 alone nil, cystectomy nil.[18] Refuse the ICU cocktail, offer the perioperative formula for the cancer resection.
5. Restrict — the phosphate fall is the signal the trial treated. The refeeding RCT: 339 adults, restriction versus standard — days alive after discharge tied but day-60 survival 91 versus 78 percent with longer survival and no safety concerns.[21] Relative phosphate fall marks early-PN harm and poor admission prediction means serial measurement, not history, finds these patients.[9] Restrict macronutrients temporarily, replete, go slow — especially with protein.
6. Cap at 180 or less — NICE-SUGAR ended tight control. 6104 patients: intensive 81-to-108 raised 90-day death 27.5 versus 24.9 percent through thirteen-fold severe hypoglycaemia, operative patients trending worse.[25] The 5202-patient switch cohort then halved adjusted death odds on abandoning intensive control. Cap, measure often, treat lows as emergencies.
References11ShowHide
- [1]Rice TW, Wheeler AP, Thompson BT, et al. Initial trophic vs full enteral feeding in patients with acute lung injury: the EDEN randomized trial. JAMA, 2012.PMID 22307571
- [3]Arabi YM, Aldawood AS, Haddad SH, et al. Permissive Underfeeding or Standard Enteral Feeding in Critically Ill Adults. N Engl J Med, 2015.PMID 25992505
- [6]Casaer MP, Mesotten D, Hermans G, et al. Early versus late parenteral nutrition in critically ill adults. N Engl J Med, 2011.PMID 21714640
- [11]Reignier J, Boisramé-Helms J, Brisard L, et al. Enteral versus parenteral early nutrition in ventilated adults with shock: a randomised, controlled, multicentre, open-label, parallel-group study (NUTRIREA-2). Lancet, 2018.PMID 29128300
- [13]Heyland DK, Patel J, Compher C, et al. The effect of higher protein dosing in critically ill patients with high nutritional risk (EFFORT Protein): an international, multicentre, pragmatic, registry-based randomised trial. Lancet, 2023.PMID 36708732
- [14]Stoppe C, Patel JJ, Zarbock A, et al. The impact of higher protein dosing on outcomes in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury: a post hoc analysis of the EFFORT protein trial. Crit Care, 2023.PMID 37853490
- [16]Heyland D, Muscedere J, Wischmeyer PE, et al. A randomized trial of glutamine and antioxidants in critically ill patients. N Engl J Med, 2013.PMID 23594003
- [18]Budai BC, Panait R, Laczkó B, et al. Immunonutrition Decreases Postoperative Complications in Gastrointestinal Cancer-A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Adv Nutr, 2026.PMID 42331289
- [21]Doig GS, Simpson F, Heighes PT, et al. Restricted versus continued standard caloric intake during the management of refeeding syndrome in critically ill adults: a randomised, parallel-group, multicentre, single-blind controlled trial. Lancet Respir Med, 2015.PMID 26597128
- [9]Lauwers C, Langouche L, Wouters PJ, et al. Early phosphate changes as potential indicator of unreadiness for artificial feeding: a secondary analysis of the EPaNIC RCT. Crit Care, 2025.PMID 39875953
- [25]Finfer S, Chittock DR, Su SY, et al. Intensive versus conventional glucose control in critically ill patients. N Engl J Med, 2009.PMID 19318384