-
Views
-
Cite
Cite
Shu Han Chong, Yingxiao Huang, Mei Shan Heng, Elizabeth Sin Tzun Chong, Cassandra D Q Lim, Kok Wah Wong, Hiu Nam Chan, Daren K Heyland, Christian Stoppe, Charlene Compher, Zheng-Yii Lee, Alvin Wong, Charles Chin Han Lew, Association Between Energy Delivery and Outcomes in Adult Critically Ill Patients Diagnosed With or At Risk of Malnutrition: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis With Trial Sequential Analysis, Nutrition Reviews, 2025;, nuaf042, https://doi.org/10.1093/nutrit/nuaf042
- Share Icon Share
Abstract
There is a common belief that adult critically ill patients diagnosed with or at risk of malnutrition would benefit from higher energy delivery.
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the association between energy delivery and mortality in adult critically ill patients diagnosed with or at risk of malnutrition.
Databases including Medline, Embase, Scopus, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Cochrane Central, and Google Scholar were searched from inception to November 20, 2023.
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that (1) included critically ill patients (aged ≥18 years) diagnosed with or at risk of malnutrition using validated tools following intensive care unit (ICU) admission, (2) had at least 20% energy difference between intervention and comparison groups, and (3) reported mortality outcomes were included. The random-effects model was used to pool the data.
Two RCTs (4681 at-risk patients) and 5 observational studies (1587 at-risk patients [including 389 high-risk patients]) were included. The pooled mean energy delivered during the first 7–14 days of ICU admission in higher vs lower energy groups was 25.6 ± 5.9 vs 9.7 ± 5.6 kcal/kg per day (P = .004) in RCTs and 21.0 ± 5.2 vs 13.3 ± 5.3 kcal/kg per day (P < .001) in observational studies. No mortality difference was found between higher vs lower energy groups in at-risk patients (risk ratio: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.85, 1.17; P = .94) in RCTs and high-risk patients (adjusted odds ratio: 1.37; 95% CI: 0.43, 4.32; P = .59) in observational studies. Trial sequential analysis was performed and 31 232 patients were required to show a potential treatment effect.
These data do not support the prevailing belief that higher energy delivery improves survival in adult critically ill patients diagnosed with or at risk of malnutrition.
PROSPERO registration no. CRD42021274378.