One year outcomes in patients with acute lung injury randomised to initial trophic or full enteral feeding: prospective follow-up of EDEN randomised trial

    loading  Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate the effect of initial low energy permissive underfeeding (“trophic feeding”) versus full energy enteral feeding (“full feeding”) on physical function and secondary outcomes in patients with acute lung injury.

Design

Prospective longitudinal follow-up evaluation of the NHLBI ARDS Clinical Trials Network's EDEN trial

Setting

41hospitals in the United States.

Participants

525 patients with acute lung injury.

Interventions

Randomised assignment to trophic or full feeding for up to six days; thereafter, all patients still receiving mechanical ventilation received full feeding.

Measurements

Blinded assessment of the age and sex adjusted physical function domain of the SF-36 instrument at 12 months after acute lung injury. Secondary outcome measures included survival; physical, psychological, and cognitive functioning; quality of life; and employment status at six and 12 months.

Results

After acute lung injury, patients had substantial physical, psychological, and cognitive impairments, reduced quality of life, and impaired return to work. Initial trophic versus full feeding did not affect mean SF-36 physical function at 12 months (55 (SD 33) v 55 (31), P=0.54), survival to 12 months (65% v 63%, P=0.63), or nearly all of the secondary outcomes.

Conclusion

In survivors of acute lung injury, there was no difference in physical function, survival, or multiple secondary outcomes at 6 and 12 month follow-up after initial trophic or full enteral feeding.

Trial Registration

NCT No 00719446

Related Topics

    loading  Loading Related Articles