Effects of early supplemental parenteral nutrition on new-onset infection in adults with acute severe stroke: a single-center retrospective case-control study.

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY BMC Neurology Pub Date : 2025-01-31 DOI:10.1186/s12883-025-04050-6
Chen Ma, Zhirong Fan, Xuan Wang, Bian Li, Jingjing Zhao, Xiaogang Kang, Wen Jiang, Fang Yang
{"title":"Effects of early supplemental parenteral nutrition on new-onset infection in adults with acute severe stroke: a single-center retrospective case-control study.","authors":"Chen Ma, Zhirong Fan, Xuan Wang, Bian Li, Jingjing Zhao, Xiaogang Kang, Wen Jiang, Fang Yang","doi":"10.1186/s12883-025-04050-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Early adequate feeding reduces mortality in patients with acute severe stroke. Supplemental parenteral nutrition (SPN) may address enteral nutrition (EN) deficiency and mitigate the risk of nosocomial infection. The benefit of the EN plus early SPN strategy over the full EN strategy is unknown in acute severe stroke patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively enrolled 20 patients with acute severe stroke in the SPN group who received EN plus early SPN (more than 50% of the energy target within 72 h after admission). Forty control patients in the EN group who received full EN were matched by age, sex and lesion site. The time to new-onset pneumonia or nosocomial infections was analyzed by Student's t test and the Breslow generalized Wilcoxon test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The baseline characteristics did not differ significantly between the SPN group and the EN group, except for higher serum leukocyte counts, neutrophil counts, and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratios in the SPN group (P < 0.05). Compared with that in the EN group, the time to new-onset pneumonia was significantly delayed in the SPN group (7.6 days vs. 5.2 days; mean difference, 2.5 days; 95% CI, 0.65 to 4.31; P = 0.009), as was the time to new-onset nosocomial infections (7.1 days vs. 4.8 days; mean difference, 2.3 days; 95% CI, 0.46 to 4.07; P = 0.015). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed similar cumulative probabilities of new-onset pneumonia and new-onset nosocomial infections in the two groups (P > 0.05). The rates of digestive intolerance events were similar between the two groups (40% in the SPN group vs. 52.5% in the EN group, P = 0.361).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In patients with acute severe stroke, the application of EN plus early SPN could delay the onset of pneumonia and nosocomial infections especially in the early phase.</p>","PeriodicalId":9170,"journal":{"name":"BMC Neurology","volume":"25 1","pages":"44"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11783952/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-025-04050-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Early adequate feeding reduces mortality in patients with acute severe stroke. Supplemental parenteral nutrition (SPN) may address enteral nutrition (EN) deficiency and mitigate the risk of nosocomial infection. The benefit of the EN plus early SPN strategy over the full EN strategy is unknown in acute severe stroke patients.

Methods: We retrospectively enrolled 20 patients with acute severe stroke in the SPN group who received EN plus early SPN (more than 50% of the energy target within 72 h after admission). Forty control patients in the EN group who received full EN were matched by age, sex and lesion site. The time to new-onset pneumonia or nosocomial infections was analyzed by Student's t test and the Breslow generalized Wilcoxon test.

Results: The baseline characteristics did not differ significantly between the SPN group and the EN group, except for higher serum leukocyte counts, neutrophil counts, and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratios in the SPN group (P < 0.05). Compared with that in the EN group, the time to new-onset pneumonia was significantly delayed in the SPN group (7.6 days vs. 5.2 days; mean difference, 2.5 days; 95% CI, 0.65 to 4.31; P = 0.009), as was the time to new-onset nosocomial infections (7.1 days vs. 4.8 days; mean difference, 2.3 days; 95% CI, 0.46 to 4.07; P = 0.015). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed similar cumulative probabilities of new-onset pneumonia and new-onset nosocomial infections in the two groups (P > 0.05). The rates of digestive intolerance events were similar between the two groups (40% in the SPN group vs. 52.5% in the EN group, P = 0.361).

Conclusions: In patients with acute severe stroke, the application of EN plus early SPN could delay the onset of pneumonia and nosocomial infections especially in the early phase.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Neurology
BMC Neurology 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
428
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Neurology is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of the prevention, diagnosis and management of neurological disorders, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology.
期刊最新文献
The expression changes endothelial and fibrinolytic biomarkers in acute ischemic stroke patients with OSA. Fast-acting treatment of myasthenic crisis with efgartigimod from the perspective of the neonatal intensive care unit. Unique amnestic syndrome after isolated left anterolateral thalamic stroke: a case report. Time moving 100-fold slower: time distortion as a diagnostic clue in anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis. A Chinese patient with cardiogenic stroke and warfarin resistance: a case report.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1