Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22632574›Full record

Trial reportCritical care (London, England)2012

Early versus late parenteral nutrition in ICU patients: cost analysis of the EPaNIC trial.

Simon Vanderheyden, Michael P Casaer, Katrien Kesteloot, Steven Simoens, Thomas De Rijdt, Guido Peers, Pieter J Wouters, Jocelijn Coenegrachts, Tine Grieten, Katleen Polders and 5 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Critical care (London, England), 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00512122 (Impact of Early Parenteral Nutrition Completing Enteral Nutrition in Adult Critically Ill Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT00512122 phase4active not recruitingnot on this map

Impact of Early Parenteral Nutrition Completing Enteral Nutrition in Adult Critically Ill Patients

TypeinterventionalSponsorKU LeuvenRan2007 to 2026Enrolled4,640ConditionsCritical Illness, StarvationArmsWithholding PN during the first week of ICU stay, Oliclinomel N71000 OR N71000E // Clinimix N17G35 OR N17G35E
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 66 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Nutrition support in hospitalised adults at nutritional risk.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Simon Vanderheyden
Michael P Casaer
Katrien Kesteloot
Steven Simoens
Thomas De Rijdt
Guido Peers
Pieter J Wouters
Jocelijn Coenegrachts
Tine Grieten
Katleen Polders
Ann Maes
Alexander Wilmer
Jasperina Dubois
Greet Van den Berghe
Dieter Mesotten
KU Leuven · BEJessa Hospital · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe EPaNIC randomized controlled multicentre trial showed that postponing initiation of parenteral nutrition (PN) in ICU-patients to beyond the first week (Late-PN) enhanced recovery, as compared with Early-PN. This was mediated by fewer infections, accelerated recovery from organ failure and reduced duration of hospitalization. Now, the trial's preplanned cost analysis (N = 4640) from the Belgian healthcare payers' perspective is reported.

methodsCost data were retrieved from individual patient invoices. Undiscounted total healthcare costs were calculated for the index hospital stay. A cost tree based on acquisition of new infections and on prolonged length-of-stay was constructed. Contribution of 8 cost categories to total hospitalization costs was analyzed. The origin of drug costs was clarified in detail through the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification system. The potential impact of Early-PN on total hospitalization costs in other healthcare systems was explored in a sensitivity analysis.

resultsICU-patients developing new infection (24.4%) were responsible for 42.7% of total costs, while ICU-patients staying beyond one week (24.3%) accounted for 43.3% of total costs. Pharmacy-related costs represented 30% of total hospitalization costs and were increased by Early-PN (+608.00 EUR/patient, p = 0.01). Notably, costs for ATC-J (anti-infective agents) (+227.00 EUR/patient, p = 0.02) and ATC-B (comprising PN) (+220.00 EUR/patient, p = 0.006) drugs were increased by Early-PN. Sensitivity analysis revealed a mean total cost increase of 1,210.00 EUR/patient (p = 0.02) by Early-PN, when incorporating the full PN costs.

conclusionsThe increased costs by Early-PN were mainly pharmacy-related and explained by higher expenditures for PN and anti-infective agents. The use of Early-PN in critically ill patients can thus not be recommended for both clinical (no benefit) and cost-related reasons.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00512122.

Indexed as

Decision TreesHealth Care CostsCosts and Cost AnalysisFemaleHumansIntensive Care UnitsMaleParenteral NutritionTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID22632574
PMCPMC3580642
OpenAlexW2100566529

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.