Trial reportCritical care (London, England)2017
A randomized controlled pilot study to evaluate the effect of an enteral formulation designed to improve gastrointestinal tolerance in the critically ill patient-the SPIRIT trial.
Trial report in Critical care (London, England), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01581957 (A Pilot Study to Evaluate the Effect of a Specific Enteral Formulation Designed to Improve Gastrointestinal Tolerance in the Critically Ill Patient), which is not on this map. Cited by 25 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
A Pilot Study to Evaluate the Effect of a Specific Enteral Formulation Designed to Improve Gastrointestinal Tolerance in the Critically Ill Patient
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of higher versus lower protein provision with meaningful dose separation in critically ill adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Pooled it
- Naso-intestinal versus gastric tube for enteral nutrition in patients undergoing mechanical ventilation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- The effects of higher versus lower protein delivery in critically ill patients: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with trial sequential analysis.Critical care (London, England) · 2024Pooled it
- Small peptide formulas versus standard polymeric formulas in critically ill patients with acute gastrointestinal injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2023Pooled it
- Impact of Energy and Protein Delivery to Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Nutrients · 2022Pooled it
- The effect of higher versus lower protein delivery in critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Critical care (London, England) · 2021Pooled it
- Medium-Chain Triglyceride (MCT) Content of Adult Enteral Tube Feeding Formulas and Clinical Outcomes. A Systematic Review.Frontiers in nutrition · 2021Pooled it
- Trial
- Semi-elemental versus polymeric formula for enteral nutrition in brain-injured critically ill patients: a randomized trial.Critical care (London, England) · 2021Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Peptide-based versus standard polymeric enteral nutrition in the PICU: a multicenter observational study.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Impact of enteral feeding strategies on nosocomialFrontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Protein intake and clinical outcomes in critically ill patients: A dose-response and pairwise meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Health promotion perspectives · 2025Review
- The Japanese Critical Care Nutrition Guideline 2024.Journal of intensive care · 2025Review
- Semi-elemental versus polymeric formula for enteral nutrition in critically ill patients: a secondary analysis of a multicenter cluster-randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
- Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Rehabilitation in Critically Ill Patients 2023 (J-ReCIP 2023).Journal of intensive care · 2023Review
- Dose-response relationship between diarrhea quantity and mortality in critical care patients: A retrospective cohort study.PloS one · 2023Article
- [Prevalence of diarrhea in adult patients in intensive care and its relationship with ready-to-use enteral formulas]Revista de la Facultad de Ciencias Medicas (Cordoba, Argentina) · 2022Article
- Foods for Special Medical Purposes in Home Enteral Nutrition-Clinical Practice Experience. Multicenter Study.Frontiers in nutrition · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDiarrhea is frequent in patients in intensive care units (ICU) and is associated with discomfort and complications and may increase the length of stay and nursing workload.
methodsThis was a prospective, double-blind, randomized, controlled single-center pilot study to assess the incidence and frequency of diarrhea and the respective effects of a modified enteral diet (intervention: Peptamen® AF, rich in proteins, medium chain triglycerides and fish oil) compared to a standard diet (control: Isosource® Energy) in 90 randomized adult patients (intervention, n = 46; control, n = 44) with an ICU stay ≥5 days and tube feeding ≥3 days. Tube feeding was initiated within 72 h of ICU admission and continued up to 10 days. The caloric goal was adjusted to needs by indirect calorimetry. Gastrointestinal function, nutritional intake, and nursing workload were recorded. Follow-up was until 28 days after randomization.
resultsMedian age was 63.3 (interquartile range (IQR) 51.0-73.2) years and Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II was 61.0 (IQR 47.8-74). Time to reach caloric goal (intervention: 2.2 (0.8-3.7) days (median, IQR); control: 2.0 (1.3-2.7) days; p = 0.16), length of time on study nutrition (intervention: 5.0 (3.6-6.4) days; control: 7.0 (5.3-8.7) days; p = 0.26), and calorie intake (intervention: 18.0 (12.5-20.9) kcal/kg/day; control 19.7 (17.3-23.1) kcal/kg/day; p = 0.08) did not differ between groups, with a higher protein intake for Peptamen® group (1.13 (0.78-1.31) g/kg/day vs 0.80 (0.70-0.94); p < 0.001). No difference in diarrhea incidence (intervention group: 29 (64%); control group: 31 (70%); p = 0.652), use of fecal collectors (23 (51%) vs. 24 (55%); p = 0.83), or diarrhea-free days (161 (64%) vs 196 (68%); p = 0.65) was found. Nursing workload and cost for diarrhea care were not different between the groups. In a post-hoc analysis, adjusted for treatment group, age, sex, and SAPS II score, diarrhea was associated with length of mechanical ventilation (9.5 (6.0-13.1) vs. 3.9 (3.2-4.6) days; p = 0.006) and length of ICU stay (11.0 (8.9-13.1) vs. 5.0 (3.8-6.2) days; p = 0.001).
conclusionsIn this pilot study, we found a high incidence of diarrhea, which was not attenuated by Peptamen® AF. Patients with diarrhea stayed longer in the ICU.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT01581957 . Registered on 18 April 2012.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.