Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39551432›Full record

ReviewAdvances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.)2025

Nine Myths about Enteral Feeding in Critically Ill Adults: An Expert Perspective.

Tara Ramaswamy, Michael P DeWane, Hassan S Dashti, Meghan Lau, Paul E Wischmeyer, Alexander Nagrebetsky, Jamie Sparling

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
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

7 authors.

Tara RamaswamyDepartment of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States. Electronic address: tramaswamy34@gmail.com.
Michael P DeWaneDepartment of Surgery, Division of Trauma, Emergency Surgery & Surgical Critical Care, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States.
Hassan S DashtiDepartment of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States.
Meghan LauDepartment of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States.
Paul E WischmeyerDepartment of Anesthesiology, Division of Critical Care Medicine, Duke University Hospital, Durham, NC, United States.
Alexander NagrebetskyDepartment of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States.
Jamie SparlingDepartment of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Malnutrition is a well-studied and significant prognostic risk factor for morbidity and mortality in critically ill perioperative patients. Common nutrition myths in the critically ill may prevent early, consistent, and adequate delivery of enteral nutrition. We outlined 9 common intensive care unit (ICU) nutrition misconceptions and our recommendations to optimize enteral nutrition in critically ill patients based on the review of available literature. Our approach is to treat every patient admitted to the ICU as at risk for malnutrition and to initiate enteral nutrition upon admission in the absence of contraindications. Early enteral nutrition via the gastric route is more beneficial than delaying feeding while awaiting small bowel access and daytime-intermittent nutrition support can safely be initiated over continuous feeding. Gastric residual volumes to assess feeding tolerance should no longer be routinely measured. For perioperative nutrition, we recommend continuing enteral nutrition for most patients with secure airways undergoing anesthesia and resuming nutrition within 24 h of abdominal surgery; even patients with open abdomens can be safely fed in the absence of bowel injury. Critically ill patients who are proned, paralyzed, and on vasopressors can usually continue enteral nutrition. Finally, continuing enteral nutrition before extubation may optimize nutrition without compromising extubation success. In this review, we highlight several common misconceptions regarding ICU nutrition that may prevent achieving nutrition goals and subsequently lead to increased malnutrition, morbidity, and mortality. This knowledge may contribute to increased implementation of early and consistent enteral nutrition strategies to improve outcomes in critically ill adult patients.

Indexed as

Critical CareCritical IllnessEnteral NutritionMalnutritionAdultHumansIntensive Care Unitsclinical nutritionevidence-based practiceintensive care unitmalnutritionnutrition supportperioperative nutrition

Identifiers

PMID39551432
PMCPMC11784768

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.