Nutrition in Critical Illness — Part 3: Parenteral Nutrition & Micronutrients

Comprehensive guide to parenteral nutrition in the ICU: indications, timing controversies, composition, lipid emulsions, monitoring, complications, transition to EN, and micronutrient supplementation including thiamine, vitamin C, vitamin D, selenium, zinc, and refeeding syndrome prevention.

guidelinesMar 2026guidelines

1. Parenteral Nutrition — Indications

1.1 When to Use Parenteral Nutrition

Parenteral nutrition (PN) should be considered when the enteral route is contraindicated, insufficient, or not feasible to meet the patient’s nutritional requirements. The enteral route is always preferred when functional; PN is not a substitute for EN in patients who can tolerate enteral feeding.1 2 3

Absolute Indications for PN

IndicationClinical Scenario
Non-functional GI tractMechanical bowel obstruction; intestinal discontinuity; severe prolonged ileus unresponsive to prokinetics
Inability to access the GI tractFailed enteral access (cannot place post-pyloric tube and gastric feeding contraindicated)
Short bowel syndromeInsufficient absorptive surface (residual small bowel < 100-150 cm without colon in continuity)
High-output GI fistula> 500 mL/day output proximal to any feasible enteral access site
Mesenteric ischemiaActive or recent bowel ischemia precluding enteral feeding
Severe GI hemorrhageOngoing hemorrhage precluding EN (transition to EN once controlled)

Supplemental PN Indications

IndicationDetails
Insufficient EN deliveryEN consistently delivering < 60% of caloric/protein targets after optimization attempts (formula change, prokinetics, post-pyloric access)
EN intolerancePersistent vomiting, abdominal distension, or high GRV despite maximal medical management
Transition periodBridge therapy while awaiting enteral access (e.g., post-pyloric tube placement, PEG)

1.2 Exclusive PN vs Supplemental PN

  • Exclusive PN: All nutrition delivered intravenously; reserved for patients with complete EN contraindication
  • Supplemental PN: PN added to partially tolerated EN to meet caloric/protein targets; the preferred approach when EN alone is insufficient (rationale: maintain gut integrity via trophic EN while supplementing with PN to meet overall targets)

2. Timing of PN Initiation — The Major Controversy

2.1 Overview of the Debate

The optimal timing for initiating PN when EN is not feasible or insufficient is one of the most debated topics in critical care nutrition. The two major international professional societies have historically differed on this question, reflecting divergent interpretations of the same evidence base.1 2 3

2.2 Position Comparison

AspectNorth American Societies (2016/2022)European Nutrition Society (2019)
PN timing (EN contraindicated)Withhold PN for the first 7 days in patients who were previously well-nourishedInitiate PN within 3-7 days if EN is not possible or insufficient
PN timing (EN contraindicated, malnourished)Initiate PN as soon as possible in malnourished or high-risk patientsInitiate PN within 24-48 hours in patients unable to receive EN
Supplemental PNConsider supplemental PN after day 7-10 if EN alone is insufficient (< 60% of target)Consider supplemental PN after day 3-7 if EN alone is insufficient
RationaleEPaNIC trial showed early PN (day 3) was harmful; concerns about overfeeding, hyperglycemia, infection riskEarly caloric deficit is harmful; need to meet energy targets; different interpretation of EPaNIC findings

2.3 Key Trials Informing PN Timing

EPaNIC Trial (2011)

FeatureDetails
DesignMulticenter RCT; n = 4,640
ComparisonEarly PN (supplemental PN initiated within 48 hours of ICU admission when EN was insufficient) vs Late PN (PN withheld until day 8)
Primary outcomeNo difference in mortality
Key findingsEarly PN was associated with more infections (26.2% vs 22.8%, p = 0.008), longer ICU stay (median 4 vs 3 days, p = 0.02), more cholestasis, and prolonged mechanical ventilation
CriticismsEarly PN group may have been overfed; high dextrose loading; glucose control protocol may have influenced results; patients were predominantly cardiac surgical (low nutritional risk)
CitationCasaer MP, Mesotten D, Hermans G, et al. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(6):506-517
DOI10.1056/NEJMoa1102662

Heidegger et al. (SPN Trial, 2013)

FeatureDetails
DesignMulticenter RCT; n = 305
ComparisonSupplemental PN starting day 4 (when EN < 60% of target as measured by IC) vs EN alone
Primary outcomeReduced nosocomial infections in the supplemental PN group (27% vs 38%, p = 0.0338)
Key findingsSupplemental PN improved caloric delivery and reduced infections; no difference in mortality or ICU LOS
NoteUsed IC to guide targets (avoided overfeeding); smaller study
CitationHeidegger CP, Berger MM, Graf S, et al. Lancet. 2013;381(9864):385-393
DOI10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61351-8

CALORIES Trial (2014)

FeatureDetails
DesignMulticenter RCT; n = 2,400
ComparisonEN vs PN initiated within 36 hours of ICU admission
Primary outcomeNo difference in 30-day mortality (33.1% vs 34.2%)
Key findingsPN and EN had similar mortality and infectious complications when caloric delivery was equivalent; PN had more hyperglycemia; EN had more vomiting and hypoglycemia
CitationHarvey SE, Parrott F, Harrison DA, et al. N Engl J Med. 2014;371(18):1673-1684
DOI10.1056/NEJMoa1409860

NUTRIREA-2 Trial (2018)

FeatureDetails
DesignMulticenter RCT; n = 2,410
ComparisonEarly EN vs early PN in ventilated adults with shock
Primary outcomeNo difference in 28-day mortality
Key findingsEN was associated with more GI complications (vomiting, bowel ischemia, GRV > 500, pseudo-obstruction); PN was not inferior; EN-related bowel ischemia occurred in 2% of EN group
ImplicationIn patients with shock, early EN has significant GI risks; early PN may be a reasonable alternative
CitationReignier J, Boisrame-Helms J, Brisard L, et al. Lancet. 2018;391(10116):133-143
DOI10.1016/S0140-6736(17)32146-3

2.4 Practical Synthesis — When to Start PN

Clinical ScenarioRecommended PN Timing
EN feasible and toleratedPN not needed
EN partially tolerated (< 60% target) — low nutritional risk (mNUTRIC 0-4)Supplemental PN after day 7-10
EN partially tolerated (< 60% target) — high nutritional risk (mNUTRIC >= 5)Supplemental PN after day 3-5 (individualized)
EN completely contraindicated — low nutritional riskExclusive PN by day 5-7 (withhold first 3-5 days; provide IV dextrose for glucose)
EN completely contraindicated — high nutritional risk or malnourishedExclusive PN within 24-48 hours
Shock requiring high-dose vasopressorsPN preferred over EN if nutrition cannot be deferred (NUTRIREA-2)

3. PN Composition

3.1 Macronutrient Components

Dextrose (Carbohydrate)

ParameterRecommendation
Caloric value3.4 kcal/g dextrose (monohydrate form used in IV solutions)
Typical contribution50-70% of non-protein calories
Concentration range10-70% dextrose solutions (final concentration after compounding)
Maximum glucose infusion rate (GIR)<= 5 mg/kg/min (exceeding this threshold promotes hyperglycemia, hepatic steatosis, and excess CO2 production)
MonitoringBlood glucose every 4-6 hours; insulin infusion per protocol if glucose > 180 mg/dL

GIR calculation:

GIR (mg/kg/min) = [Dextrose (g/day) x 1,000] / [Weight (kg) x 1,440]

Example: Patient weighing 70 kg receiving 250 g dextrose/day:

GIR = (250 x 1,000) / (70 x 1,440) = 250,000 / 100,800 = 2.48 mg/kg/min (acceptable)

Amino Acids (Protein)

ParameterRecommendation
Caloric value4 kcal/g amino acid
Typical contributionProtein targets mirror EN (1.2-2.0 g/kg/day; higher in specific populations)
Concentration range4.25-15% amino acid solutions
NoteAmino acid calories are traditionally included in total caloric delivery but are primarily used for protein synthesis, not energy; some clinicians target non-protein calories separately

Lipid Emulsions (Fat)

ParameterRecommendation
Caloric value10 kcal/g fat (as administered in emulsion form: 20% emulsion = 2.0 kcal/mL)
Typical contribution25-40% of non-protein calories
Maximum dose<= 1.0-1.5 g/kg/day (to reduce hypertriglyceridemia and immune suppression risk)
Infusion rateInfuse over >= 12 hours (continuous) or may be part of a 3-in-1 admixture

3.2 Lipid Emulsion Types

Lipid SourceTrade ExamplesCompositionAdvantagesDisadvantages
Soybean oil (SO)Intralipid100% soybean oil; rich in omega-6 PUFA (linoleic acid)Widely available; inexpensivePro-inflammatory (high omega-6:omega-3 ratio); immunosuppressive at high doses; hepatic steatosis risk
Olive oil-basedClinOleic80% olive oil, 20% soybean oil; rich in MUFA (oleic acid)Less pro-inflammatory than SO; less immunosuppressiveLimited availability in some regions
SMOF lipidSMOFlipid30% soybean oil, 30% MCT, 25% olive oil, 15% fish oilBalanced fatty acid profile; omega-3s (EPA/DHA); anti-inflammatory; alpha-tocopherol (vitamin E) enriched; reduced hepatotoxicityMore expensive; limited head-to-head outcome data vs soybean oil
MCT/LCTLipofundin MCT/LCT50% MCT, 50% soybean oilFaster oxidation of MCTs; less hepatic fat depositionStill contains soybean oil omega-6
Fish oil (pure)Omegaven100% fish oil; rich in omega-3 (EPA, DHA)Potent anti-inflammatory; parenteral nutrition-associated liver disease (PNALD) rescueApproved mainly in pediatrics (FDA); used off-label in adults; expensive; sole-source use controversial

Recommendation: The European nutrition society recommends olive oil-based or SMOF lipid emulsions as preferred over pure soybean oil emulsions in ICU patients. The North American societies do not make a strong recommendation for one lipid type over another but note that limiting soybean oil exposure may be beneficial.1 3

3.3 Fluid Volume Considerations

PN ComponentTypical Volume Contribution
Amino acids + dextrose (2-in-1)1,000-2,000 mL/day
Lipid emulsion (if separate)250-500 mL/day
Total PN volume (3-in-1)1,200-2,500 mL/day
Concentrated PN (fluid restriction)As low as 800-1,000 mL/day (higher concentrations of dextrose/amino acids; reduced free water)

Fluid-restricted patients (heart failure, ARDS, renal failure): Use concentrated PN formulations (high-concentration dextrose and amino acids; calorie-dense lipid emulsions at 20% or 30%). Coordinate with pharmacy to minimize total daily volume while meeting macronutrient targets.

3.4 Electrolytes and Additives in PN

ComponentStandard Daily AdditionMonitoring
Sodium1-2 mEq/kgBasic metabolic panel daily
Potassium1-2 mEq/kgBasic metabolic panel daily; EKG as indicated
Phosphorus20-40 mmolDaily during initiation; critical for refeeding prevention
Magnesium8-24 mEqDaily during initiation
Calcium (as gluconate)10-15 mEqIonized calcium daily; watch for calcium-phosphate precipitation
Acetate / ChlorideAdjusted for acid-base statusBasic metabolic panel; adjust ratio for metabolic acidosis (more acetate) or alkalosis (more chloride)
Zinc3-5 mgWeekly serum zinc if supplementing
Copper0.3-0.5 mgOmit or reduce in cholestasis (biliary excretion)
Chromium10-15 mcgOmit in renal failure (renally excreted)
Manganese55-150 mcgOmit or reduce in cholestasis; neurotoxicity risk with accumulation
Selenium60-100 mcgWeekly serum selenium if supplementing
MVI (multivitamin injection)1 vial dailyStandard addition
Trace element injection1 vial dailyStandard addition; adjust individual elements as above

4. PN Monitoring

4.1 Monitoring Schedule

ParameterFrequency During Initiation (Days 1-7)Frequency After Stabilization
Blood glucoseEvery 4-6 hoursEvery 6-8 hours (or per insulin protocol)
Basic metabolic panel (Na, K, Cl, CO2, BUN, Cr, glucose)DailyDaily to every other day
PhosphorusDaily (critical for refeeding)2-3 times per week
MagnesiumDaily2-3 times per week
Ionized calciumDaily2-3 times per week
TriglyceridesBaseline, then 24-48 hours after initiation, then 1-2 times per weekWeekly
Liver function tests (AST, ALT, ALP, total/direct bilirubin)Baseline, then 2-3 times per weekWeekly
PrealbuminNot useful during acute inflammationMay track weekly during recovery (when CRP is declining)
C-reactive protein2-3 times per weekWeekly (to contextualize prealbumin trends)
Nitrogen balance (24-hour UUN)Weekly (if feasible)Weekly
WeightDaily (trend; interpret cautiously with fluid shifts)Daily
Fluid balanceDailyDaily

5. PN Complications

5.1 Metabolic Complications

Hyperglycemia

AspectDetails
IncidenceVery common (> 50% of PN patients)
MechanismDextrose infusion; insulin resistance of critical illness; hepatic glucose production
Target range140-180 mg/dL (see glycemic control section)
ManagementInsulin infusion protocol; reduce dextrose concentration if persistent hyperglycemia despite insulin; ensure GIR <= 5 mg/kg/min
ImpactHyperglycemia > 180 mg/dL during PN is associated with increased infections, mortality, and length of stay

Hypertriglyceridemia

AspectDetails
ThresholdHold or reduce lipids if triglycerides > 400 mg/dL; some guidelines use > 250 mg/dL as a threshold for dose reduction
Risk factorsPropofol (contains 10% soybean oil emulsion — must account for additional lipid and caloric load: propofol provides 1.1 kcal/mL), sepsis, renal failure, pancreatitis, high-dose lipid infusion
ManagementReduce lipid dose to 0.5-0.7 g/kg/day; hold lipids if TG > 400; recheck in 24-48 hours; consider lipid-free PN temporarily; account for propofol lipid load
Propofol caloric contributionPropofol lipid calories = propofol rate (mL/hr) x 1.1 kcal/mL x 24 hours (subtract from PN lipid dose)

Hepatic Complications (PN-Associated Liver Disease — PNALD)

ComplicationTimeframeMechanismPrevention/Management
Hepatic steatosisDays to weeksExcessive dextrose (GIR > 5 mg/kg/min); overfeeding; soybean oil lipidsAvoid overfeeding; limit GIR; use mixed lipid emulsions; cycle PN (10-12 hour infusion with 12-14 hour rest)
CholestasisWeeks to monthsBile stasis from lack of enteral stimulation; manganese/copper accumulation; soybean oil lipidsInitiate even trophic EN as soon as possible; reduce or omit manganese and copper; consider SMOF or fish oil lipids; cycle PN
Elevated LFTs (transaminases, ALP, bilirubin)VariableMultifactorialEvaluate for other causes (medications, biliary obstruction, sepsis); optimize PN composition; transition to EN as soon as possible

Electrolyte Abnormalities

  • Hypophosphatemia: Most dangerous in the context of refeeding syndrome (see Section 7)
  • Hypokalemia and hypomagnesemia: Common with insulin-mediated intracellular shifts upon carbohydrate reintroduction
  • Hypernatremia/hyponatremia: Related to free water content of PN and concurrent IV fluids

5.2 Infectious Complications

ComplicationRisk FactorPrevention
Central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI)PN is an independent risk factor for CLABSI due to the nutrient-rich solution providing an ideal growth mediumDedicated PN lumen (do not use PN lumen for other infusions or blood draws); strict aseptic technique; chlorhexidine dressing changes per CLABSI bundle; minimize line manipulation; consider antimicrobial-impregnated catheters
Fungemia (Candida)PN, broad-spectrum antibiotics, central lineBlood cultures if fever develops; empiric antifungal consideration in high-risk patients

5.3 Mechanical Complications

  • Complications related to central venous access (pneumothorax, arterial puncture, thrombosis) — these are catheter-related rather than PN-specific
  • Catheter occlusion from PN precipitates (calcium-phosphate, lipid residue) — flush with normal saline; use ethanol lock for lipid occlusion if needed

6. Transition from PN to EN

6.1 Principles

  • Always transition to EN as soon as the GI tract is functional — even partial EN (trophic) with PN supplementation is preferable to exclusive PN
  • Transition should be gradual to avoid rebound hypoglycemia from abrupt PN discontinuation
  • Overlap EN and PN during the transition period

6.2 Transition Protocol

StepAction
1Initiate EN at trophic rate (10-20 mL/hr) while continuing full PN
2Advance EN by 10-25 mL/hr every 4-8 hours as tolerated
3When EN delivers >50-60% of caloric target, begin reducing PN proportionally
4Reduce PN in a stepwise fashion (reduce by 25-50% of original dose every 12-24 hours)
5When EN reaches >75-80% of target, discontinue PN
6Before final PN discontinuation: taper dextrose infusion rate or provide D10W at 50-75 mL/hr for 1-2 hours to prevent rebound hypoglycemia
7Monitor blood glucose every 1-2 hours for the first 6-12 hours after PN discontinuation

6.3 Monitoring During Transition

  • Blood glucose every 2-4 hours during the taper
  • Electrolytes (K, Mg, PO4) daily
  • Caloric/protein delivery tracking (sum of EN + PN) to avoid underfeeding gaps or overfeeding overlap

7. Refeeding Syndrome

7.1 Pathophysiology

Refeeding syndrome (RFS) occurs when nutrition (particularly carbohydrate) is reintroduced after a period of starvation or severe malnutrition. During starvation, the body shifts from carbohydrate to fat as its primary energy source, depleting intracellular stores of phosphate, potassium, and magnesium. Upon carbohydrate reintroduction:4 5

  1. Insulin secretion increases rapidly in response to glucose
  2. Insulin drives intracellular uptake of phosphate, potassium, magnesium, and water
  3. Severe hypophosphatemia (the hallmark) leads to ATP depletion, impaired cellular function, and potentially fatal cardiac, respiratory, and neurologic complications
  4. Hypokalemia causes cardiac arrhythmias
  5. Hypomagnesemia exacerbates arrhythmia risk and contributes to refractory hypokalemia and hypocalcemia
  6. Fluid retention (sodium and water reabsorption driven by insulin) can precipitate acute heart failure and pulmonary edema
  7. Thiamine depletion — increased carbohydrate metabolism rapidly consumes thiamine (vitamin B1), which is an essential cofactor for pyruvate dehydrogenase, alpha-ketoglutarate dehydrogenase, and transketolase; deficiency can cause Wernicke encephalopathy and lactic acidosis

7.2 Risk Factors for Refeeding Syndrome

High risk (one or more of the following):4

CriterionThreshold
BMI< 16 kg/m2
Unintentional weight loss> 15% in the preceding 3-6 months
Minimal or no nutritional intake> 10 days
Low baseline electrolytes before feedingLow phosphate, potassium, or magnesium

Moderate risk (two or more of the following):

CriterionThreshold
BMI< 18.5 kg/m2
Unintentional weight loss> 10% in the preceding 3-6 months
Minimal or no nutritional intake> 5 days
History of alcohol misuseOr drugs including insulin, chemotherapy, antacids, diuretics

Additional ICU-specific risk factors:

  • Chronic alcoholism
  • Anorexia nervosa / eating disorders
  • Oncology patients (especially head and neck cancer, esophageal cancer)
  • Elderly patients with poor oral intake before admission
  • Chronic malabsorptive conditions
  • Prolonged ICU stay with inadequate nutrition support
  • Post-bariatric surgery patients

7.3 Refeeding Syndrome Prevention Protocol

DayCaloric PrescriptionMonitoringSupplementation
Pre-feedingCheck baseline PO4, K, Mg, Ca, glucose, thiamine level (if available)Thiamine 200-300 mg IV daily x 3 days BEFORE starting nutrition or concurrently with first feed; correct electrolyte deficiencies
Day 1Start at 10 kcal/kg/day (or as low as 5 kcal/kg/day in extreme cases, e.g., BMI < 14)PO4, K, Mg every 6-12 hours; glucose every 4-6 hours; daily weights; strict I/OPhosphate 0.3-0.6 mmol/kg/day IV (adjust for levels); K 1-2 mEq/kg/day; Mg 0.3-0.4 mEq/kg/day; MVI daily
Day 2-3If electrolytes stable: advance to 15 kcal/kg/dayContinue electrolyte monitoring every 8-12 hoursContinue thiamine, electrolyte supplementation
Day 4-5If electrolytes stable: advance to 20 kcal/kg/dayElectrolytes every 12-24 hoursContinue thiamine through day 5-7 minimum
Day 6-7Advance to 25 kcal/kg/day (or full target)Transition to daily electrolytesAdjust supplementation based on levels
Day 7+Full target caloriesStandard monitoringStandard supplementation

7.4 Electrolyte Replacement in Refeeding

ElectrolyteTarget LevelReplacement Strategy
Phosphate> 2.5 mg/dL (0.81 mmol/L)Mild (2.0-2.5): PO4 15-30 mmol IV over 4-6 hours. Moderate (1.0-1.9): PO4 30-45 mmol IV over 4-6 hours. Severe (< 1.0): PO4 45-60 mmol IV over 8-12 hours; recheck in 2-4 hours
Potassium> 4.0 mEq/LKCl 20-40 mEq IV over 1-2 hours (max 20 mEq/hr via central line; 10 mEq/hr peripheral); recheck 2-4 hours after replacement
Magnesium> 2.0 mg/dL (0.82 mmol/L)MgSO4 2-4 g IV over 2-4 hours; recheck 4-6 hours after replacement
Thiamine— (empiric dosing)Thiamine 200-300 mg IV daily for minimum 3-5 days; transition to 100 mg oral/IV daily

7.5 Clinical Manifestations of Refeeding Syndrome

SystemManifestations
CardiacArrhythmias (VT, VF, torsades de pointes), heart failure, hypotension, cardiac arrest
RespiratoryRespiratory muscle weakness, failure to wean from ventilator, respiratory failure
NeurologicWernicke encephalopathy (confusion, ophthalmoplegia, ataxia), delirium, seizures, coma
HematologicHemolytic anemia, thrombocytopenia, leukocyte dysfunction
MetabolicLactic acidosis, hyperglycemia, metabolic alkalosis
MusculoskeletalRhabdomyolysis, weakness
FluidPeripheral edema, pulmonary edema

8. Micronutrient Supplementation in Critical Illness

8.1 Thiamine (Vitamin B1)

ParameterDetails
RoleEssential cofactor for pyruvate dehydrogenase (aerobic glucose metabolism), alpha-ketoglutarate dehydrogenase (Krebs cycle), and transketolase (pentose phosphate pathway)
Deficiency prevalence in ICU20-70% of critically ill patients (depending on population and assay used)
High-risk populationsChronic alcoholism; malnutrition; refeeding syndrome; chronic diuretic use; hyperemesis; bariatric surgery; prolonged TPN without adequate supplementation
Clinical manifestations of deficiencyWernicke encephalopathy (confusion, oculomotor dysfunction, ataxia — classic triad present in only ~16% of cases); beriberi (wet: high-output heart failure; dry: peripheral neuropathy); lactic acidosis (impaired aerobic metabolism)
Dosing — refeeding prevention200-300 mg IV daily for 3-5 days, then 100 mg IV/PO daily
Dosing — suspected Wernicke500 mg IV three times daily for 3-5 days, then 250 mg IV daily for 3-5 days, then 100 mg PO daily
Dosing — sepsis (empiric)200 mg IV every 12 hours for 7 days (based on sepsis vitamin cocktail studies)
AdministrationIV push or short infusion (30 minutes); stable in PN admixtures
SafetyVery low toxicity; anaphylaxis is extremely rare with IV administration

6

8.2 Vitamin C (Ascorbic Acid)

Vitamin C is a potent antioxidant and essential cofactor for catecholamine and cortisol synthesis. Its role in sepsis and critical illness has been extensively studied.7 8 9

ParameterDetails
RoleAntioxidant; cofactor for catecholamine synthesis (dopamine beta-hydroxylase); collagen synthesis; immune function; enhances iron absorption
Deficiency in ICUCommon (up to 40-70% of critically ill patients have low vitamin C levels)
Standard supplementation100-200 mg/day (as part of standard MVI in PN)

Key Trials in Sepsis

TrialDesignInterventionKey Findings
CITRIS-ALI (2019)Multicenter RCT; n = 167; ARDS + sepsisVitamin C 50 mg/kg IV every 6 hours x 96 hours vs placeboNo difference in primary outcome (modified SOFA or inflammatory biomarkers at 96 hours); secondary analysis showed reduced 28-day mortality (29.8% vs 46.3%, p = 0.03) — but this was a secondary outcome and should be interpreted cautiously
VITAMINS (2020)Multicenter RCT; n = 216; septic shockVitamin C 1.5 g IV q6h + hydrocortisone 50 mg IV q6h + thiamine 200 mg IV q12h vs hydrocortisone aloneNo difference in time alive and vasopressor-free to day 7; no mortality difference
LOVIT (2022)Multicenter RCT; n = 872; sepsisVitamin C 50 mg/kg IV every 6 hours x 96 hours vs placeboPotential harm: higher composite of death or persistent organ dysfunction at day 28 in vitamin C group (44.5% vs 38.5%, RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.04-1.40)

Current recommendation: High-dose vitamin C (>= 6 g/day) is NOT routinely recommended in sepsis based on current evidence. Standard supplementation (100-200 mg/day) remains part of routine micronutrient support in PN. Further trials are needed.7 8 9

Citation (CITRIS-ALI)Fowler AA, Truwit JD, Hite RD, et al. JAMA. 2019;322(13):1261-1270
DOI10.1001/jama.2019.11825
Citation (VITAMINS)Fujii T, Luethi N, Young PJ, et al. JAMA. 2020;323(5):423-431
DOI10.1001/jama.2019.22176
Citation (LOVIT)Lamontagne F, Masse MH, Menard J, et al. N Engl J Med. 2022;386(25):2387-2398
DOI10.1056/NEJMoa2200644

8.3 Vitamin D

ParameterDetails
Deficiency prevalence40-70% of ICU patients have 25(OH)D levels < 20 ng/mL (deficiency); up to 80-90% may have suboptimal levels
RoleCalcium homeostasis; immune modulation (innate and adaptive immunity); skeletal muscle function; anti-inflammatory effects
Association with outcomesLow vitamin D is associated with increased mortality, longer ICU stay, and greater infection risk — but association does not prove causation
Key trial: VIOLET (2019)RCT; n = 1,078; critically ill adults with 25(OH)D < 20 ng/mL; single dose of 540,000 IU vitamin D3 vs placebo. No difference in 90-day mortality (23.5% vs 20.6%), hospital LOS, or ventilator-free days
Key trial: VITdAL-ICU (2014)RCT; n = 475; critically ill adults with 25(OH)D <= 20 ng/mL; loading dose 540,000 IU oral vitamin D3 vs placebo. No difference in 28-day mortality overall; possible benefit in severe deficiency subgroup (25(OH)D <= 12 ng/mL): lower hospital mortality (28.6% vs 46.1%, p = 0.04)
RecommendationCheck 25(OH)D level in all ICU patients. Supplement if deficient (< 20 ng/mL). Standard approach: cholecalciferol 50,000 IU weekly or 10,000 IU daily for loading, then 1,000-2,000 IU daily. High single-dose bolus (> 300,000 IU) has not shown benefit and may have risks.

10 11

8.4 Selenium

ParameterDetails
RoleComponent of glutathione peroxidase (antioxidant defense); selenoproteins (thyroid hormone metabolism, immune function)
Deficiency in ICUCommon; depletion accelerated by systemic inflammation and oxidative stress
EvidenceMixed results in clinical trials. The REDOXS trial (see Part 4) found that high-dose selenium (as part of an antioxidant cocktail with glutamine) was associated with a trend toward increased mortality. Smaller earlier trials suggested potential benefit in sepsis.
RecommendationStandard trace element supplementation in PN (60-100 mcg/day selenium). High-dose supplementation (>= 500 mcg/day) is NOT recommended based on current evidence.
MonitoringSerum selenium levels can be checked but are not routinely monitored

3 12

8.5 Zinc

ParameterDetails
RoleImmune function (T-cell and NK-cell activity); wound healing; protein synthesis; > 300 enzyme cofactor
Deficiency in ICUVery common; redistributed from plasma to liver during acute phase response (serum zinc is a negative acute-phase reactant, similar to albumin)
Populations at highest riskBurns (massive zinc losses in wound exudate), chronic alcoholism, malabsorption, high-output GI fistulae, chronic diarrhea, CRRT
SupplementationStandard: 3-5 mg/day in PN; additional: 10-30 mg/day in patients with large wound/GI losses or burns
Burns-specific dosingZinc supplementation 25-40 mg/day (often combined with copper and selenium) for patients with major burns
MonitoringSerum zinc (interpret cautiously — levels drop with inflammation regardless of stores)

8.6 Copper

ParameterDetails
RoleCeruloplasmin synthesis (iron metabolism); cytochrome c oxidase (mitochondrial function); lysyl oxidase (collagen/elastin cross-linking); superoxide dismutase (antioxidant)
Deficiency signsMicrocytic anemia (refractory to iron), neutropenia, osteoporosis, neurologic dysfunction
PN supplementation0.3-0.5 mg/day standard; reduce or omit in cholestasis (copper is excreted in bile; accumulation risk with cholestasis)
MonitoringSerum copper and ceruloplasmin; interpret in context of inflammation (copper is a positive acute-phase reactant — levels may be falsely elevated during inflammation)

8.7 Summary of Micronutrient Recommendations

MicronutrientStandard PN DoseHigh-Risk Indications for Extra SupplementationDo NOT Give High Dose
Thiamine (B1)6 mg/day (in MVI)Refeeding risk: 200-300 mg IV/day; Wernicke: 500 mg IV TID
Vitamin C200 mg/day (in MVI)Standard supplementation only>= 6 g/day in sepsis (LOVIT: potential harm)
Vitamin DCheck level; supplement if deficient50,000 IU weekly or 10,000 IU/day loading if < 20 ng/mLSingle dose > 300,000 IU (no benefit)
Selenium60-100 mcg/dayStandard dose only>= 500 mcg/day (REDOXS: trend toward harm)
Zinc3-5 mg/dayBurns: 25-40 mg/day; high GI losses: 10-30 mg/day
Copper0.3-0.5 mg/dayWound healingReduce/omit in cholestasis

9. Glycemic Control During Nutrition Support

9.1 Target Blood Glucose Range

ParameterRecommendation
Target range140-180 mg/dL (7.8-10.0 mmol/L)
AvoidTight glycemic control (80-110 mg/dL) — the NICE-SUGAR trial demonstrated that tight control increased mortality (27.5% vs 24.9%, p = 0.02) and severe hypoglycemia (6.8% vs 0.5%) compared to conventional control (target < 180 mg/dL)
Insulin protocolContinuous IV insulin infusion preferred in the ICU; subcutaneous basal-bolus for stable patients transitioning to ward
MonitoringBlood glucose every 4-6 hours during PN/EN; every 1-2 hours during insulin infusion titration

13

9.2 Nutrition-Specific Glycemic Management

ScenarioApproach
Persistent hyperglycemia (> 180 mg/dL) on ENStart insulin infusion; do NOT hold EN for hyperglycemia alone; consider diabetes-specific formula
Persistent hyperglycemia on PNStart insulin infusion; reduce dextrose concentration; ensure GIR <= 5 mg/kg/min; add insulin to PN bag (regular insulin, typically starting at 0.1 units per gram of dextrose in the PN)
Hypoglycemia (< 70 mg/dL) after EN holdStart D10W at 50-75 mL/hr; recheck glucose in 15-30 minutes; restart EN when possible
Hypoglycemia after PN interruptionNever abruptly stop PN; taper dextrose; run D10W at 50-75 mL/hr if PN interrupted unexpectedly

References


  1. McClave SA, Taylor BE, Martindale RG, et al. “Guidelines for the Provision and Assessment of Nutrition Support Therapy in the Adult Critically Ill Patient: Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) and American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (A.S.P.E.N.).” JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2016;40(2):159-211. DOI: 10.1177/0148607115621863 ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎

  2. Compher C, Bingham AL, McCall M, et al. “Guidelines for the Provision of Nutrition Support Therapy in the Adult Critically Ill Patient: The American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition.” JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2022;46(1):12-41. DOI: 10.1002/jpen.2267 ↩︎ ↩︎

  3. Singer P, Blaser AR, Berger MM, et al. “ESPEN guideline on clinical nutrition in the intensive care unit.” Clin Nutr. 2019;38(1):48-79. DOI: 10.1016/j.clnu.2018.08.037 ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎

  4. Friedli N, Stanga Z, Sobotka L, et al. “Revisiting the refeeding syndrome: Results of a systematic review.” Nutrition. 2017;35:151-160. DOI: 10.1016/j.nut.2016.05.016 ↩︎ ↩︎

  5. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). “Nutrition support for adults: oral nutrition support, enteral tube feeding and parenteral nutrition.” Clinical Guideline CG32. 2006 (updated 2017). URL: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg32 ↩︎

  6. Donnino MW, Andersen LW, Chase M, et al. “Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Thiamine as a Metabolic Resuscitator in Septic Shock: A Pilot Study.” Crit Care Med. 2016;44(2):360-367. DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000001572 ↩︎

  7. Fowler AA, Truwit JD, Hite RD, et al. “Effect of Vitamin C Infusion on Organ Failure and Biomarkers of Inflammation and Vascular Injury in Patients With Sepsis and Severe Acute Respiratory Failure: The CITRIS-ALI Randomized Clinical Trial.” JAMA. 2019;322(13):1261-1270. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2019.11825 ↩︎ ↩︎

  8. Fujii T, Luethi N, Young PJ, et al. “Effect of Vitamin C, Hydrocortisone, and Thiamine vs Hydrocortisone Alone on Time Alive and Free of Vasopressor Support Among Patients With Septic Shock: The VITAMINS Randomized Clinical Trial.” JAMA. 2020;323(5):423-431. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2019.22176 ↩︎ ↩︎

  9. Lamontagne F, Masse MH, Menard J, et al. “Intravenous Vitamin C in Adults with Sepsis in the Intensive Care Unit.” N Engl J Med. 2022;386(25):2387-2398. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2200644 ↩︎ ↩︎

  10. Ginde AA, Brower RG, Caterino JM, et al. “Early High-Dose Vitamin D3 for Critically Ill, Vitamin D-Deficient Patients.” N Engl J Med. 2019;381(26):2529-2540. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1911124 ↩︎

  11. Amrein K, Schnedl C, Holl A, et al. “Effect of high-dose vitamin D3 on hospital length of stay in critically ill patients with vitamin D deficiency: the VITdAL-ICU randomized clinical trial.” JAMA. 2014;312(15):1520-1530. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2014.13204 ↩︎

  12. Heyland DK, Muscedere J, Wischmeyer PE, et al. “A randomized trial of glutamine and antioxidants in critically ill patients (REDOXS).” N Engl J Med. 2013;368(16):1489-1497. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1212722 ↩︎

  13. NICE-SUGAR Study Investigators; Finfer S, Chittock DR, Su SY, et al. “Intensive versus conventional glucose control in critically ill patients.” N Engl J Med. 2009;360(13):1283-1297. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa0810625 ↩︎