Skip to main content
Download PDF

Obesity and critical care nutrition: current practice gaps and directions for future research

Critical Care volume 26, Article number: 283 (2022) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

This review has been developed following a panel discussion with an international group of experts in the care of patients with obesity in the critical care setting and focuses on current best practices in malnutrition screening and assessment, estimation of energy needs for patients with obesity, the risks and management of sarcopenic obesity, the value of tailored nutrition recommendations, and the emerging role of immunonutrition. Patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) increasingly present with overweight and obesity that require individualized nutrition considerations due to underlying comorbidities, immunological factors such as inflammation, and changes in energy expenditure and other aspects of metabolism. While research continues to accumulate, important knowledge gaps persist in recognizing and managing the complex nutritional needs in ICU patients with obesity. Available malnutrition screening and assessment tools are limited in patients with obesity due to a lack of validation and heterogeneous factors impacting nutrition status in this population. Estimations of energy and protein demands are also complex in patients with obesity and may include estimations based upon ideal, actual, or adjusted body weight. Evidence is still sparse on the role of immunonutrition in patients with obesity, but the presence of inflammation that impacts immune function may suggest a role for these nutrients in hemodynamically stable ICU patients. Educational efforts are needed for all clinicians who care for complex cases of critically ill patients with obesity, with a focus on strategies for optimal nutrition and the consideration of issues such as weight stigma and bias impacting the delivery of care.

Conclusions

Current nutritional strategies for these patients should be undertaken with a focus on individualized care that considers the whole person, including the possibility of preexisting comorbidities, altered metabolism, and chronic stigma, which may impact the provision of nutritional care. Additional research should focus on the applicability of current guidelines and evidence for nutrition therapy in populations with obesity, especially in the setting of critical illness.

Introduction

Patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) increasingly present with obesity, with rates reported between 28.2% and 36% [1,2,3]. In 2000, the World Health Organization (WHO) recognized obesity (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) as a distinct disease, describing the condition as a global pandemic with the potential to surpass more traditional world health problems, such as undernutrition and infectious diseases [4]. Since 2000, multiple societies [5,6,7,8,9] have all affirmed the classification of obesity as a disease. The WHO defines obesity as a condition in which excess or abnormal body fat accumulation increases health risks [4, 10]. Specifically, overweight and obesity are important contributors to morbidity and mortality due to increased risks of hypertension, dyslipidemia, type 2 diabetes, coronary heart disease, stroke, certain types of cancer, and other chronic conditions [4]. The Obesity Society issued a statement emphasizing the definition of obesity as a multicausal, chronic disease associated with structural abnormalities, physiologic derangements, and functional impairment accompanied by an increased risk of morbidity and early mortality [6]. Furthermore, nutritional deficiencies and malnutrition are likely underdiagnosed in patients with overweight and obesity related to the lack of highly sensitive and specific assessment tools and established diagnostic criteria.

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic provides a unique lens through which to view obesity risks to the overall population and the complex presentation and clinical needs of patients with obesity [11]. Obesity is common in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Of more than 148,000 patients who received a diagnosis of COVID-19 in US emergency departments or inpatient units between March and December 2020, 50.8% had obesity [12]. A meta-analysis of available data from January 1, 2020, to August 11, 2020, found that pooled mortality rates among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were approaching 19%, and obesity was identified as a significant risk factor for mortality for these patients [13]. Meanwhile, the pandemic has not only negatively impacted the care of hospitalized patients with obesity but may also be contributing to population-wide weight gain [14]. In patients with preexisting obesity, the COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with increasingly unhealthy eating patterns [15]. Even in those without preexisting overweight and obesity, issues resulting from self-quarantine such as inadequate sleep, snacking, lack of dietary restraint, stress-related eating, and reduced physical activity may be contributing to weight gain [16, 17].

Traditional diagnostic assessment tools like body mass index (BMI) may fail to exhibit linear patterns between individual BMI determinations and cardiometabolic health status [18] or associated risk in critical illness [19]. Although controversial, current research describes a J-shaped relationship between BMI and mortality risk in critical illness, suggesting that patients who are overweight or who have moderate obesity have a lower mortality risk than those with a normal range BMI or severe obesity [20, 21]. These findings, termed the obesity paradox, may be subject to selection bias related to the possibility that some of these individuals may have had a better nutrition status than those with a low BMI [22]. The data suggest that more precise measures of body composition and nutrition status may offer greater insight when determining individual morbidity risks, especially during critical illness.

Guidelines are available for the nutrition care of critically ill patients with obesity, but underlying research in this area is limited. Societies such as the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN), the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM), and the European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) have published recommendations for this population and often recommend an individualized approach to most aspects of nutritional care in patients with obesity (Table 1) [23,24,25]. A recently published update to the 2016 ASPEN/SCCM guidelines evaluated five questions central to nutritional therapy for all critical care patients. The guidelines did not specify recommendations for patients with obesity and instead, concluded that clinical judgment and close monitoring continue to be needed in the absence of consistent evidence [26]. Practitioners should also consider that a variety of factors can complicate the delivery of optimal nutritional care to patients with obesity. These patients may present with altered nutrient processing and pharmacokinetics, especially in the critical care setting, which potentially complicates both medication delivery and nutritional management efforts [26,27,28,29,30,31,32]. A summary of potential factors complicating the care of patients with obesity in critical illness is illustrated in Fig. 1.

Table 1 A review of guidelines and other consensus recommendations for nutritional management of patients with obesity in critical care
Full size table
Fig. 1
figure 1

Factors complicating the care of critically ill patients with obesity. Created with BioRender.com

Full size image

While research continues to accumulate, important knowledge gaps persist in recognizing and managing the complex nutritional needs in ICU patients with obesity. This paper is the result of an international advisory board consisting of experts in obesity care in the ICU working to address these gaps from dietitian, physician, pharmacist, and nursing perspectives. The advisory board aimed to identify key knowledge gaps, challenges, clinical considerations, and outstanding questions when providing optimal nutritional care for critically ill patients with obesity. Consequently, this review will focus on current best practices in malnutrition screening and assessment, estimation of energy and protein needs, the risks and management of sarcopenic obesity, the value of tailored nutrition recommendations, and the emerging role of immunonutrition for patients with obesity.

Malnutrition screening and assessment

Malnutrition screening and assessment is a key challenge in patients with overweight and obesity, and it may not be routinely performed. Thus, malnutrition as a diagnosis may be underestimated for these patients. Patients with malnutrition and obesity were less likely to have a malnutrition diagnosis coded than patients with malnutrition and a BMI in the normal or underweight categories [33]. The limitations of available tools should be recognized when implementing routine screening and assessment of these patients. A summary of the possible uses and limitations of selected tools, including the Malnutrition Screening Tool (MST), the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST), the modified NUTrition Risk in the Critically ill (mNUTRIC) score, Nutrition-Focused Physical Exam (NFPE) and Subjective Global Assessment, is presented in Table 2 [24, –39].

Table 2 Selected malnutrition screening and assessment tools and limitations to their application in patients with obesity
Full size table

Many screening tools consider low BMI when calculating nutritional risk. It is essential to understand that BMI as a sole indicator is not directly predictive of poor outcomes, especially among critically ill patients with obesity [40]. Therefore, tools such as MUST, which include BMI as a marker of risk, may be of limited value [22, 33]. For example, in one retrospective study of mechanically ventilated patients admitted for more than 7 days to the ICU, refeeding hypophosphatemia/syndrome, which is commonly seen in malnourished individuals, occurred in almost 37% of subjects, but baseline characteristics, including BMI, were poor predictors of risk [41].

The Nutrition-Focused Physical Exam (NFPE) can be used to assess nutritional status in patients found to be at risk of potential macro- or micronutrient deficits, including in patients with obesity. During the NFPE, the clinician 1) assesses the patient’s general appearance and compares initial impressions with available patient data from medical records or other sources; 2) evaluates the patient’s current body habitus and compares usual BMI and weight changes with these findings; and 3) performs a hands-on assessment of subcutaneous fat mass, muscle mass, and edema and evaluates skin, hair, nails, and the oral cavity to note clinical signs of micronutrient deficiencies or excesses [37, 42,43,44]. Risk factors for micronutrient deficiencies in patients with obesity may include history of bariatric surgery, underlying fatty liver disease, and the use of certain medications for common comorbidities such as hypertension [45]. Finally, this assessment may also include measures to identify signs of poorly managed chronic conditions such as dyspnea and acanthosis nigricans. Although the NFPE may be routine in some settings, excess adiposity may present barriers to accurately assessing muscle wasting or fat loss.

The subjective global assessment (SGA) tool, validated for different populations including critical care patients, focuses on essential clinical variables that can be obtained from the patient or family members of those who cannot provide their nutritional history. The SGA is a low-cost, noninvasive tool based on a patient’s medical history and physical examination. Due to these characteristics, it has become a commonly used tool for hospitalized patients in various clinical situations. This instrument has also been shown to be a good prognostic assessment tool. One cross-sectional study found that SGA was a reliable tool for identifying malnutrition in patients with overweight and obesity requiring mechanical ventilation [46]. Another study indicated that critically ill patients, including those with obesity and diagnosed as malnourished by SGA, presented with higher ICU readmissions as well as increased mortality [47].

Other assessment instruments like anthropometry and bioimpedance are influenced not only by the hydration status of the patients but also by the cutoffs for normality that may not be appropriate for patients with obesity. Ultrasonography, which can be done at the bedside, seemed to be a promising assessment of the muscle, which is a compartment of the nutritional status, but it requires training and may be technically challenging in patients with obesity. Furthermore, sophisticated tools such as tomography and magnetic resonance may not be routinely available unless performed for diagnosis of the current condition, but even if so, they require software and expertise to interpret results. Muscle function associated with the nutritional status is also difficult to assess once patients are under sedation or neuromuscular blocker therapy. Biochemical parameters like albumin and transthyretin are influenced by the inflammatory status of the patient and, therefore, not useful indicators of nutritional status [48]. More recently, the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) has been proposed as a framework for the diagnosis of the nutritional status; however, it has not been adequately validated to advocate its use in patients with obesity [49, 50].

Current guidelines for screening and assessment

Notably, the 2019 ESPEN guidelines did not recommend any specific tool to be used in critically ill patients and instead stated that “Every critically ill patient staying for more than 48 h in the ICU should be considered at risk for malnutrition [23].” Meanwhile, the 2016 American Society of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN) and the Society of Critical Care Medicine, as well as the updated ASPEN guidelines do not address the topic [24, 26]. Neither guideline specifically highlights whether or how screening and assessment practices should differ for patients with obesity.

Clinical considerations

Available malnutrition screening and assessment tools were not specifically developed for patients with obesity. Overall, assessments should consider the possibility of underlying malnutrition, signs and symptoms of micronutrient deficiencies, and poor muscle quality despite the presence obesity should be considered [45, 51]. Therefore, a good clinical assessment along with an adequate physical examination is required for proper nutritional diagnosis. It is also important to monitor patients for refeeding syndrome, as they may have risk factors unrelated to BMI.

Estimating energy needs for patients with obesity

There is no current consensus among clinicians and a lack of definitive research on how best to estimate energy needs for patients with obesity in critical care settings. Frequently, measured energy expenditure in critically ill patients with obesity is higher than patients of lower BMI, and energy expenditure tends to increase with increasing BMI [52]. Patients with obesity expend more energy due to higher weight burden. Current evidence supports that increased daily activity increases overall energy expenditure compared to a sedentary lifestyle for those with obesity [53]. Thus, an individualized approach is needed [54]. Indirect calorimetry is the most accurate measure of energy needs and is the reference standard for critically ill patients. There are limitations to its use in critical care; however, recent technological advances allow for broader use of indirect calorimetry in the intensive care unit [55, 56]. Predictive equations are also available, including the Penn State and Modified Penn State equations which were developed in critically ill cohorts, including patients with a wide range of BMIs [57,58,59]. In general, predictive equations demonstrate a low to moderate level of performance but may still be useful as a starting point in some clinical settings due to the inherent time and logistic limitations of routine indirect calorimetry [55, 56]. A recent analysis compared measured energy expenditure to weight-based equations recommended in the 2016 ASPEN/SCCM guidelines. They reported clinically significant variations and concluded that “a one-size-fits-all approach to estimation of energy expenditure at a single time point is likely to be inappropriate in critical illness [24, 52].” Finally, there is no consensus on whether actual, ideal, or adjusted body weight should be used to calculate energy needs when using these equations, especially for critically ill patients with obesity [23,24,25, 60].

Current guidelines on energy provision

The 2013 ASPEN obesity guidelines suggest that if indirect calorimetry is unavailable, energy requirements should be based on the Penn State University 2010 predictive equation, or the modified Penn State equation if the patient is over the age of 60 years [25]. The 2016 ASPEN/SCCM guidelines echoed the preference for indirect calorimetry and stated that, if unavailable, a simple weight-based equation be used [24]. Specifically, these guidelines suggest that enteral nutrition be provided within 24–48 h of admission to patients with obesity and suggest an energy provision of 11–14 kcal/kg actual body weight for individuals with a BMI of 30–50 kg/m2 and 22–25 kcal/kg ideal body weight for individuals with a BMI greater than 50 kg/m2 [24]. In 2019, ESPEN released guidelines suggesting clinicians add 20%–25% of the difference in actual body weight minus ideal body weight added to ideal body weight when calculating energy requirements for patients with obesity [23] as estimating caloric intake on ideal body weight may underestimate energy expenditure for those with obesity. It should be noted that all available guidelines are based on a low quality of evidence, and none contemplate which ideal body weight calculation to use. The current ESPEN guidelines, for instance, discuss three different methods for calculating ideal body weight [23], with no consensus for clinicians on which might be optimal for their patients.

In the absence of consistent guidelines to estimate energy needs for these patients, clinicians should use an individualized approach that considers current guidelines, the amount of metabolically active tissue the patient may have (which will influence the degree of hypermetabolism) and the need to respond to changing nutritional requirements and metabolic aberrations throughout the course of care. Patients should be closely monitored, and nutrition regimens should be adjusted accordingly for outcomes such as hyperglycemia, hypercapnia, and other metabolic disturbances.

Clinical considerations

It is important to understand the limitations of available tools when calculating energy needs and their low applicability to patients with obesity. If utilized, predictive equations should only be one aspect of a nutrition assessment for these complex patients and limitations should be recognized. Clinical staff should review individual nutritional requirements and consider factors that affect energy needs on a regular basis such as changes in clinical status including fever and infection, major postoperative procedures, and increased mobility and physical activity. This is necessary as patients’ needs can frequently and rapidly change over the course of critical illness. Finally, regardless of BMI and the determined energy target, it is important to recognize that hospitalized patients, especially those in the ICU, frequently do not consume or receive the amount of nutrition prescribed [52, 61]. Ultimately, the nutritional management of critically ill patients with obesity should be undertaken with the intention of reducing net protein catabolism without concurrent feeding complications and worsening of physical function and clinical outcomes.

Protein requirements in the ICU

Factors such as advanced age, immobility, inflammation, insulin resistance, and medications may increase the protein requirements of critically ill patients [24, 62]. These factors, along with chronic low protein provision in many patients with obesity, may contribute to the loss of lean body mass and the development of sarcopenic obesity, as well as ICU-acquired weakness. Sarcopenia and cachexia are both more common than previously recognized in critically ill patients with obesity [63, 64]. Sarcopenic obesity is estimated to impact 11% of community-dwelling older adults and 16% of older adults in the hospital setting, suggesting that additional screening for earlier diagnosis is needed to provide effective intervention and improve outcomes [65]. Meanwhile, there is no consensus on protein requirements in patients with obesity, leaving clinicians to depend on limited evidence and current guidelines. Ultimately, muscle mass loss may still occur in critically ill patients despite the delivery of what may be determined as adequate protein provision.

Current guidelines for protein provision

To address protein requirements, the ESPEN 2019 guidelines suggest that protein delivery should be guided by urinary nitrogen losses or lean body mass assessments. Use of urinary nitrogen losses to estimate nitrogen balance can be challenging as it requires an accurate 24-h record of nutritional intake and urine collection. It is difficult to obtain a precise 24-h urine collection especially for those without an indwelling urinary catheter. Intestinal drainages and stool losses cannot be measured and requires an assumption of estimated integumentary and urinary non-urea nitrogen losses. Finally, nitrogen balance is reflective of the net difference between nitrogen intake and nitrogen losses. It is limited in that it cannot detect whether anabolism or catabolism is being influenced by the nutrition therapy [66]. The ESPEN 2019 guidelines recommend assessment of lean body assessment via ultrasound, computed tomography scan, magnetic resonance imaging, dual-energy absorptiometry, or bioelectrical impedance [23].

If these tools are unavailable, the progressive delivery of 1.3 g/kg of protein per day based on adjusted body weight is recommended [23]. Likewise, the 2013 ASPEN guidelines suggest beginning with 1.2 g protein/kg actual weight, or 2–2.5 g/kg ideal body weight of protein for patients who are overweight or have obesity, with adjustments based on results of nitrogen balance studies [25]. The 2016 ASPEN/SCCM obesity guidelines suggest 2 g protein/kg ideal body weight for patients with BMI of 30–40 kg/m2 and up to 2.5 g/kg ideal body weight for those with a BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2 [24].

Muscle protein synthesis following protein administration is blunted in critical illness [67]. However, indirect evidence, using nitrogen balance determinations, indicates that this anabolic resistance can be mediated by increasing protein intake in critically ill trauma patients with or without obesity [26, 27, 68]. Current guidelines reflect evidence that higher levels of protein delivery have been associated with positive patient outcomes in retrospective and prospective observational studies and small randomized controlled trials, which have not been definitively determined in adequately sized randomized controlled trials. One prospective cohort study in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients (mean BMI: 26 ± 6 kg/m2) found that optimal nutritional therapy, including adequate protein and energy delivery, was associated with a 50% decrease in 28-day mortality. Adequate energy delivery without meeting protein targets, however, was not associated with mortality risk [69]. In another study of 1,171 critically ill patients with a mean BMI of 28 kg/m2, increased protein intake was associated with a modest reduction in mortality risk [70]. Thus, higher protein delivery, which may be achieved with the use of high protein formula or protein modular supplements, may be preferred. For instance, a double-blind, randomized trial found that a very high-protein enteral formula (32% kcals from protein) compared to a conventional, standard high-protein content formula (20% kcals from protein) demonstrated the ability to deliver adequate protein requirements without increased energy intake in critically ill patients who were overweight [71].

Clinical considerations

A personalized approach to nutrition is key to delivering adequate protein while reducing the risk of excessive energy provision for critically ill patients with obesity to reduce morbidity and mortality risks [72]. A practical approach to developing this type of nutritional regimen would be the use of high protein, low calorie enteral formulas with the addition of bolus protein supplements if necessary for those require enteral nutrition therapy. For parenteral nutrition, a low dextrose, high amino acid content formula would be prescribed. However, other aspects must be taken into consideration, such as renal and hepatic function. As previously discussed, frequent reassessment of clinical status and nutritional needs is vital in these vulnerable patients.

Nutrition strategies for patients with obesity in the ICU

Considering previously discussed nutrition requirements in the critical care setting for all patients, including those with obesity, and understanding the importance of avoiding overfeeding, a tailored approach with fewer calories and more protein seems reasonable. Although data are currently limited and only available from small study populations, hypocaloric, high-protein nutrition therapy has been found to decrease net protein catabolism in hospitalized and critically ill patients with obesity [26, 73,74,75,76]. One such study indicated improved clinical outcomes with hypocaloric high-protein feeding compared to eucaloric feeding [73]; however, other studies [74, 75] indicated no difference. More recently, the augmented versus routine approach to giving energy trial (TARGET) evaluated energy provision of 1.0 kcal/mL versus 1.5 kcal/mL in 3957 patients in the setting of critical illness. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality at 90 days, infectious complications, or adverse events in the overall study group or in the subgroup with obesity [77]. However, interpretation of these data is tempered, as both groups potentially may have received inadequate protein intakes (~ 1.1 g/kg ideal body weight or ~ 0.8 g/kg actual weight daily).

Anabolic resistance, as assessed by nitrogen balance or whole-body protein dynamics using isotopes, associated with aging can be overcome with sufficient protein intake during critical illness [27] even during hypocaloric energy intake for critically ill older patients with obesity [28]. The extent of obesity also appears to influence the amount of protein required as those patients with class III obesity needed more protein to achieve an equivalent nitrogen balance compared to those with class I and II obesity [78].

Current guidelines

Based on this and other evidence, 2016 guidelines from ASPEN/SCCM suggest fewer calories and a high-protein diet for patients with obesity [24, 25]. Specifically, based on expert consensus, the guidelines state, “if available, an enteral formula with low caloric density and a reduced NPC:N [nonprotein calorie:nitrogen ratio] be used in the adult obese ICU patient [24].”

Clinical considerations

Like other aspects of nutritional management in critically ill patients with obesity, clinicians should consider an individualized approach to nutritional management that achieves a higher protein intake without overfeeding energy. While fewer calories are appropriate, a high-protein nutrition regimen may be preferred for many critically ill patients with obesity. While debate ensues regarding the duration and ideal protein delivery during hypocaloric feeding, a target of 2 to 2.5 g/kg ideal body weight per day is considered reasonable in critically ill patients with obesity. While all calculations of ideal body weight have certain limitations, the Hamwi formula may be used in this setting [79]. Monitoring patients for adequate protein is another area of controversy and challenges, especially if a 24-h urine collection is required for nitrogen balance analysis. Limited data are available on proper interpretation of nitrogen balance results, and it is still unclear how these findings correlate with clinical outcomes.

The role of immunonutrition and fiber in critically Ill patients with obesity

The excessive visceral fat tissue and adipocyte hypertrophy seen in patients with obesity contributes to a pro-inflammatory environment, including higher levels of hormones like leptin that disrupt T cell function, which results in a suppressed immune response to infection [80]. Immune function may be influenced by nutritional factors such as vitamin D and arginine status, both of which have been reported to be reduced in non-ICU patients with obesity [81,82,83,84]. Beyond arginine and vitamin D, inflammation may be modulated by other dietary factors such as omega-3 fatty acids and fiber; therefore, the use of these immune-modulating nutrients (also known as immunonutrition) has been considered in critically ill patients with obesity who are hemodynamically stable.

The enteric microbiome is integral to the development and function of innate/adaptive immune systems through microbial metabolites and is likewise impacted by leptin and other hormones that are motivated by a pro-inflammatory environment [85,86,87]. These same pathways are hypothesized to play an important role in the initial development of obesity as well [88, 89]. Nutrition, including the route of nutrition (enteral versus parenteral) [90, 91] and nutrition components such as soluble fiber [92, 93], have been shown to alter the gut microbiota. The microbiome is, therefore, being investigated as a target to address inflammation and obesity, with immunonutrition a potential modulating factor in this setting.

Current guidelines

Based on expert opinion or very low to moderate quality of evidence, the 2016 ASPEN/SCCM guidelines suggest immune-modulating formulas with components such as arginine and fish oil in the surgical intensive care unit, for severe trauma patients, and for those with traumatic brain injury [24]. It is not clear if immunonutrition could benefit critically ill patients with obesity who do not have these conditions. The 2016 ASPEN/SCCM guidelines state, “while an exaggerated immune response in obese patients implicates potential benefit from immunomodulating formulas, lack of outcome data precludes a recommendation at this time [24].” Regarding soluble fiber, the 2016 ASPEN/SCCM guidelines suggest “a fermentable soluble fiber additive (e.g., fructooligosaccharides [FOSs], inulin) be considered for routine use in all hemodynamically stable MICU [medical intensive care unit]/SICU [surgical intensive care unit] patients placed on a standard enteral formulation [24].” This guidance is for the general ICU patient and the guidelines do not mention whether fiber provision should differ for patients with obesity.

Clinical considerations

Although immunonutrition may modulate inflammation in critically ill patients with obesity, its clinical relevance has not yet been fully elucidated. Until further evidence is available, clinicians should use their clinical judgment and evaluate individual patient situations when considering immunonutrition adjuncts in critically ill patients with obesity.

Educational opportunities to support patients

Patients with obesity are complex and present in the critical care setting with a high degree of variability in baseline risk for poor outcomes [94,95,96]. Patient size does not necessarily predict individual risk. This message and the need for specialized, individualized nutrition therapy requires ongoing educational efforts for all clinical staff involved in the management of these complex patients.

Critical care staff, including physicians, nurses, dietitians, and pharmacists involved in the clinical care of patients with obesity, require adequate knowledge to provide optimal nutrition that maintains physical function and reduces risk of poor outcomes [94,95,96]. In addition, clinicians should consider the unique logistic and equipment needs for this population, as well as the use of strategies such as proper patient positioning to reduce pressure injury risk [97], maintain the airway, and prevent aspiration due to unique anatomical challenges [95, 96]. Repositioning and ambulation may be more difficult in patients with obesity, however, are important for optimal care and may have important impacts on the nutrition status and needs of the patient [98]. For example, inadequate repositioning may increase risk for pressure injury development which can alter the patient’s requirement for calories, protein, and micronutrients necessary for wound healing [99]. Early mobilization has been encouraged for functional recovery and maintenance of muscle health; therefore, nutrition needs may be impacted during and following discharge if not routinely performed [100].

Educational efforts should highlight that weight stigma and bias may affect the delivery of care [94, 95, 101]. To treat the whole person, staff should be encouraged to use person-first language and recognize the possibility that patients with obesity may have experienced stigma or negative experiences with healthcare in the past. Finally, in addition to using clinical judgment, clinicians should remain informed of updated guidelines from nutritional societies and evolving research on the topics discussed in this review.

Conclusion

Patients with obesity and critical illness present with several clinical challenges due to the possibility of underlying comorbidities, systemic inflammation, and a lack of evidence to routinely guide nutritional management interventions. Considering the challenges in providing optimal care for patients with obesity and the lack of robust evidence, this advisory board’s consensus opinion rests on the importance of individual care with the principal of first, do no harm. Overall, current nutritional strategies for these patients should be undertaken with a focus on individualized care that considers the whole person, including the possibility of chronic stigma that could impact the delivery of effective care. Additional research should focus on the applicability of current guidelines and evidence for nutrition therapy in populations with obesity. Future studies should also be undertaken to determine the potential for strategies that better address underlying inflammation and other chronic risks seen in patients with obesity, especially in the setting of critical illness.

Data availability

Not applicable

Abbreviations

AND:

Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics

ASPEN:

American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition

BIA:

Bioelectrical impedance analysis

BMI:

Body mass index

CT:

Computed tomography

DXA:

Dual-energy absorptiometry

ESPEN:

European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism

FOS:

Fructooligosaccharide

GLIM:

Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition

IC:

Indirect calorimetry

ICU:

Intensive care unit

IMN:

Immunonutrition

MICU:

Medical intensive care unit

mNUTRIC:

Modified nutrition risk in the critically ill

MRI:

Magnetic resonance imaging

MST:

Malnutrition screening tool

MUST:

Malnutrition universal screening tool

NFPE:

Nutrition-focused physical exam

SCCM:

Society of Critical Care Medicine

SGA:

Subjective global assessment

SICU:

Surgical intensive care unit

TARGET:

The augmented versus routine approach to giving energy trial

TBI:

Traumatic brain injury

WHO:

World Health Organization

References

  1. Alexopoulos AS, Fayfman M, Zhao L, et al. Impact of obesity on hospital complications and mortality in hospitalized patients with hyperglycemia and diabetes. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2016;4(1): e000200.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Abhyankar S, Leishear K, Callaghan FM, Demner-Fushman D, McDonald CJ. Lower short- and long-term mortality associated with overweight and obesity in a large cohort study of adult intensive care unit patients. Crit Care. 2012;16(6):R235.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Finkielman JD, Gajic O, Afessa B. Underweight is independently associated with mortality in post-operative and non-operative patients admitted to the intensive care unit: a retrospective study. BMC Emerg Med. 2004;4(1):3.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Obesity: preventing and managing the global epidemic. Report of a WHO consultation. World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser. 2000;894:i-xii, 1–253.

  5. About overweight & obesity. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. April 7, 2021. Accessed April 4, 2022. https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/about-obesity/index.html#:~:text=Obesity%20is%20a%20serious%20chronic,%2C%20productivity%2C%20and%20military%20readiness

  6. Jastreboff AM, Kotz CM, Kahan S, Kelly AS, Heymsfield SB. Obesity as a disease: the obesity society 2018 position statement. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2019;27(1):7–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Pollack A. A.M.A. recognizes obesity as a disease. The New York Times. June 18, 2013. Accessed February 8, 2022. https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/19/business/ama-recognizes-obesity-as-a-disease.html

  8. Council of the Obesity Society. Obesity as a disease: the obesity society council resolution. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2008;16:1151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. AMA House of Delegates Adopts Policy to Recognize Obesity as a Disease. Obesity Medicine Association. June 19, 2013. Accessed February 8, 2022. https://obesitymedicine.org/ama-adopts-policy-recognize-obesity-disease/

  10. Schetz M, De Jong A, Deane AM, et al. Obesity in the critically ill: a narrative review. Intensive Care Med. 2019;45(6):757–69.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Barazzoni R, Bischoff SC, Busetto L, et al. Nutritional management of individuals with obesity and COVID-19: ESPEN expert statements and practical guidance [published online ahead of print, 2021 May 11]. Clin Nutr. 2021;S0261–5614(21)00248-X.

  12. Zhang X, Lewis AM, Moley JR, Brestoff JR. A systematic review and meta-analysis of obesity and COVID-19 outcomes. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):7193.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Noor FM, Islam MM. Prevalence and associated risk factors of mortality among COVID-19 patients: a meta-analysis. J Commun Health. 2020;45(6):1270–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Glazer AS, Vallis M. Weight gain, weight management and medical care for individuals living with overweight and obesity during the COVID-19 pandemic (EPOCH Study). Obesity Sci Pract. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1002/osp4.591.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Ashby NJS. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on unhealthy eating in populations with obesity. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2020;28(10):1802–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Bhutani S, vanDellen MR, Cooper JA. Longitudinal weight gain and related risk behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic in adults in the US. Nutrients. 2021;13(2):671.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Zachary Z, Brianna F, Brianna L, et al. Self-quarantine and weight gain related risk factors during the COVID-19 pandemic. Obes Res Clin Pract. 2020;14(3):210–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Tomiyama AJ, Hunger JM, Nguyen-Cuu J, Wells C. Misclassification of cardiometabolic health when using body mass index categories in NHANES 2005–2012. Int J Obes (Lond). 2016;40(5):883–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Decruyenaere A, Steen J, Colpaert K, Benoit DD, Decruyenaere J, Vansteelandt S. The obesity paradox in critically ill patients: a causal learning approach to a casual finding. Crit Care. 2020;24(1):485.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Zhao Y, Li Z, Yang T, Wang M, Xi X. Is body mass index associated with outcomes of mechanically ventilated adult patients in intensive critical units? A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE. 2018;13(6): e0198669.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Huang HK, Bukhari K, Peng CC, et al. The J-shaped relationship between body mass index and mortality in patients with COVID-19: a dose-response meta-analysis. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2021;23(7):1701–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Gonzalez MC, Correia MITD, Heymsfield SB. A requiem for BMI in the clinical setting. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2017;20(5):314–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. McClave SA, Taylor BE, Martindale RG, et al. Society of Critical Care Medicine; American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition. 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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Choban P, Dickerson R, Malone A, Worthington P, Compher C. American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition A.S.P.E.N. Clinical guidelines: nutrition support of hospitalized adult patients with obesity. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2013;37(6):714–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. 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 [published correction appears in JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2022;46(1):12–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Dickerson RN, Medling TL, Smith AC, et al. Hypocaloric, high-protein nutrition therapy in older vs younger critically ill patients with obesity. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2013;37(3):342–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Dickerson RN, Maish GO III, Croce MA, Minard G, Brown RO. Influence of aging on nitrogen accretion during critical illness. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2015;39(3):282–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. de Oliveira LF, de Azevedo LG, da Mota SJ, de Sales LPC, Pereira-Santos M. Obesity and overweight decreases the effect of vitamin D supplementation in adults: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Rev Endocr Metab Disord. 2020;21(1):67–76.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Dickerson RN, Holmes WL, Maish GO 3rd, Croce MA, Minard G. Obesity attenuates serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D response to cholecalciferol therapy in critically ill patients. Nutrition. 2019;63–64:120–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Hanrahan TP, Lipman J, Roberts JA. Antibiotic dosing in obesity: a BIG challenge. Crit Care. 2016;20(1):240.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Jeevanandam M, Young DH, Schiller WR. Obesity and the metabolic response to severe multiple trauma in man. J Clin Invest. 1991;87(1):262–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Agarwal E, Ferguson M, Banks M, et al. Malnutrition, poor food intake, and adverse healthcare outcomes in non-critically ill obese acute care hospital patients. Clin Nutr. 2019;38(2):759–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Skipper A, Coltman A, Tomesko J, Charney P, Porcari J, Piemonte T, A, Handu D, Cheng F, W: Position of the academy of nutrition and dietetics: malnutrition (undernutrition) screening tools for all adults. JAND 2019.

  35. van Vliet IMY, Gomes-Neto AW, de Jong MFC, Bakker SJL, Jager-Wittenaar H, Navis GJ. Malnutrition screening on hospital admission: impact of overweight and obesity on comparative performance of MUST and PG-SGA SF. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2021;75(9):1398–406.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. de Vries MC, Koekkoek WK, Opdam MH, van Blokland D, van Zanten AR. Nutritional assessment of critically ill patients: validation of the modified NUTRIC score. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2018;72(3):428–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. White JV, Guenter P, Jensen G, et al. Consensus statement: Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics and American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition: characteristics recommended for the identification and documentation of adult malnutrition (undernutrition). JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2012;36(3):275–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Jensen GL, Cederholm T, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition: a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2019;43(1):32–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Correia MITD, Tappenden KA, Malone A, et al. Utilization and validation of the global leadership initiative on malnutrition (GLIM): a scoping review. Clin Nutr. 2022;41(3):687–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Nutrition support for adults: oral nutrition support, enteral tube feeding and parenteral nutrition. 2017. Updated August 4, 2017. Accessed April 4, 2022. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg32

  41. Olthof LE, Koekkoek WACK, van Setten C, Kars JCN, van Blokland D, van Zanten ARH. Impact of caloric intake in critically ill patients with, and without, refeeding syndrome: a retrospective study. Clin Nutr. 2018;37(5):1609–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Krzizek EC, Brix JM, Herz CT, et al. Prevalence of micronutrient deficiency in patients with morbid obesity before bariatric surgery. Obes Surg. 2018;28(3):643–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Litchford M. Putting the Nutrition-Focused Physical Assessment into Practice in Long-Term Care. Annals of Long-term Care. November 2013. Accessed April 4, 2022. https://www.hmpgloballearningnetwork.com/site/altc/articles/putting-nutrition-focused-physical-assessment-practice-long-term-care

  44. Ernst B, Thurnheer M, Schmid SM, Schultes B. Evidence for the necessity to systematically assess micronutrient status prior to bariatric surgery. Obes Surg. 2009;19(1):66–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Barazzoni R, Gortan CG. Double burden of malnutrition in persons with obesity. Rev Endocr Metab Disord. 2020;21(3):307–13.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Sheean PM, Peterson SJ, Gurka DP, Braunschweig CA. Nutrition assessment: the reproducibility of subjective global assessment in patients requiring mechanical ventilation. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2010;64(11):1358–64.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Fontes D, Generoso Sde V, Toulson Davisson Correia MI. Subjective global assessment: a reliable nutritional assessment tool to predict outcomes in critically ill patients. Clin Nutr. 2014;33(2):291–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Evans DC, Corkins MR, Malone A, et al. The use of visceral proteins as nutrition markers: An ASPEN position paper [published correction appears in Nutr Clin Pract. Nutr Clin Pract. 2021;36(1):22–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition - a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. Clin Nutr. 2019;38(1):1–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Keller H, de van der Schueren MAE; GLIM Consortium, et al. Global leadership initiative on malnutrition (GLIM): Guidance on validation of the operational criteria for the diagnosis of protein-energy malnutrition in adults. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2020;44(6):992–1003.

  51. Cava E, Yeat NC, Mittendorfer B. Preserving healthy muscle during weight loss. Adv Nutr. 2017;8(3):511–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Ridley EJ, Tierney A, King S, et al. Measured energy expenditure compared with best-practice recommendations for obese, critically iIll patients-A prospective observational study. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2020;44(6):1144–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Carneiro IP, Elliott SA, Siervo M, et al. Is obesity associated with altered energy expenditure? Adv Nutr. 2016;7(3):476–87.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. Lambell KJ, Miller EG, Tatucu-Babet OA, Peake S, Ridley EJ. Nutrition management of obese critically ill adults: a survey of critical care dietitians in Australia and New Zealand. Aust Crit Care. 2021;34(1):3–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Oshima T, Berger MM, De Waele E, et al. Indirect calorimetry in nutritional therapy. A position paper by the ICALIC study group. Clin Nutr. 2017;36(3):651–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Bendavid I, Lobo DN, Barazzoni R, et al. The centenary of the Harris-Benedict equations: How to assess energy requirements best? Recommendations from the ESPEN expert group. Clin Nutr. 2021;40(3):690–701.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Frankenfield DC, Ashcraft CM, Galvan DA. Prediction of resting metabolic rate in critically ill patients at the extremes of body mass index. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2013;37(3):361–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Frankenfield D. Validation of an equation for resting metabolic rate in older obese, critically ill patients. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2011;35(2):264–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Frankenfield DC, Coleman A, Alam S, Cooney RN. Analysis of estimation methods for resting metabolic rate in critically ill adults. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2009;33(1):27–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Thibault R, Abbasoglu O, Ioannou E, et al. ESPEN guideline on hospital nutrition. Clin Nutr. 2021;40(12):5684–709.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Kent-Smith L, Eisenbraun C, Wile H. Hospital patients are not eating their full feal: results of the Canadian 2010–2011 nutrition day survey. Can J Diet Pract Res. 2016;77(1):25–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Tieland M, van Dronkelaar C, Boirie Y. Sarcopenic obesity in the ICU. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2019;22(2):162–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Prado CM, Cushen SJ, Orsso CE, Ryan AM. Sarcopenia and cachexia in the era of obesity: clinical and nutritional impact. Proc Nutr Soc. 2016;75(2):188–98.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Ryan AM, Power DG, Daly L, Cushen SJ, Ní Bhuachalla Ē, Prado CM. Cancer-associated malnutrition, cachexia and sarcopenia: the skeleton in the hospital closet 40 years later. Proc Nutr Soc. 2016;75(2):199–211.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Gao Q, Mei F, Shang Y, et al. Global prevalence of sarcopenic obesity in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Nutr. 2021;40(7):4633–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Dickerson RN. Using nitrogen balance in clinical practice. Hosp Pharm. 2005;40(12):1081–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Chapple LS, Kouw IWK, Summers MJ, et al. Muscle protein synthesis following protein administration in critical illness [published online ahead of print]. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2022;https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.202112-2780OC.

  68. Dickerson RN, Pitts SL, Maish GO 3rd, et al. A reappraisal of nitrogen requirements for patients with critical illness and trauma. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2012;73(3):549–57.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Weijs PJ, Stapel SN, de Groot SD, et al. Optimal protein and energy nutrition decreases mortality in mechanically ventilated, critically ill patients: a prospective observational cohort study. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2012;36(1):60–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Zusman O, Theilla M, Cohen J, Kagan I, Bendavid I, Singer P. Resting energy expenditure, calorie and protein consumption in critically ill patients: a retrospective cohort study. Crit Care. 2016;20(1):367.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  71. van Zanten ARH, Petit L, De Waele J, et al. Very high intact-protein formula successfully provides protein intake according to nutritional recommendations in overweight critically ill patients: a double-blind randomized trial. Crit Care. 2018;22(1):156.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  72. van Zanten ARH, De Waele E, Wischmeyer PE. Nutrition therapy and critical illness: practical guidance for the ICU, post-ICU, and long-term convalescence phases. Crit Care. 2019;23(1):368.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  73. Dickerson RN, Boschert KJ, Kudsk KA, Brown RO. Hypocaloric enteral tube feeding in critically ill obese patients. Nutrition. 2002;18(3):241–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Choban PS, Burge JC, Scales D, Flancbaum L. Hypoenergetic nutrition support in hospitalized obese patients: a simplified method for clinical application. Am J Clin Nutr. 1997;66(3):546–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Burge JC, Goon A, Choban PS, Flancbaum L. Efficacy of hypocaloric total parenteral nutrition in hospitalized obese patients: a prospective, double-blind randomized trial. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 1994;18(3):203–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Dickerson RN, Rosato EF, Mullen JL. Net protein anabolism with hypocaloric parenteral nutrition in obese stressed patients. Am J Clin Nutr. 1986;44(6):747–55.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. TARGET Investigators, for the ANZICS Clinical Trials Group, Chapman M, Peake SL, et al. Energy-Dense versus Routine Enteral Nutrition in the Critically Ill. N Engl J Med. 2018;379(19):1823–1834.

  78. Choban PS, Dickerson RN. Morbid obesity and nutrition support: is bigger different? Nutr Clin Pract. 2005;20(4):480–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Taylor S, Dumont N, Clemente R, Allan K, Downer C, Mitchell A. Critical care: meeting protein requirements without overfeeding energy. Clin Nutr ESPEN. 2016;11:e55–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Francisco V, Pino J, Campos-Cabaleiro V, et al. Obesity, fat mass and immune system: role for leptin. Front Physiol. 2018;9:640.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  81. de Oliveira S, Feijó GDS, Neto J, et al. Zinc supplementation decreases obesity-related neuroinflammation and improves metabolic function and memory in rats. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2021;29(1):116–24.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  82. Sansbury BE, Hill BG. Regulation of obesity and insulin resistance by nitric oxide. Free Radic Biol Med. 2014;73:383–99.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Niu YC, Feng RN, Hou Y, et al. Histidine and arginine are associated with inflammation and oxidative stress in obese women. Br J Nutr. 2012;108(1):57–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Eid HM, Arnesen H, Hjerkinn EM, Lyberg T, Seljeflot I. Relationship between obesity, smoking, and the endogenous nitric oxide synthase inhibitor, asymmetric dimethylarginine. Metabolism. 2004;53(12):1574–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Pérez-Pérez A, Sánchez-Jiménez F, Vilariño-García T, Sánchez-Margalet V. Role of leptin in inflammation and vice versa. Int J Mol Sci. 2020;21(16):5887.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. Kau AL, Ahern PP, Griffin NW, Goodman AL, Gordon JI. Human nutrition, the gut microbiome, and the immune system. Nature. 2011;474(7351):327–36.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  87. Tilg H, Kaser A. Gut microbiome, obesity, and metabolic dysfunction. J Clin Invest. 2011;121(6):2126–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  88. Gilbert JA, Blaser MJ, Caporaso JG, Jansson JK, Lynch SV, Knight R. Current understanding of the human microbiome. Nat Med. 2018;24(4):392–400.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  89. Sanmiguel C, Gupta A, Mayer EA. Gut microbiome and obesity: a plausible explanation for obesity. Curr Obes Rep. 2015;4(2):250–61.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  90. Andersen S, Staudacher H, Weber N, et al. Pilot study investigating the effect of enteral and parenteral nutrition on the gastrointestinal microbiome post-allogeneic transplantation. Br J Haematol. 2020;188(4):570–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Wan X, Bi J, Gao X, et al. Partial enteral nutrition preserves elements of gut barrier function, including innate immunity, intestinal alkaline phosphatase (IAP) level, and intestinal microbiota in mice. Nutrients. 2015;7(8):6294–312.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  92. Cara KC, Beauchesne AR, Wallace TC, Chung M. Safety of using enteral nutrition formulations containing dietary fiber in hospitalized critical care patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2021;45(5):882–906.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Fu Y, Moscoso DI, Porter J, et al. Relationship between dietary fiber intake and short-chain fatty acid-producing bacteria during critical illness: A prospective cohort study. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2020;44(3):463–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Pritts W. Confidently caring for critically ill overweight and obese adults. Nurs Crit Care. 2020;15(1):16–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Holsworth C, Gallagher S. Managing care of critically ill bariatric patients. AACN Adv Crit Care. 2017;28(3):275–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Berrios LA. The ABCDs of managing morbidly obese patients in intensive care units. Crit Care Nurse. 2016;36(5):17–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Haesler E. Evidence summary: prevention of pressure injuries in individuals with overweight or obesity. Wound Pract Res. 2018;26(3):158–61.

    Google Scholar 

  98. Dubb R, Nydahl P, Hermes C, et al. Barriers and strategies for early mobilization of patients in intensive care units. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2016;13(5):724–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel, National Pressure Injury Advisory Panel and Pan Pacific Pressure Injury Alliance. Prevention and Treatment of Pressure Ulcers/Injuries: Clinical Practice Guideline. The International Guideline. Emily Haesler (Ed.). EPUAP/NPIAP/PPPIA: 2019.

  100. Marra A, Ely EW, Pandharipande PP, Patel MB. The ABCDEF bundle in critical care. Crit Care Clin. 2017;33(2):225–43.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  101. Phelan SM, Burgess DJ, Yeazel MW, Hellerstedt WL, Griffin JM, van Ryn M. Impact of weight bias and stigma on quality of care and outcomes for patients with obesity. Obes Rev. 2015;16(4):319–26.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This review and previous panel discussion was funded by Abbott Nutrition, The USA.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Translational Science, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, 881 Madison Avenue, Suite 345, Memphis, TN, 38163, USA

    Roland N. Dickerson

  2. Clinical Nutrition Manager, Sodexo, Minneapolis, MN, USA

    Laura Andromalos

  3. Digestive Disease and Surgery Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA

    J. Christian Brown

  4. Department of Surgery, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil

    Maria Isabel T. D. Correia

  5. Placenta-Linda Hospital, 1301 Rose Dr, Placentia, CA, USA

    Wanda Pritts

  6. Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

    Emma J. Ridley

  7. Scientific and Medical Affairs, Abbott Nutrition, 2900 Easton Square Pl, Columbus, OH, USA

    Katie N. Robinson

  8. Acute Care Surgery Team, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, USA

    Martin D. Rosenthal

  9. Chair, Department of Intensive Care Medicine & Research, Gelderse Vallei Hospital, Willy Brandtlaan 10, 6716 RP, Ede, The Netherlands

    Arthur R. H. van Zanten

  10. Division of Human Nutrition and Health, Chair Group Nutritional Biology, Wageningen University & Research, HELIX (Building 124), Stippeneng 4, 6708 WE, Wageningen, The Netherlands

    Arthur R. H. van Zanten

Authors
  1. Roland N. Dickerson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Laura Andromalos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J. Christian Brown
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Maria Isabel T. D. Correia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Wanda Pritts
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Emma J. Ridley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Katie N. Robinson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Martin D. Rosenthal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Arthur R. H. van Zanten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the writing, editing, final review, and approval of submission of the manuscript

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Roland N. Dickerson.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dickerson, R.N., Andromalos, L., Brown, J.C. et al. Obesity and critical care nutrition: current practice gaps and directions for future research. Crit Care 26, 283 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-022-04148-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-022-04148-0

Keywords

  • Malnutrition
  • Obesity
  • Critical illness
  • Nutrition assessment
  • Nutritional requirements
  • Nutrition therapy

Critical Care

ISSN: 1364-8535