METHODS: Data from patients admitted to the ward or intensive care unit (ICU) were collected at three different times: within the first 72 h (T1) of PN use, on the 7th day (T2), and the 14th day (T3) after the initial assessment.
RESULTS: 302 patients were included; the average age was 48.3 years old; the prevalence of death was 22.2%, and 61.6% of the sample were male. TTR values and the effectiveness of nutritional support in these patients were not associated with the outcome; however, meeting caloric needs was related to the outcome (p = 0.047). No association was found when TTR values were compared to the nutritional status. Thus, TTR was not a good indicator of nutritional risk or nutritional status in hospitalized patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Undoubtedly, the TTR measurement was inversely proportional to CRP measurements. It was possible to conclude in this follow-up cohort of hospitalized patients that TTR values were not useful for determining whether the patient was malnourished, predicting death or effectiveness of nutritional support, yet based upon our analyses, a decrease in TTR greater than 0.024 units for every 1 unit increase in CRP might be due to ineffective nutritional supply.
方法:在三个不同的时间收集进入病房或重症监护病房(ICU)的患者的数据:在使用PN的最初72小时(T1)内,在第7天(T2),以及初始评估后的第14天(T3)。
结果:共纳入302例患者,平均年龄48.3岁,死亡率为22.2%,61.6%的样本为男性。这些患者的TTR值和营养支持的有效性与结局无关;然而,满足热量需求与结局相关(p=0.047).当将TTR值与营养状况进行比较时,未发现关联。因此,TTR不是住院患者营养风险或营养状况的良好指标。
结论:毫无疑问,TTR测量值与CRP测量值成反比.在这个住院患者的随访队列中可以得出结论,TTR值对确定患者是否营养不良没有帮助。预测死亡或营养支持的有效性,然而根据我们的分析,CRP每增加1个单位,TTR降低大于0.024个单位可能是由于营养供应无效.