Research

Mixed

Providing similar energy intake via parenteral nutrition (PN) as compared to enteral nutrition (EN) in the first week of critical illness results in similar clinical outcomes.

If a critically ill patient cannot tolerate enteral nutrition (EN), parenteral nutrition (PN) is an acceptable alternative. Ensure similar energy intake and monitor for glycemic control and catheter-related infections. Cost and convenience may guide the choice.

GoodQualifiesHIGH confidence
There was no significant difference in clinical outcomes. Because similar energy intake provided as PN is not superior to EN and no differences in harm were identified, we recommend that either PN or EN is acceptable.
Charlene Compher et al. · Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition · 2021

Why this rating

High quality evidence, strong recommendation.

Source

Guidelines for the provision of nutrition support therapy in the adult critically ill patient: The American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition

Charlene Compher et al. · Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition · 2021

DOI 10.1002/jpen.2267

Meta-analysis · 36 studiesCited 641×
Read the paper
DOI resolved against Crossref · corpus check 2026-06-10

This is one finding among thousands. Every one is graded and traced to its source, so you can see what the evidence actually supports. Browse the research →