{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02181818181818182, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004545454545454545, 'mean_word_length': 5.796296296296297, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Clinical benefits of early post-injury enteral feeding.

Over the past two decades, clinical studies have provided convincing evidence that early nutritional support benefits metabolically stressed surgical patients by preventing acute protein malnutrition. However, the optimal route of substrate delivery (ie, enteral versus parenteral) continues to be debated. Recent basic and clinical investigation offers the exciting possibility that the beneficial effects of traditional nutritional support can be amplified by supplementing specific nutrients that exert pharmacological immune-enhancing effects. Over the past 15 years, the Department of Surgery at the Denver General Hospital has focused clinical research efforts on defining optimal nutrition following major torso trauma. The purpose of this paper is to review our studies as well as other clinical studies in order to answer three questions: 1) Does early post-injury nutritional support improve patient outcome? 2) What is the preferred route of substrate delivery? 3) Do new 'immune-enhancing' diets offer additional clinical benefits?