Highlights
A randomized controlled trial in mechanically ventilated critically ill adults found that a 40 g intraduodenal whey protein bolus did not significantly increase postprandial muscle protein synthesis compared with a 20 g bolus.
The higher protein dose did increase circulating amino acid exposure, including leucine and tyrosine, showing that substrate delivery was greater but not translated into a clearly greater anabolic response in skeletal muscle.
These data support the concept of anabolic resistance during critical illness and suggest that simply escalating a single enteral protein bolus may be insufficient to restore muscle protein synthesis.
The study is clinically important because loss of muscle mass and function is a major contributor to prolonged recovery, ventilator dependence, and post-ICU disability.
Background
Critical illness rapidly alters whole-body metabolism. In the intensive care unit, inflammatory signaling, immobilization, endocrine disruption, inadequate nutrient delivery, organ dysfunction, and exposure to sedatives or vasopressors all contribute to accelerated muscle wasting. Skeletal muscle loss begins early, can be profound within days, and is strongly linked to weakness, delayed liberation from mechanical ventilation, longer rehabilitation, and poorer long-term functional outcomes.
Protein delivery is therefore a central focus of ICU nutrition practice. Guidelines commonly recommend relatively high protein intakes in critically ill adults, although the strength of evidence remains limited and the optimal dose, route, timing, and pattern of delivery are still debated. The biological rationale is straightforward: amino acids, especially essential amino acids and leucine-rich proteins such as whey, stimulate muscle protein synthesis. In healthy individuals, larger protein doses can augment the anabolic response up to a threshold. In critical illness, however, this response is blunted, a phenomenon often termed anabolic resistance.
The present trial by Summers and colleagues addressed a clinically relevant mechanistic question: if critically ill patients demonstrate impaired anabolic responsiveness, can a higher enteral protein dose overcome this defect? This is a particularly important question because many ICU nutrition strategies assume that more protein should produce more muscle anabolism. Direct human skeletal muscle data in ICU patients are scarce, and studies using stable isotope methodology remain technically demanding. For that reason, this trial provides valuable insight beyond routine nutritional balance studies or observational associations.
Study Design
This was a randomized, controlled clinical trial conducted in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients. Twenty patients were studied, with 10 assigned to a 40 g whey protein isolate bolus and 10 assigned to a 20 g whey protein isolate bolus. Baseline characteristics were broadly similar between groups: the 40 g group was 90% male with mean age 49 ± 21 years, and the 20 g group was 80% male with mean age 51 ± 13 years.
The intervention consisted of a single intraduodenal protein bolus administered over 1 hour. Intraduodenal delivery reduced variability related to gastric emptying and allowed a more controlled examination of nutrient exposure. The protein source was whey isolate, which is rich in leucine and typically considered highly anabolic under noncritical conditions.
To quantify muscle protein synthesis, the investigators used a sophisticated stable isotope tracer protocol with primed continuous intravenous infusions of L-[ring-13C6]-phenylalanine and L-[3,5-2H2]-tyrosine. Repeated arterial blood sampling and skeletal muscle biopsies were obtained across a 2-hour fasting phase and a 6-hour postprandial phase. This enabled assessment of plasma amino acid kinetics and fractional synthetic rates of skeletal muscle protein.
The primary endpoint was postprandial muscle protein synthesis rate. Fasting muscle protein synthesis, plasma amino acid availability, and within-group changes from fasting to postprandial conditions were also examined. Data were reported as mean ± SD and area under the curve, with analysis using ANCOVA adjusted for fasting muscle protein synthesis rate and paired t-tests where appropriate.
Key Findings
Primary Outcome
The principal finding was negative: postprandial muscle protein synthesis did not significantly differ between the higher- and lower-dose groups. Mean postprandial muscle protein synthesis was 0.030 ± 0.012%·h-1 in the 40 g group and 0.025 ± 0.010%·h-1 in the 20 g group. The adjusted mean difference was 0.007%·h-1, with a 95% confidence interval from -0.003 to 0.016, and P = .152.
Clinically and mechanistically, this result suggests that doubling the enteral whey protein bolus increased substrate exposure but did not clearly produce a greater anabolic effect in skeletal muscle over the measured postprandial period. The confidence interval does not exclude a small benefit, but it does not support a robust dose-response effect under these conditions.
Fasting Muscle Protein Synthesis
Fasting muscle protein synthesis rates were similar between groups before the intervention: 0.020 ± 0.012%·h-1 in the 40 g group and 0.025 ± 0.023%·h-1 in the 20 g group, with P = .558. This helps support baseline comparability of the anabolic state, although the small sample limits certainty.
Plasma Amino Acid Availability
Despite the neutral primary endpoint, the biological exposure signal was clear. Postprandial plasma leucine area under the curve was significantly higher after 40 g than after 20 g protein: 263 ± 87 versus 194 ± 54 µmol·L-1, P = .005. Tyrosine area under the curve was likewise higher with 40 g: 92 ± 24 versus 63 ± 17 µmol·L-1, P = .006.
These findings are important because they indicate that the higher dose did reach the circulation in greater amounts. In other words, the null result for muscle protein synthesis cannot simply be dismissed as failed delivery of amino acids. Rather, the data support a downstream defect in utilization or signaling, consistent with anabolic resistance.
Post Hoc Within-Group Analysis
A post hoc uncontrolled analysis showed that muscle protein synthesis increased from fasting to postprandial periods in the 40 g group only, with P = .005. However, the between-group comparison remained nonsignificant, and the study was designed around the randomized between-group contrast, not isolated within-group testing.
This nuance matters. A significant within-group change in one arm but not the other does not prove superiority of that intervention. Such analyses may generate hypotheses, especially in small studies, but they should not override the primary randomized comparison. At most, the finding suggests a possibility that some critically ill patients may derive a modest anabolic increment from a larger bolus, though the present trial was not able to confirm a reliable overall advantage.
Clinical Interpretation
The trial’s central message is that increased amino acid availability alone may be insufficient to normalize muscle anabolic responsiveness during critical illness. This is highly plausible biologically. Critical illness is characterized by inflammation, insulin resistance, mitochondrial dysfunction, altered muscle perfusion, immobilization, and disrupted intracellular signaling through pathways such as mTOR. Under these conditions, the skeletal muscle machinery needed to convert amino acid availability into net protein synthesis may be impaired.
For clinicians, the findings argue against assuming that simply pushing a larger single enteral protein bolus will necessarily produce greater muscle anabolism in sedated, ventilated ICU patients. This does not mean protein is unimportant. Rather, it suggests that the relationship between administered protein dose and muscle protein synthetic response is non-linear and constrained by pathophysiology.
The study also helps explain why higher-protein ICU nutrition trials have often yielded mixed or inconclusive clinical results. If muscle tissue is resistant to anabolic stimulation, escalating dose may not reliably preserve lean mass unless combined with other strategies, such as early mobilization, optimized energy delivery, reduced deep sedation when feasible, metabolic control, or perhaps different amino acid formulations and feeding patterns.
Strengths of the Trial
A major strength is the direct measurement of skeletal muscle protein synthesis using stable isotope tracers and muscle biopsies. This is a far more informative mechanistic endpoint than serum proteins, nitrogen balance estimates, or crude intake comparisons. The randomized design also strengthens causal inference, and intraduodenal administration improved control over nutrient delivery.
Another strength is the use of whey protein isolate, an intervention with strong theoretical anabolic potential because of its high leucine content and rapid digestibility. If a dose-response effect was not demonstrable under these optimized mechanistic conditions, that finding is informative for the broader question of anabolic resistance in the ICU.
Limitations and Cautions
The sample size was small, with only 20 patients total. As a result, the study may have been underpowered to detect modest differences. The observed numerical difference in postprandial muscle protein synthesis favored 40 g, but the confidence interval crossed zero. Therefore, the trial does not prove equivalence; it shows lack of statistically significant superiority under the conditions tested.
The intervention was a single bolus rather than a prolonged feeding strategy. ICU nutrition is delivered over days, and cumulative effects on muscle mass, strength, functional recovery, and survival may differ from acute tracer responses. A null short-term anabolic signal does not fully rule out longer-term clinical benefit or harm from different protein dosing regimens.
Generalizability is also limited. The population was mechanically ventilated and predominantly male. The timing within the critical illness course, disease severity, inflammatory burden, concurrent therapies, and pre-illness nutritional status may all influence anabolic responsiveness. Results may not apply equally to women, older frail adults, patients later in recovery, or those receiving active mobilization.
In addition, muscle protein synthesis is only one side of muscle protein balance. Critical illness also increases proteolysis. A feeding strategy could theoretically have limited effect on synthesis yet still affect net balance through suppression of breakdown, although that was not the main focus here.
How This Fits With Current Practice and Guidelines
Contemporary critical care nutrition guidelines generally support enteral nutrition and recommend moderate-to-high protein provision, while acknowledging uncertainty about the ideal target and timing. The present study does not invalidate those recommendations, but it does challenge a simplistic “more is better” interpretation, at least for acute stimulation of muscle protein synthesis with a single whey bolus.
In practice, ICU clinicians should continue to prioritize individualized nutrition assessment, feasible enteral delivery, and avoidance of prolonged underfeeding when possible. At the same time, this trial supports caution against expecting higher protein dose alone to reverse muscle wasting. The problem is probably multifactorial and likely requires multimodal solutions.
Research Implications
Several questions follow directly from this trial. First, would repeated bolus feeding, continuous feeding, or hybrid approaches produce different anabolic responses? Second, could leucine-enriched formulas, essential amino acid blends, or adjunctive agents better activate muscle anabolic signaling? Third, does responsiveness differ according to phase of illness, inflammation level, age, obesity, renal dysfunction, or baseline sarcopenia?
Most importantly, future studies should connect mechanism to outcomes that matter clinically: muscle mass preservation, ICU-acquired weakness, duration of ventilation, mobility, hospital length of stay, and long-term physical function. Mechanistic tracer studies are indispensable, but they need to be integrated with larger pragmatic trials.
Another high-priority area is combination therapy. Nutritional interventions may need to be paired with early rehabilitation, neuromuscular activation, glycemic optimization, and strategies to reduce immobilization. If anabolic resistance is driven by critical illness biology rather than substrate deficiency alone, then single-agent nutrition escalation will likely have limited impact.
Conclusion
This randomized clinical trial provides important mechanistic evidence that, in mechanically ventilated critically ill adults, increasing a single intraduodenal whey protein bolus from 20 g to 40 g increased circulating amino acid availability but did not significantly augment postprandial skeletal muscle protein synthesis. The findings reinforce the concept of anabolic resistance in critical illness and suggest that higher enteral protein dose alone may be insufficient to restore muscle anabolism.
For clinicians, the study is less a repudiation of protein feeding than a reminder of complexity. Protein remains essential, but dose escalation by itself may not solve ICU muscle wasting. For researchers, the message is clear: the next generation of trials should test integrated strategies that address not only substrate delivery, but also the biological and functional barriers to recovery.
Funding and Trial Registration
Trial registration: Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry Identifier: ACTRN12620000776909.
Funding information was not provided in the abstract supplied here. Readers should consult the full article for funding disclosures and conflict-of-interest statements.
References
Summers MJ, Kouw IWK, Asser IE, Louis R, Anand Devanand N, Arunachala Murthy T, Plummer MP, Deane AM, Raith E, Lange KM, Court-Kowalski S, Yadav N, Chai Y, van Loon LJC, Chapman MJ, Chapple LS. Increasing protein dose does not further augment muscle protein synthesis in critical illness: a randomized, controlled clinical trial. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. 2026;212(5):964-971. PMID: 42085214.
Compher C, Bingham AL, McCall M, Patel J, Rice TW, Braunschweig C, McKeever L. Guidelines for the provision of nutrition support therapy in the adult critically ill patient: The American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition. Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition. 2022;46(1):12-41.
Singer P, Blaser AR, Berger MM, Alhazzani W, Calder PC, Casaer MP, Hiesmayr M, Mayer K, Montejo JC, Pichard C, Preiser JC, van Zanten ARH, Oczkowski S, Szczeklik W, Bischoff SC. ESPEN guideline on clinical nutrition in the intensive care unit. Clinical Nutrition. 2019;38(1):48-79.
Puthucheary ZA, Rawal J, McPhail M, Connolly B, Ratnayake G, Chan P, Hopkinson NS, Phadke R, Dew T, Sidhu PS, Velloso C, Seymour J, Agley CC, Selby A, Limb M, Edwards LM, Smith K, Rowlerson A, Rennie MJ, Moxham J, Harridge SDR, Hart N, Montgomery HE. Acute skeletal muscle wasting in critical illness. JAMA. 2013;310(15):1591-1600.