Does enteral nutrition compared to parenteral nutrition result in better outcomes in critically ill adult patients? A systematic review of the literature

Nutrition ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 20 (10) ◽  
pp. 843-848 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leah Gramlich ◽  
Krikor Kichian ◽  
Jaime Pinilla ◽  
Nadia J. Rodych ◽  
Rupinder Dhaliwal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Enteral Nutrition ◽  
Parenteral Nutrition ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Adult Patients ◽  
Review Of The Literature

scholarly journals Effect of Supplemental Parenteral Nutrition Versus Enteral Nutrition Alone on Clinical Outcomes in Critically Ill Adult Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Nutrients ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (10) ◽  
pp. 2968
Author(s):  
Dalal J. Alsharif ◽  
Farah J. Alsharif ◽  
Ghadeer S. Aljuraiban ◽  
Mahmoud M. A. Abulmeaty
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Enteral Nutrition ◽  
Parenteral Nutrition ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Nosocomial Infections ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Icu Mortality ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Enteral nutrition (EN) is considered the first feeding route for critically ill patients. However, adverse effects such as gastrointestinal complications limit its optimal provision, leading to inadequate energy and protein intake. We compared the clinical outcomes of supplemental parenteral nutrition added to EN (SPN + EN) and EN alone in critically ill adults. Electronic databases restricted to full-text randomized controlled trials available in the English language and published from January 1990 to January 2019 were searched. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Jadad scale, and the meta-analysis was conducted using the MedCalc software. A total of five studies were eligible for inclusion in the systematic review and meta-analysis. Compared to EN alone, SPN + EN decreased the risk of nosocomial infections (relative risk (RR) = 0.733, p = 0.032) and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (RR = 0.569, p = 0.030). No significant differences were observed between SPN + EN and EN in the length of hospital stay, hospital mortality, length of ICU stay, and duration of mechanical ventilation. In conclusion, when enteral feeding fails to fulfill the energy requirements in critically ill adult patients, SPN may be beneficial as it helps in decreasing nosocomial infections and ICU mortality, in addition to increasing energy and protein intakes with no negative effects on other clinical outcomes.

Nursing issues in enteral nutrition during prone position in critically ill patients: A systematic review of the literature

2020 ◽  
Vol 60 ◽  
pp. 102899 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Bruni ◽  
Eugenio Garofalo ◽  
Laura Grande ◽  
Gaetano Auletta ◽  
Davide Cubello ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Enteral Nutrition ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Prone Position ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Review Of The Literature

scholarly journals Effect of gut microbiota modulation on feeding tolerance of enterally fed critically ill adult patients: a systematic review

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Najmeh Seifi ◽  
Ali Jafarzadeh Esfahani ◽  
Alireza Sedaghat ◽  
Reza Rezvani ◽  
Majid Khadem-Rezaiyan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Gut Microbiota ◽  
Beneficial Effect ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Energy Intake ◽  
Adult Patients ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Clinical Endpoints ◽  
Feeding Tolerance

Abstract Purpose The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the effect of pre-, pro-, and synbiotics on feeding tolerance of enterally fed critically ill adult patients. Methods MEDLINE, Science Direct, Web of Knowledge, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched up to November 2019. English language randomized controlled trials reporting the effect of pre, pro or synbiotics on the feeding tolerance of enterally fed critically ill adult patients were included. Results Overall, 15 papers were selected for review. Among six studies reporting the energy intake, only two studies showed significantly higher energy intake in the prebiotic-receiving groups. Among four RCTs reporting frequency or time to achieve the target calorie, only one found a significant effect of probiotics to reduce the time to achieve a target dose of calorie. About the prevalence or duration of diarrhea, 7 out of 12 RCTs reported a beneficial effect. All but one study found no beneficial effects for gut microbiota manipulation on clinical endpoints including length of stay (LOS) in hospital and intensive care unit (ICU). Conclusion It should be noticed that the heterogeneity in study designs, product format, and ICU patient populations makes it difficult to draw any general conclusion. Overall, it seems that pre, pro, or synbiotics have no significant beneficial effect on feeding tolerance and clinical endpoints in critically ill adults, but they may reduce the prevalence or duration of diarrhea.

scholarly journals Leiomyosarcoma of the Urinary Bladder in Adult Patients: A Systematic Review of the Literature and Meta-Analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 102 (1) ◽  
pp. 96-101 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen Zieschang ◽  
Rainer Koch ◽  
Manfred P. Wirth ◽  
Michael Froehner
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Urinary Bladder ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Adult Patients ◽  
Review Of The Literature

Total parenteral nutrition alters amikacin pharmacokinetics in critically ill adult patients

1994 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 57 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Tormo ◽  
F.J. Abad ◽  
C.L. Ronchera ◽  
V. Parra ◽  
M.D. Bellés ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Parenteral Nutrition ◽  
Total Parenteral Nutrition ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Adult Patients

The Benefits of Parenteral Nutrition (PN) Versus Enteral Nutrition (EN) Among Adult Critically Ill Patients: What is the Evidence? A Literature Review

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (7) ◽  
pp. 615-626 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angel Joel Cadena ◽  
Sara Habib ◽  
Fred Rincon ◽  
Stephanie Dobak
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Enteral Nutrition ◽  
Parenteral Nutrition ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Nutrition Support ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation Duration ◽  
The Impact

Malnutrition is frequently seen among patients in the intensive care unit. Evidence shows that optimal nutritional support can lead to better clinical outcomes. Recent clinical trials debate over the efficacy of enteral nutrition (EN) over parenteral nutrition (PN). Multiple trials have studied the impact of EN versus PN in terms of health-care cost and clinical outcomes (including functional status, cost, infectious complications, mortality risk, length of hospital and intensive care unit stay, and mechanical ventilation duration). The aim of this review is to address the question: In critically ill adult patients requiring nutrition support, does EN compared to PN favorably impact clinical outcomes and health-care costs?

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document