Correction: Efficacy comparisons of enteral nutrition and parenteral nutrition in patients with severe acute pancreatitis: A meta-analysis from randomized controlled trials

Objective. To analyze the effect of total parenteral nutrition (TPN) and enteral nutrition (EN) in patients with acute pancreatitis.Methods. Randomized controlled trials of TPN and EN in patients with acute pancreatitis were searched in NCBI and CBM databases and The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register. Six studies were enrolled into the analysis, and the details about the trial designs, characters of the subjects, results of the studies were reviewed by two independent authors and analyzed by STATA 11.0 software.Results. Compared with TPN, EN was associated with a significantly lower incidence of pancreatic infection complications (RR=0.556, 95% CI 0.436∼0.709,P=.000), MOF (RR=0.395, 95% CI 0.272∼0.573,P=.003), surgical interventions (RR=0.556, 95% CI 0.436∼0.709,P=.000), and mortality (RR=0.426, 95% CI 0.238∼0.764,P=.167). There was no statistic significance in non-pancreatitis-related complications (RR=0.853, 95% CI 0.490∼1.483,P=.017). However, EN had a significantly higher incidence of non-infection-related complications (RR=2.697, 95% CI 1.947∼3.735,P=.994).Conclusion. EN could be the preferred nutrition feeding method in patients with acute pancreatitis.

Download Full-text

Faculty Opinions recommendation of Use of probiotics in the treatment of severe acute pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Faculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature ◽

10.3410/f.718333901.793493399 ◽

2014 ◽

Author(s):

Marco Bruno ◽

Paul Didden

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Acute Pancreatitis ◽

Randomized Controlled Trials ◽

Severe Acute Pancreatitis ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Randomized Controlled

Download Full-text

Nasogastric Nutrition versus Nasojejunal Nutrition in Patients with Severe Acute Pancreatitis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Gastroenterology Research and Practice ◽

10.1155/2016/6430632 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 2016 ◽

pp. 1-8 ◽

Cited By ~ 11

Author(s):

Youfeng Zhu ◽

Haiyan Yin ◽

Rui Zhang ◽

Xiaoling Ye ◽

Jianrui Wei

Keyword(s):

Acute Pancreatitis ◽

Randomized Controlled Trials ◽

Severe Acute Pancreatitis ◽

Small Sample Size ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Small Sample ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

China National Knowledge Infrastructure ◽

Randomized Controlled

Introduction.Previous studies have shown that the nasogastric (NG) route seems equivalent to the nasojejunal (NJ) route in patients with severe acute pancreatitis (SAP). However, these studies used a small sample size and old criteria for diagnosing SAP, which may include some patients with moderate SAP, according to the newly established SAP criteria (Atlanta 2012 classification). Based on the changes in the criteria for classifying SAP, we performed an up-to-date meta-analysis.Method.We reviewed the PubMed, EMbase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials electronic databases. We included randomized controlled trials comparing NG and NJ nutrition in patients with SAP. We performed the meta-analysis using the Cochrane Collaborations’ RevMan 5.3 software.Results.We included four randomized controlled trials involving 237 patients with SAP. There were no significant differences in the incidence of mortality, infectious complications, digestive complications, achievement of energy balance, or length of hospital stay between the NG and NJ nutrition groups.Conclusions.NG nutrition was as safe and effective as NJ nutrition in patients with SAP. Further studies are needed to confirm our results.

Download Full-text