scholarly journals Enteral Nutrition within 48 Hours of Admission Improves Clinical Outcomes of Acute Pancreatitis by Reducing Complications: A Meta-Analysis

PLoS ONE ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (6) ◽  
pp. e64926 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jie-Yao Li ◽  
Tao Yu ◽  
Guang-Cheng Chen ◽  
Yu-Hong Yuan ◽  
Wa Zhong ◽  
...  
2018 ◽  
Vol 42 (7) ◽  
pp. 1110-1110
Author(s):  
Sven M. van Dijk ◽  
Olaf J. Bakker ◽  
Marco J. Bruno ◽  
Harry van Goor ◽  
Hjalmar C. van Santvoort ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 144 (5) ◽  
pp. S-274 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olaf J. Bakker ◽  
Sandra van Brunschot ◽  
Antoni Farre ◽  
Colin D. Johnson ◽  
Fotis Kalfarentzos ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 111 ◽  
pp. S52-S53
Author(s):  
Ajai S. Rajabalan ◽  
Tamer Said Ahmed ◽  
Samir V. Patel ◽  
Thara Vidyasagaran ◽  
Vishnu R. Mani ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 46 (9) ◽  
pp. 3948-3958 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wen Li ◽  
Jixi Liu ◽  
Shuqiao Zhao ◽  
Jingtao Li

Objective This study was performed to systematically compare the safety and efficacy of total enteral nutrition (TEN) and total parenteral nutrition (TPN) for patients with severe acute pancreatitis (SAP). Methods The PubMed database was searched up to January 2017, and nine studies were retrieved. These studies were selected according to specific eligibility criteria. The methodological quality of each trial was assessed, and the study design, interventions, participant characteristics, and final results were then analyzed by Review Manager 5.3 (The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark). Results Nine relevant randomized controlled trials involving 500 patients (244 patients in the TEN group and 256 patients in the TPN group) were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled analysis showed a significantly lower mortality rate in the TEN than TPN group [odds ratio (OR), 0.31; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.18–0.54]. The duration of hospitalization was significantly shorter in the TEN than TPN group (mean difference, −0.59; 95% CI, −2.56–1.38). Compared with TPN, TEN had a lower risk of pancreatic infection and related complications (OR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.22–0.77), organ failure (OR, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.06–0.52), and surgical intervention (OR, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.05–0.62). Conclusions This meta-analysis indicates that TEN is safer and more effective than TPN for patients with SAP. When both TEN and TPN have a role in the management of SAP, TEN is the preferred option.


Nutrients ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (6) ◽  
pp. 1840
Author(s):  
Omorogieva Ojo ◽  
Amanda Rodrigues Amorim Adegboye ◽  
Osarhumwese Osaretin Ojo ◽  
Xiaohua Wang ◽  
Joanne Brooke

Background: Although there are merits in using commercial “enteral nutrition formula” (ENF) compared with blended ENF, there is a growing preference for the use of blended ENF in many countries globally. However, the nutritional value and physical properties of blended ENF compared with commercial ENF may be limiting its use. We have not found any evidence of a meta-analysis on the nutritional value of blended diets in the adult population. Aim: The aim of this review was to compare the nutritional value, physical properties, and clinical outcomes of blended ENF with commercial ENF. Methods: The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses were used for this review. The search strategy was based on a Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome framework. The following databases; Pubmed, EMBASE, PSYCInfo, and Google scholar were searched for articles of interest using keywords, Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) and Boolean operators (AND/OR) from the inception of each database until 23 February 2020. The articles were evaluated for quality. Results: Based on the systematic review and meta-analysis, four distinct themes were identified; Nutritional value, Physical properties, Clinical outcomes; and Adverse events. The findings of this review showed inconsistencies in the macronutrient and micronutrient values of the blenderised ENF compared with the commercial ENF. The results of the meta-analysis demonstrated that there were no significant differences (p > 0.05) between the blenderised ENF and the commercial ENF in relation to the fat and protein contents of the diets. However, the blenderised ENF was significantly lower (p < 0.05) than the commercial ENF regarding the energy content of the diets, with an overall mean difference of −29.17 Kcal/100 mL (95% CI, −51.12, −7.22) and carbohydrate content with an overall mean difference of -5.32 g/100 mL (95% CI, −7.64, −3.00). In terms of sodium, potassium, and vitamin A, there were no significant differences (p > 0.05) between the blenderised and commercial ENF, although significant differences (p < 0.05) were observed between the two diets with respect to calcium, phosphorus, magnesium, zinc, iron, and vitamin C contents. Furthermore, the blenderised ENF showed significantly higher levels (p < 0.05) of viscosity and osmolality than the commercial ENF. The significantly lower levels of some of the macro-nutrients and micro-nutrients in the blenderised ENF compared with the commercial ENF and the difference in the expected nutritional values may be due to the fact blenderised ENF is produced from common foods. Thus, the type of foodstuffs, cooking, and processing methods may lead to loss of nutrients and energy density. The deficits in the energy content and some of the macro- and micro-nutrients in the blenderised ENF compared with commercial ENF may have implications for patients’ health and clinical outcomes. The clinical implications of the underdelivering of nutrients may include increased risk of undernutrition, including energy malnutrition, which could have a negative effect on body composition and anthropometric parameters, morbidity, mortality, length of hospital stay, and costs. For outpatient care, this could increase the risk of hospital re-admission and homecare costs. Additionally, the higher viscosity and osmolality of the blenderised ENF compared with the commercial ENF can increase the risk of complications, including tube blockage, and impaired delivery of feed, water, and medications, with significant implications for patients’ nutritional status and health outcomes. Conclusion: The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis identified significant variability in the nutritional value of blenderised ENF compared with commercial ENF. Furthermore, the nutritional values of the blenderised ENF do not meet the expected recommended levels compared with commercial ENF and these may have implications for patients’ nutritional status and health outcomes, including the effect on body composition, morbidity, mortality, hospital re-admission, and costs. Further studies are needed to elucidate the nutritional value of blenderised ENF on patients’ clinical outcomes.


2008 ◽  
Vol 134 (4) ◽  
pp. A-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadim S. Jafri ◽  
Suhal S. Mahid ◽  
Swapna K. Gopathi ◽  
Carlton A. Hornung ◽  
Susan Galandiuk ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 2011 ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heming Quan ◽  
Xingpeng Wang ◽  
Chuanyong Guo

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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document