-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2020Nutrition is an important aspect of management in severe acute pancreatitis. Enteral nutrition has advantages over parenteral nutrition and is the preferred method of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Nutrition is an important aspect of management in severe acute pancreatitis. Enteral nutrition has advantages over parenteral nutrition and is the preferred method of feeding. Enteral feeding via nasojejunal tube is often recommended, but its benefits over nasogastric feeding are unclear. The placement of a nasogastric tube is technically simpler than the placement of a nasojejunal tube.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the mortality, morbidity, and nutritional status outcomes of people with severe acute pancreatitis fed via nasogastric tube versus nasojejunal tube.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS on 17 October 2019 without using any language restrictions. We also searched reference lists and conference proceedings for relevant studies and clinical trial registries for ongoing trials. We contacted authors for additional information.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing enteral feeding by nasogastric and nasojejunal tubes in participants with severe acute pancreatitis.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias of the included studies, and extracted data. This information was independently verified by the other review authors. We used standard methods expected by Cochrane to assess the risk of bias and perform data synthesis. We rated the certainty of evidence according to GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included five RCTs that randomised a total of 220 adult participants from India, Scotland, and the USA. Two of the trial reports were available only as abstracts. The trials differed in the criteria used to rate the severity of acute pancreatitis, and three trials excluded those who presented in severe shock. The duration of onset of symptoms before presentation in the trials ranged from within one week to four weeks. The trials also differed in the methods used to confirm the placement of the tubes and in what was considered to be nasojejunal placement. We assessed none of the trials as at high risk of bias, though reporting of methods in four trials was insufficient to judge the risk of bias for one or more of the domains assessed. There was no evdence of effect with nasogastric or nasojejunal placement on the primary outcome of mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 1.17; I = 0%; 5 trials, 220 participants; very low-certainty evidence due to indirectness and imprecision). Similarly, there was no evidence of effect on the secondary outcomes for which data were available. These included organ failure (3 trials, 145 participants), rate of infection (2 trials, 108 participants), success rate (3 trials, 159 participants), complications associated with the procedure (2 trials, 80 participants), need for surgical intervention (3 trials, 145 participants), requirement of parenteral nutrition (2 trials, 80 participants), complications associated with feeds (4 trials, 195 participants), and exacerbation of pain (4 trials, 195 participants). However, the certainty of the evidence for these secondary outcomes was also very low due to indirectness and imprecision. Three trials (117 participants) reported on length of hospital stay, but the data were not suitable for meta-analysis. None of the trials reported data suitable for meta-analysis for the other secondary outcomes of this review, which included days taken to achieve full nutrition requirement, duration of tube feeding, and duration of analgesic requirement after feeding tube placement.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is insufficient evidence to conclude that there is superiority, inferiority, or equivalence between the nasogastric and nasojejunal mode of enteral tube feeding in people with severe acute pancreatitis.
Topics: Enteral Nutrition; Humans; Intubation, Gastrointestinal; Length of Stay; Nutritional Status; Pancreatitis; Parenteral Nutrition; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32216139
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010582.pub2 -
The Journal of Nutrition Oct 2021Dietary saturated fat raises total cholesterol and LDL cholesterol levels. It is unclear whether these effects differ by the fatty acid chain lengths of saturated fats;... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Dietary saturated fat raises total cholesterol and LDL cholesterol levels. It is unclear whether these effects differ by the fatty acid chain lengths of saturated fats; particularly, it is unclear whether medium-chain fatty acids increase lipid levels.
OBJECTIVES
We conducted a systematic review to determine the effects of medium-chain triglyceride (MCT) oil, consisting almost exclusively of medium-chain fatty acids (6:0-10:0), on blood lipids.
METHODS
We searched Medline and Embase through March 2020 for randomized trials with a minimum 2-week intervention period that compared MCT oil with another fat or oil. Outcomes were total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, and triglyceride levels. Included studies were restricted to adults above 18 years of age. Studies conducted in populations receiving enteral or parenteral nutrition were excluded. Data were pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis.
RESULTS
Seven articles were included in the meta-analysis; LDL cholesterol and HDL cholesterol were reported in 6 studies. MCT oil intake did not affect total cholesterol (0.04 mmol/L; 95% CI, -0.11 to 0.20; I2 = 33.6%), LDL cholesterol (0.02 mmol/L; 95% CI, -0.13 to 0.17; I2 = 28.7%), or HDL cholesterol (-0.01 mmol/L; 95% CI, -0.10 to 0.09; I2 = 74.1%) levels, but did increase triglycerides (0.14 mmol/L; 95% CI, 0.01-0.27; I2 = 42.8%). Subgroup analyses showed that the effects of MCT oil on total cholesterol and LDL cholesterol differed based on the fatty acid profile of the control oil (Pinteraction = 0.003 and 0.008, respectively), with MCT oil increasing total cholesterol and LDL cholesterol when compared to a comparator consisting predominantly of unsaturated fatty acids, and with some evidence for reductions when compared to longer-chain SFAs.
CONCLUSIONS
MCT oil does not affect total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, or HDL cholesterol levels, but does cause a small increase in triglycerides.
Topics: Cholesterol; Cholesterol, HDL; Dietary Fats; Humans; Lipids; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Triglycerides
PubMed: 34255085
DOI: 10.1093/jn/nxab220 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2019Early enteral nutrition support (within 48 hours of admission or injury) is frequently recommended for the management of patients in intensive care units (ICU). Early... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Early enteral nutrition support (within 48 hours of admission or injury) is frequently recommended for the management of patients in intensive care units (ICU). Early enteral nutrition is recommended in many clinical practice guidelines, although there appears to be a lack of evidence for its use and benefit.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of early enteral nutrition (initiated within 48 hours of initial injury or ICU admission) versus delayed enteral nutrition (initiated later than 48 hours after initial injury or ICU admission), with or without supplemental parenteral nutrition, in critically ill adults.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL (2019, Issue 4), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to April 2019), Embase Ovid SP (1974 to April 2019), CINAHL EBSCO (1982 to April 2019), and ISI Web of Science (1945 to April 2019). We also searched Turning Research Into Practice (TRIP), trial registers (ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN registry), and scientific conference reports, including the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition and the European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism. We applied no restrictions by language or publication status.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared early versus delayed enteral nutrition, with or without supplemental parenteral nutrition, in adults who were in the ICU for longer than 72 hours. This included individuals admitted for medical, surgical, and trauma diagnoses, and who required any type of enteral nutrition.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors extracted study data and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies. We expressed results as risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous data, and as mean differences (MD) for continuous data, both with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included seven RCTs with a total of 345 participants. Outcome data were limited, and we judged many trials to have an unclear risk of bias in several domains. Early versus delayed enteral nutrition Six trials (318 participants) assessed early versus delayed enteral nutrition in general, medical, and trauma ICUs in the USA, Australia, Greece, India, and Russia. Primary outcomes Five studies (259 participants) measured mortality. It is uncertain whether early enteral nutrition affects the risk of mortality within 30 days (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.16 to 6.38; 1 study, 38 participants; very low-quality evidence). Four studies (221 participants) reported mortality without describing the timeframe; we did not pool these results. None of the studies reported a clear difference in mortality between groups. Three studies (156 participants) reported infectious complications. We were unable to pool the results due to unreported data and substantial clinical heterogeneity. The results were inconsistent across studies. One trial measured feed intolerance or gastrointestinal complications; it is uncertain whether early enteral nutrition affects this outcome (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.01; 59 participants; very low-quality evidence). Secondary outcomes One trial assessed hospital length of stay and reported a longer stay in the early enteral group (median 15 days (interquartile range (IQR) 9.5 to 20) versus 12 days (IQR 7.5 to15); P = 0.05; 59 participants; very low-quality evidence). Three studies (125 participants) reported the duration of mechanical ventilation. We did not pool the results due to clinical and statistical heterogeneity. The results were inconsistent across studies. It is uncertain whether early enteral nutrition affects the risk of pneumonia (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.06; 4 studies, 192 participants; very low-quality evidence). Early enteral nutrition with supplemental parenteral nutrition versus delayed enteral nutrition with supplemental parenteral nutrition We identified one trial in a burn ICU in the USA (27 participants). Primary outcomes It is uncertain whether early enteral nutrition with supplemental parenteral nutrition affects the risk of mortality (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.25 to 2.18; very low-quality evidence), or infectious complications (MD 0.00, 95% CI -1.94 to 1.94; very low-quality evidence). There were no data available for feed intolerance or gastrointestinal complications. Secondary outcomes It is uncertain whether early enteral nutrition with supplemental parenteral nutrition reduces the duration of mechanical ventilation (MD 9.00, 95% CI -10.99 to 28.99; very low-quality evidence). There were no data available for hospital length of stay or pneumonia.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Due to very low-quality evidence, we are uncertain whether early enteral nutrition, compared with delayed enteral nutrition, affects the risk of mortality within 30 days, feed intolerance or gastrointestinal complications, or pneumonia. Due to very low-quality evidence, we are uncertain if early enteral nutrition with supplemental parenteral nutrition compared with delayed enteral nutrition with supplemental parenteral nutrition reduces mortality, infectious complications, or duration of mechanical ventilation. There is currently insufficient evidence; there is a need for large, multicentred studies with rigorous methodology, which measure important clinical outcomes.
Topics: Combined Modality Therapy; Critical Illness; Enteral Nutrition; Humans; Intensive Care Units; Malnutrition; Parenteral Nutrition; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Time Factors
PubMed: 31684690
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012340.pub2 -
Nutrients Feb 2022Teduglutide has been described as an effective treatment for parenteral support (PS) reduction in patients with short bowel syndrome (SBS). However, a quantitative... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Teduglutide has been described as an effective treatment for parenteral support (PS) reduction in patients with short bowel syndrome (SBS). However, a quantitative summary of the available evidence is still lacking. PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane library, OVID, and CINAHL databases were systematically searched up to July 2021 for studies reporting the rate of response (defined as a ≥20% reduction in PS) to teduglutide among PS-dependent adult patients. The rate of weaning (defined as the achievement of PS independence) was also evaluated as a secondary end-point. Ten studies were finally considered in the meta-analysis. Pooled data show a response rate of 64% at 6 months, 77% at 1 year and, 82% at ≥2 years; on the other hand, the weaning rate could be estimated as 11% at 6 months, 17% at 1 year, and 21% at ≥2 years. The presence of colon in continuity reduced the response rate (-17%, 95%CI: (-31%, -3%)), but was associated with a higher weaning rate (+16%, 95%CI: (+6%, +25%)). SBS etiology, on the contrary, was not found to be a significant predictor of these outcomes, although a nonsignificant trend towards both higher response rates (+9%, 95%CI: (-8%, +27%)) and higher weaning rates (+7%, 95%CI: (-14%, +28%)) could be observed in patients with Crohn's disease. This was the first meta-analysis that specifically assessed the efficacy of teduglutide in adult patients with SBS. Our results provide pooled estimates of response and weaning rates over time and identify intestinal anatomy as a significant predictor of these outcomes.
Topics: Adult; Gastrointestinal Agents; Humans; Parenteral Nutrition; Peptides; Short Bowel Syndrome
PubMed: 35215445
DOI: 10.3390/nu14040796 -
Critical Care Medicine Apr 2024Maintaining glycemic control of critically ill patients may impact outcomes such as survival, infection, and neuromuscular recovery, but there is equipoise on the target...
RATIONALE
Maintaining glycemic control of critically ill patients may impact outcomes such as survival, infection, and neuromuscular recovery, but there is equipoise on the target blood levels, monitoring frequency, and methods.
OBJECTIVES
The purpose was to update the 2012 Society of Critical Care Medicine and American College of Critical Care Medicine (ACCM) guidelines with a new systematic review of the literature and provide actionable guidance for clinicians.
PANEL DESIGN
The total multiprofessional task force of 22, consisting of clinicians and patient/family advocates, and a methodologist applied the processes described in the ACCM guidelines standard operating procedure manual to develop evidence-based recommendations in alignment with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Approach (GRADE) methodology. Conflict of interest policies were strictly followed in all phases of the guidelines, including panel selection and voting.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review for each Population, Intervention, Comparator, and Outcomes question related to glycemic management in critically ill children (≥ 42 wk old adjusted gestational age to 18 yr old) and adults, including triggers for initiation of insulin therapy, route of administration, monitoring frequency, role of an explicit decision support tool for protocol maintenance, and methodology for glucose testing. We identified the best available evidence, statistically summarized the evidence, and then assessed the quality of evidence using the GRADE approach. We used the evidence-to-decision framework to formulate recommendations as strong or weak or as a good practice statement. In addition, "In our practice" statements were included when the available evidence was insufficient to support a recommendation, but the panel felt that describing their practice patterns may be appropriate. Additional topics were identified for future research.
RESULTS
This guideline is an update of the guidelines for the use of an insulin infusion for the management of hyperglycemia in critically ill patients. It is intended for adult and pediatric practitioners to reassess current practices and direct research into areas with inadequate literature. The panel issued seven statements related to glycemic control in unselected adults (two good practice statements, four conditional recommendations, one research statement) and seven statements for pediatric patients (two good practice statements, one strong recommendation, one conditional recommendation, two "In our practice" statements, and one research statement), with additional detail on specific subset populations where available.
CONCLUSIONS
The guidelines panel achieved consensus for adults and children regarding a preference for an insulin infusion for the acute management of hyperglycemia with titration guided by an explicit clinical decision support tool and frequent (≤ 1 hr) monitoring intervals during glycemic instability to minimize hypoglycemia and against targeting intensive glucose levels. These recommendations are intended for consideration within the framework of the patient's existing clinical status. Further research is required to evaluate the role of individualized glycemic targets, continuous glucose monitoring systems, explicit decision support tools, and standardized glycemic control metrics.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Child; Humans; Blood Glucose; Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring; Critical Care; Critical Illness; Glycemic Control; Hyperglycemia; Insulin; Infant; Child, Preschool
PubMed: 38240484
DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000006174 -
Clinical Infectious Diseases : An... May 2023Infectious diseases and ophthalmology professional societies have disagreed regarding ocular screening in patients with candidemia. We aimed to summarize the current... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Infectious diseases and ophthalmology professional societies have disagreed regarding ocular screening in patients with candidemia. We aimed to summarize the current evidence on the prevalence of ocular candidiasis (OC) and Candida endophthalmitis (CE) according to the standardized definitions.
METHODS
A literature search was conducted from the inception date through 16 October 2022 using PubMed, Embase, and SCOPUS. Pooled prevalence of ocular complications was derived from generalized linear mixed models (PROSPERO CRD42022326610).
RESULTS
A total of 70 and 35 studies were included in the meta-analysis for OC and concordant CE (chorioretinitis with vitreous involvement), respectively. This study represented 8599 patients with candidemia who underwent ophthalmologic examination. Pooled prevalences (95% CI) of OC, overall CE, concordant CE, and discordant CE were 10.7% (8.4-13.5%), 3.1% (2.1-4.5%), 1.8% (1.3-2.6%), and 7.4% (4.5-12%) of patients screened, respectively. Studies from Asian countries had significantly higher concordant CE prevalence (95% CI) of patients screened (3.6%; 2.9-4.6%) compared with studies from European countries (1.4%; .4-5%) and American countries (1.4%; .9-2.2%) (P <.01). Presence of total parenteral nutrition and Candida albicans was associated with CE, with pooled odds ratios (95% CI) of 6.92 (3.58-13.36) and 3.02 (1.67-5.46), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
Prevalence of concordant CE overall and among Asian countries was 2 and 4 times higher than the prevalence previously reported by the American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) of <0.9%, respectively. There is an urgent need to study optimal screening protocols and to establish joint recommendations by the Infectious Diseases Society of America and AAO.
Topics: Humans; Candidemia; Prevalence; Candidiasis; Candida albicans; Eye Infections, Fungal; Endophthalmitis
PubMed: 36750934
DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciad064 -
The Journal of Hospital Infection May 2022The incidence of central venous catheter (CVC)-related bloodstream infections is high in patients requiring a long-term CVC. Therefore, infection prevention is of the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The incidence of central venous catheter (CVC)-related bloodstream infections is high in patients requiring a long-term CVC. Therefore, infection prevention is of the utmost importance. The aim of this study was to provide an updated overview of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of taurolidine containing lock solutions (TL) to other lock solutions for the prevention of CVC-related bloodstream infections in all patient populations. On 15 February 2021, PubMed, Embase and The Cochrane Library were searched for RCTs comparing the efficacy of TLs for the prevention of CVC-related bloodstream infections with other lock solutions. Exclusion criteria were non-RCTs, studies describing <10 patients and studies using TLs as treatment. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. A random effects model was used to pool individual study incidence rate ratios (IRRs). Subgroup analyses were performed based on the following factors: CVC indication, comparator lock and bacterial isolates cultured. A total of 14 articles were included in the qualitative synthesis describing 1219 haemodialysis, total parenteral nutrition and oncology patients. The pooled IRR estimated for all patient groups together (nine studies; 918 patients) was 0.30 (95% confidence interval 0.19-0.46), favouring the TLs. Adverse events (10 studies; 867 patients) were mild and scarce. The quality of the evidence was limited due to a high risk of bias and indirectness of evidence. The use of TLs might be promising for the prevention of CVC-related bloodstream infections. Large-scale RCTs are needed to draw firm conclusions on the efficacy of TLs.
Topics: Catheter-Related Infections; Catheterization, Central Venous; Central Venous Catheters; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sepsis; Taurine; Thiadiazines
PubMed: 34767871
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhin.2021.10.022 -
Journal of Clinical Nursing Mar 2024To evaluate and summarize the evidence for prevention and management of enteral feeding intolerance in critically ill patients and provide reference for clinical... (Review)
Review
AIM
To evaluate and summarize the evidence for prevention and management of enteral feeding intolerance in critically ill patients and provide reference for clinical practice.
DESIGN
This study was an evidence summary followed by the evidence summary reporting standard of Fudan University Center for Evidence-based Nursing.
METHODS
Current literatures were systematically searched for the best evidence for prevention and management of enteral feeding intolerance in critically ill patients. Literature types included clinical guidelines, best practice information sheets, expert consensuses, systematic reviews, evidence summaries and cohort studies.
DATA SOURCES
UpToDate, BMJ Best Practice, Joanna Briggs Institute, Guidelines International Network, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, Registered Nurses Association of Ontario, Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network, the Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, Sinomed, Web of Science, Yi Maitong Guidelines Network, DynaMed, MEDLINE, CNKI, WanFang database, Chinese Medical Journal Full-text Database, European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism website, the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition website were searched from January 2012 to April 2023.
RESULTS
We finally identified 18 articles that had high-quality results. We summarized the 24 pieces of best evidence from these articles, covering five aspects: screening and assessment of the risk of enteral nutritional tolerance; formulation of enteral nutrition preparations; enteral nutritional feeding implementation; feeding intolerance symptom prevention and management; and multidisciplinary management. Of these pieces of evidence, 19 were 'strong' and 5 were 'weak', 7 pieces of evidence were recommended in level one and 4 pieces of evidence were recommended in level two.
CONCLUSION
The following 24 pieces of evidence for prevention and management of enteral feeding intolerance in critically ill patients were finally recommended. However, as these evidences came from different countries, relevant factors such as the clinical environment should be evaluated before application. Future studies should focus on more specific symptoms of feeding intolerance and more targeted prevention design applications.
IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND PATIENT CARE
The clinical medical staffs are recommended to take evidence-based recommendations for the implementation of standardized enteral nutrition to improve patient outcomes and decrease gastrointestinal intolerance in critically ill patients.
IMPACT
The management of enteral nutrition feeding intolerance has always been a challenge and difficulty in critically ill patients. This study summarizes 24 pieces of the best evidence for prevention and management of enteral nutrition feeding intolerance in critically ill patients. Following and implementing these 24 pieces of evidence is beneficial to the prevention and management of feeding intolerance in clinical practice. The 24 pieces of evidence include five aspects, including screening and assessment of the risk of enteral nutritional tolerance, formulation of enteral nutrition preparations, enteral nutritional feeding implementation, feeding intolerance symptom prevention and management and multidisciplinary management. These five aspects constitute a good implementation process. Screening and assessment of enteral nutritional tolerance throughout intervention are important guarantees for developing a feasible nutrition program in critically ill patients. This study will be benefit to global medical workers in the nutritional management of critically ill patients.
REPORTING METHOD
This evidence summary followed the evidence summary reporting specifications of Fudan University Center for Evidence-based Nursing, which were based on the methodological process for the summary of the evidence produced by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI). The reporting specifications include problem establishment, literature retrieval, literature screening, literature evaluation, the summary and grading of evidence and the formation of practical suggestions. This study was based on the evidence summary reporting specifications of the Fudan University Center for the Evidence-based Nursing, the register name is 'Best evidence summary for prevention and management of enteral feeding intolerance in critically ill patients', the registration number is 'ES20231823'.
Topics: Humans; Infant, Newborn; Enteral Nutrition; Critical Illness; Nutritional Status; Critical Care; Parenteral Nutrition
PubMed: 37994227
DOI: 10.1111/jocn.16934 -
Respiration; International Review of... 2022Congenital chylothorax (CCT) of the newborn is a rare entity but the most common cause of pleural effusion in this age-group. We aimed to find the optimal treatment...
BACKGROUND
Congenital chylothorax (CCT) of the newborn is a rare entity but the most common cause of pleural effusion in this age-group. We aimed to find the optimal treatment strategy.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A PubMed search was performed according to the PRISMA criteria. All cases were analyzed according to prenatal, perinatal, and postnatal treatment modalities and follow-ups.
RESULTS
We identified 753 cases from 157 studies published between 1990 and 2018. The all-cause mortality rate was 28%. Prematurity was present in 71%, male gender dominated 57%, mean gestational age was 34 weeks, and birth weight was 2,654 g. Seventy-nine percent of newborns had bilateral CCT, the most common associated congenital anomalies with CCT were pulmonary lymphangiectasia and pulmonary hypoplasia, and the most common chromosomal aberrations were Down, Noonan, and Turner syndromes, respectively. Mechanical ventilation was reported in 381 cases for mean 17 (range 1-120) days; pleural punctuations and drainages were performed in 32% and 64%, respectively. Forty-four percent received total parenteral nutrition (TPN) for mean 21 days, 46% medium-chain triglyceride (MCT) diet for mean 37 days, 20% octreotide, and 3% somatostatin; chemical pleurodesis was performed in 116 cases, and surgery was reported in 48 cases with a success rate of 69%. In 462 cases (68%), complete restitution was reported; in 34 of 44 cases (77%), intrauterine intervention was carried out.
CONCLUSION
Respiratory support, pleural drainages, TPN, and MCT diet as octreotide remain to be the cornerstones of CCT management. Pleurodesis with OK-432 done prenatally and povidone-iodine postnatally might be discussed for use in life-threatening CCT.
Topics: Chylothorax; Female; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Male; Octreotide; Pleural Effusion; Pleurodesis
PubMed: 34515211
DOI: 10.1159/000518217 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2018Corticosteroids are often preferred over enteral nutrition (EN) as induction therapy for Crohn's disease (CD). Prior meta-analyses suggest that corticosteroids are... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Corticosteroids are often preferred over enteral nutrition (EN) as induction therapy for Crohn's disease (CD). Prior meta-analyses suggest that corticosteroids are superior to EN for induction of remission in CD. Treatment failures in EN trials are often due to poor compliance, with dropouts frequently due to poor acceptance of a nasogastric tube and unpalatable formulations. This systematic review is an update of a previously published Cochrane review.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of exclusive EN as primary therapy to induce remission in CD and to examine the importance of formula composition on effectiveness.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL from inception to 5 July 2017. We also searched references of retrieved articles and conference abstracts.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials involving patients with active CD were considered for inclusion. Studies comparing one type of EN to another type of EN or conventional corticosteroids were selected for review.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Data were extracted independently by at least two authors. The primary outcome was clinical remission. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, serious adverse events and withdrawal due to adverse events. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). A random-effects model was used to pool data. We performed intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses for the primary outcome. Heterogeneity was explored using the Chi and I statistics. The studies were separated into two comparisons: one EN formulation compared to another EN formulation and EN compared to corticosteroids. Subgroup analyses were based on formula composition and age. Sensitivity analyses included abstract publications and poor quality studies. We used the Cochrane risk of bias tool to assess study quality. We used the GRADE criteria to assess the overall quality of the evidence supporting the primary outcome and selected secondary outcomes.
MAIN RESULTS
Twenty-seven studies (1,011 participants) were included. Three studies were rated as low risk of bias. Seven studies were rated as high risk of bias and 17 were rated as unclear risk of bias due to insufficient information. Seventeen trials compared different formulations of EN, 13 studies compared one or more elemental formulas to a non-elemental formula, three studies compared EN diets of similar protein composition but different fat composition, and one study compared non-elemental diets differing in glutamine enrichment. Meta-analysis of 11 trials (378 participants) demonstrated no difference in remission rates. Sixty-four per cent (134/210) of patients in the elemental group achieved remission compared to 62% (105/168) of patients in the non-elemental group (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.18; GRADE very low quality). A per-protocol analysis (346 participants) produced similar results (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.18). Subgroup analyses performed to evaluate the different types of elemental and non-elemental diets (elemental, semi-elemental and polymeric) showed no differences in remission rates. An analysis of 7 trials including 209 patients treated with EN formulas of differing fat content (low fat: < 20 g/1000 kCal versus high fat: > 20 g/1000 kCal) demonstrated no difference in remission rates (RR 1.03; 95% CI 0.85 to 1.26). Very low fat content (< 3 g/1000 kCal) and very low long chain triglycerides demonstrated higher remission rates than higher content EN formulas. There was no difference between elemental and non-elemental diets in adverse event rates (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.60; GRADE very low quality), or withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.80 to 2.09; GRADE very low quality). Common adverse events included nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and bloating.Ten trials compared EN to steroid therapy. Meta-analysis of eight trials (223 participants) demonstrated no difference in remission rates between EN and steroids. Fifty per cent (111/223) of patients in the EN group achieved remission compared to 72% (133/186) of patients in the steroid group (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.03; GRADE very low quality). Subgroup analysis by age showed a difference in remission rates for adults but not for children. In adults 45% (87/194) of EN patients achieved remission compared to 73% (116/158) of steroid patients (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.82; GRADE very low quality). In children, 83% (24/29) of EN patients achieved remission compared to 61% (17/28) of steroid patients (RR 1.35, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.97; GRADE very low quality). A per-protocol analysis produced similar results (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.14). The per-protocol subgroup analysis showed a difference in remission rates for both adults (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.95) and children (RR 1.43, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.97). There was no difference in adverse event rates (RR 1.39, 95% CI 0.62 to 3.11; GRADE very low quality). However, patients on EN were more likely to withdraw due to adverse events than those on steroid therapy (RR 2.95, 95% CI 1.02 to 8.48; GRADE very low quality). Common adverse events reported in the EN group included heartburn, flatulence, diarrhea and vomiting, and for steroid therapy acne, moon facies, hyperglycemia, muscle weakness and hypoglycemia. The most common reason for withdrawal was inability to tolerate the EN diet.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Very low quality evidence suggests that corticosteroid therapy may be more effective than EN for induction of clinical remission in adults with active CD. Very low quality evidence also suggests that EN may be more effective than steroids for induction of remission in children with active CD. Protein composition does not appear to influence the effectiveness of EN for the treatment of active CD. EN should be considered in pediatric CD patients or in adult patients who can comply with nasogastric tube feeding or perceive the formulations to be palatable, or when steroid side effects are not tolerated or better avoided. Further research is required to confirm the superiority of corticosteroids over EN in adults. Further research is required to confirm the benefit of EN in children. More effort from industry should be taken to develop palatable polymeric formulations that can be delivered without use of a nasogastric tube as this may lead to increased patient adherence with this therapy.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Crohn Disease; Enteral Nutrition; Food, Formulated; Humans; Intention to Treat Analysis; Parenteral Nutrition Solutions; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Remission Induction
PubMed: 29607496
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000542.pub3