Impact of early enteral nutrition in critically ill children: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q2 NUTRITION & DIETETICS Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition Pub Date : 2025-02-19 DOI:10.1002/jpen.2738
Ana Cristina Assumpção Benjamin, Humberto Magalhães Silva, Raísa Sanches Uzun, Andrea Maria Cordeiro Ventura, Isabel de Siqueira Ferraz, Roberto José Negrão Nogueira, Tiago Henrique De Souza
{"title":"Impact of early enteral nutrition in critically ill children: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Ana Cristina Assumpção Benjamin, Humberto Magalhães Silva, Raísa Sanches Uzun, Andrea Maria Cordeiro Ventura, Isabel de Siqueira Ferraz, Roberto José Negrão Nogueira, Tiago Henrique De Souza","doi":"10.1002/jpen.2738","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study aims to evaluate the impact of early enteral nutrition (EEN) compared with late enteral nutrition on clinical outcomes in critically ill children.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched until December 2024. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality, with secondary outcomes including duration of mechanical ventilation and length of stay in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) and hospital. The meta-analysis used a random-effects model with inverse variance weighting.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-one studies (10,006 children) were included. Definitions of EEN varied across studies, ranging from 24 to 72 h. EEN was associated with decreased mortality in both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (odds ratio [OR] = 0.64; 95% CI, 0.43-0.96; P = 0.03) and observational studies (OR = 0.38; 95% CI, 0.23-0.62; P < 0.001). A sensitivity analysis was conducted by combining studies with similar EEN definitions. EEN initiated within 24 h of PICU admission was not significantly associated with mortality (OR = 0.72; 95% CI, 0.43-1.20; P = 0.21). However, EEN within 48 h was significantly associated with reduced mortality (OR = 0.37; 95% CI, 0.25-0.56; P < 0.001). The certainty of evidence (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) from RCTs was evaluated as low, whereas that from observational studies was evaluated as very low.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The evidence from this study suggests that EEN benefits critically ill children by reducing mortality and shortening hospital stays. However, the high risk of bias and very low certainty of the evidence highlight the need for further research.</p>","PeriodicalId":16668,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jpen.2738","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This study aims to evaluate the impact of early enteral nutrition (EEN) compared with late enteral nutrition on clinical outcomes in critically ill children.

Methods: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched until December 2024. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality, with secondary outcomes including duration of mechanical ventilation and length of stay in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) and hospital. The meta-analysis used a random-effects model with inverse variance weighting.

Results: Twenty-one studies (10,006 children) were included. Definitions of EEN varied across studies, ranging from 24 to 72 h. EEN was associated with decreased mortality in both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (odds ratio [OR] = 0.64; 95% CI, 0.43-0.96; P = 0.03) and observational studies (OR = 0.38; 95% CI, 0.23-0.62; P < 0.001). A sensitivity analysis was conducted by combining studies with similar EEN definitions. EEN initiated within 24 h of PICU admission was not significantly associated with mortality (OR = 0.72; 95% CI, 0.43-1.20; P = 0.21). However, EEN within 48 h was significantly associated with reduced mortality (OR = 0.37; 95% CI, 0.25-0.56; P < 0.001). The certainty of evidence (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) from RCTs was evaluated as low, whereas that from observational studies was evaluated as very low.

Conclusion: The evidence from this study suggests that EEN benefits critically ill children by reducing mortality and shortening hospital stays. However, the high risk of bias and very low certainty of the evidence highlight the need for further research.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
8.80%
发文量
161
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (JPEN) is the premier scientific journal of nutrition and metabolic support. It publishes original peer-reviewed studies that define the cutting edge of basic and clinical research in the field. It explores the science of optimizing the care of patients receiving enteral or IV therapies. Also included: reviews, techniques, brief reports, case reports, and abstracts.
期刊最新文献
Impact of early enteral nutrition in critically ill children: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JPEN Journal Club 91. Choosing the population to study. Metabolic profiles and malnutrition in hospitalized adults: A metabolomic cohort study. Performance of GLIM with different nutrition risk screening tools in predicting 90-day mortality in critically ill adults with acute stroke: A comparison study. JPEN Journal Club 90. Emulated clinical trials.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1