经皮内镜胃管置入术后早期喂养与晚期喂养的比较分析:系统回顾与元分析》。

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Digestive Diseases and Sciences Pub Date : 2024-10-05 DOI:10.1007/s10620-024-08654-9
Mahesh Gajendran, Eric Smith, Priyadarshini Loganathan, Iqra Kazi, Mohan Babu, Umapathy Chandraprakash
{"title":"经皮内镜胃管置入术后早期喂养与晚期喂养的比较分析:系统回顾与元分析》。","authors":"Mahesh Gajendran, Eric Smith, Priyadarshini Loganathan, Iqra Kazi, Mohan Babu, Umapathy Chandraprakash","doi":"10.1007/s10620-024-08654-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>In clinical practice, tube feedings have been delayed after the percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube placement. Previous studies, including a meta-analysis in 2008, have shown that it is safe to start tube feeding ≤ 4 h of PEG tube placement. However, it is still a common practice to delay the initiation of tube feeding up to 24 h after PEG tube placement. We have performed an updated analysis of studies comparing early versus delayed tube feedings following PEG placement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Major databases like PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched in June 2022 for randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies reporting on comparative outcomes with early (< or = 4 h) versus delayed (> 4 h) feeding after PEG tube placement in adult patients. The primary outcomes in our study include complication rates and mortality rates within 72 h of the procedure. The outcomes were reported as pooled odds ratio (95% confidence interval (CI) (Moole et al. in Indian J Gastroenterol. 35:323-330, 2016), p value, I<sup>2</sup> values).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 212 individuals in the early feeding group and 215 individuals in the late feeding group were analyzed from six studies. The pooled odds ratio of total complication events between early and late feed groups was 0.86 (CI 0.51-1.45, p = 0.58). The pooled odds ratio of fever, vomiting, and local infection was 0.94 (CI 0.186-4.74, p = 0.94), 1.0 (CI 0.38-2.65, p = 0.9), and 1.25 (0.36-4.3, p = 0.72), respectively, between early and late feeding post-PEG tube placement. In conclusion, this meta-analysis confirms that early feeding ≤ 4 h after PEG placement does not increase the odds of poor outcomes or mortality, and it is a well-tolerated, safe, and effective alternative to delayed feeding. Furthermore, early feeding may decrease hospital stays and healthcare costs.</p>","PeriodicalId":11378,"journal":{"name":"Digestive Diseases and Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Analysis of Early Versus Late Feeding Post-percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Tube Placement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Mahesh Gajendran, Eric Smith, Priyadarshini Loganathan, Iqra Kazi, Mohan Babu, Umapathy Chandraprakash\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10620-024-08654-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>In clinical practice, tube feedings have been delayed after the percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube placement. Previous studies, including a meta-analysis in 2008, have shown that it is safe to start tube feeding ≤ 4 h of PEG tube placement. However, it is still a common practice to delay the initiation of tube feeding up to 24 h after PEG tube placement. We have performed an updated analysis of studies comparing early versus delayed tube feedings following PEG placement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Major databases like PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched in June 2022 for randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies reporting on comparative outcomes with early (< or = 4 h) versus delayed (> 4 h) feeding after PEG tube placement in adult patients. The primary outcomes in our study include complication rates and mortality rates within 72 h of the procedure. The outcomes were reported as pooled odds ratio (95% confidence interval (CI) (Moole et al. in Indian J Gastroenterol. 35:323-330, 2016), p value, I<sup>2</sup> values).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 212 individuals in the early feeding group and 215 individuals in the late feeding group were analyzed from six studies. The pooled odds ratio of total complication events between early and late feed groups was 0.86 (CI 0.51-1.45, p = 0.58). The pooled odds ratio of fever, vomiting, and local infection was 0.94 (CI 0.186-4.74, p = 0.94), 1.0 (CI 0.38-2.65, p = 0.9), and 1.25 (0.36-4.3, p = 0.72), respectively, between early and late feeding post-PEG tube placement. In conclusion, this meta-analysis confirms that early feeding ≤ 4 h after PEG placement does not increase the odds of poor outcomes or mortality, and it is a well-tolerated, safe, and effective alternative to delayed feeding. Furthermore, early feeding may decrease hospital stays and healthcare costs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11378,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Digestive Diseases and Sciences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Digestive Diseases and Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-024-08654-9\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Digestive Diseases and Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-024-08654-9","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:在临床实践中,经皮内镜胃造口术(PEG)置管后的管饲时间一直被推迟。以往的研究(包括 2008 年的一项荟萃分析)表明,在 PEG 管置入后 4 小时内开始管饲是安全的。然而,将开始管饲的时间延迟到放置 PEG 管后 24 小时仍是一种常见的做法。我们对比较 PEG 置管后早期和延迟管饲的研究进行了最新分析:2022 年 6 月,我们在 PubMed、EMBASE 和 Web of Science 等主要数据库中搜索了有关成人患者 PEG 置管后早期(4 小时)喂食结果比较的随机对照试验 (RCT) 研究报告。我们研究的主要结果包括手术后 72 小时内的并发症发生率和死亡率。结果以汇总的几率比(95% 置信区间 (CI)(Moole 等人在 Indian J Gastroenterol. 35:323-330, 2016)、P 值、I2 值)进行报告:共分析了六项研究中早期喂养组的212人和晚期喂养组的215人。早期喂养组和晚期喂养组之间总并发症事件的汇总几率比为 0.86(CI 0.51-1.45,P = 0.58)。PEG置管后早喂养组和晚喂养组的发热、呕吐和局部感染的汇总几率比分别为 0.94(CI 0.186-4.74,p = 0.94)、1.0(CI 0.38-2.65,p = 0.9)和 1.25(0.36-4.3,p = 0.72)。总之,这项荟萃分析证实,PEG 置管后 4 小时以内的早期喂养不会增加不良预后或死亡率的几率,而且是一种耐受性良好、安全且有效的替代延迟喂养的方法。此外,早期喂养可减少住院时间和医疗费用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Comparative Analysis of Early Versus Late Feeding Post-percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Tube Placement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Introduction: In clinical practice, tube feedings have been delayed after the percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube placement. Previous studies, including a meta-analysis in 2008, have shown that it is safe to start tube feeding ≤ 4 h of PEG tube placement. However, it is still a common practice to delay the initiation of tube feeding up to 24 h after PEG tube placement. We have performed an updated analysis of studies comparing early versus delayed tube feedings following PEG placement.

Methods: Major databases like PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched in June 2022 for randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies reporting on comparative outcomes with early (< or = 4 h) versus delayed (> 4 h) feeding after PEG tube placement in adult patients. The primary outcomes in our study include complication rates and mortality rates within 72 h of the procedure. The outcomes were reported as pooled odds ratio (95% confidence interval (CI) (Moole et al. in Indian J Gastroenterol. 35:323-330, 2016), p value, I2 values).

Results: A total of 212 individuals in the early feeding group and 215 individuals in the late feeding group were analyzed from six studies. The pooled odds ratio of total complication events between early and late feed groups was 0.86 (CI 0.51-1.45, p = 0.58). The pooled odds ratio of fever, vomiting, and local infection was 0.94 (CI 0.186-4.74, p = 0.94), 1.0 (CI 0.38-2.65, p = 0.9), and 1.25 (0.36-4.3, p = 0.72), respectively, between early and late feeding post-PEG tube placement. In conclusion, this meta-analysis confirms that early feeding ≤ 4 h after PEG placement does not increase the odds of poor outcomes or mortality, and it is a well-tolerated, safe, and effective alternative to delayed feeding. Furthermore, early feeding may decrease hospital stays and healthcare costs.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Digestive Diseases and Sciences
Digestive Diseases and Sciences 医学-胃肠肝病学
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
3.20%
发文量
420
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Digestive Diseases and Sciences publishes high-quality, peer-reviewed, original papers addressing aspects of basic/translational and clinical research in gastroenterology, hepatology, and related fields. This well-illustrated journal features comprehensive coverage of basic pathophysiology, new technological advances, and clinical breakthroughs; insights from prominent academicians and practitioners concerning new scientific developments and practical medical issues; and discussions focusing on the latest changes in local and worldwide social, economic, and governmental policies that affect the delivery of care within the disciplines of gastroenterology and hepatology.
期刊最新文献
Country Comfort? Risk Factors for Unplanned Healthcare Visits in Rural America in Children with IBD. Preventive Measures and Risk Factors for Post-ERCP Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review and Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis. A Case of Imaging-Negative Distal Cholangiocarcinoma Diagnosed by Novel Spyglass Transoral Cholangioscope. Association of Heterotopic Gastric Mucosa in the Upper Esophagus (HGMUE) with Pharyngolaryngeal Symptoms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Inflammatory Bowel Disease Knowledge and Education Among Healthcare Professional Groups.
×
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