Dataset Information

Enteral nutrition in acute pancreatitis: a review of the current evidence.

ABSTRACT: The use of enteral feeding as part of the management of acute pancreatitis dates back almost two decades. This review describes the indications for and limitations of enteral feeding for the treatment of acute pancreatitis using up-to-date evidence-based data. A systematic review was carried out to analyse current data on the use of enteral nutrition in the management of acute pancreatitis. Relevant literature was analysed from the viewpoints of enteral vs parenteral feeding, early vs delayed enteral nutrition, nasogastric vs nasojejunal feeding, and early oral diet and immunonutrition, particularly glutamine and probiotic supplementation. Finally, current applicable guidelines and the effects of these guidelines on clinical practice are discussed. The latest meta-analyses suggest that enteral nutrition significantly reduces the mortality rate of severe acute pancreatitis compared to parenteral feeding. To maintain gut barrier function and prevent early bacterial translocation, enteral feeding should be commenced within the first 24 h of hospital admission. Also, the safety of nasogastric feeding, which eases the administration of enteral nutrients in the clinical setting, is likely equal to nasojejunal feeding. Furthermore, an early low-fat oral diet is potentially beneficial in patients with mild pancreatitis. Despite the initial encouraging results, the current evidence does not support the use of immunoenhanced nutrients or probiotics in patients with acute pancreatitis.

SUBMITTER: Olah A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4239498 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Enteral nutrition in acute pancreatitis: a review of the current evidence.

Oláh Attila A Romics Laszlo L

World journal of gastroenterology 20141101 43

The use of enteral feeding as part of the management of acute pancreatitis dates back almost two decades. This review describes the indications for and limitations of enteral feeding for the treatment of acute pancreatitis using up-to-date evidence-based data. A systematic review was carried out to analyse current data on the use of enteral nutrition in the management of acute pancreatitis. Relevant literature was analysed from the viewpoints of enteral vs parenteral feeding, early vs delayed en ...[more]

PMID: 25473164

Similar Datasets

Project description:Although enteral nutrition has become one of the standard therapies for patients with acute pancreatitis, the optimal formulae for enteral nutrition have been under debate. Elemental formula is assumed to be suitable in the treatment of patients with acute pancreatitis because it has less stimulating effects for exocrine secretions of the pancreas, simultaneously maintaining gut immunity; however, clinical studies corroborating this assumption have been scarce.We conducted a retrospective cohort study using a Japanese national administrative database between 2010 and 2015. Patients with acute pancreatitis who received enteral feeding within 3 days of admission were identified and divided into two groups according to whether elemental formula was administered. We assessed the impact of elemental formula for the outcomes (primary, in-hospital mortality; secondary, development of sepsis, hospital-free days at 90 days, and total health-care costs) using a multivariate mixed-effect regression analysis and propensity score matching analysis adjusted by a well-validated case-mix adjustment model. Analysis for the subpopulation of patients with severe acute pancreatitis was also performed.Of 243,312 patients with acute pancreatitis, 948 patients were identified and classified into the elemental formula group (N?=?382) and the control group (N?=?566). No significant differences were observed for in-hospital mortality [10.2% in the elemental formula group vs. 11.0% in the control group; adjusted adds ratio (95% confidence interval; CI)?=?0.94 (0.53-1.67)], sepsis development [5.0 vs. 7.1%; adjusted adds ratio (95% CI)?=?0.66 (0.34-1.28)], mean hospital-free days [54 days vs. 51 days; adjusted difference (95% CI)?=?2 days (-?2 to 5)], and mean total health-care costs [$29,360 vs. $34,214; adjusted difference (95% CI)?=?-?$4250 (-?8643 to 141)]. Similar results were also observed in patients with severe acute pancreatitis.The results of our retrospective cohort study using a large-scale national database did not demonstrate the benefit of elemental formula compared to semi-elemental and polymeric formulae in patients with acute pancreatitis. Further assessment of alternative nutritional strategy is expected.

Project description:BackgroundNutritional problems in the early stages of severe burns are prominent and seriously affect the clinical outcomes of patients. Our aim is to analyze the effects of early enteral nutrition (EEN) in patients with severe burns.MethodsIn this study, relevant articles were searched in 8 English and Chinese data, with a time limit from the creation of the database to June 2023. Two researchers independently completed the search, screening and quality assessment of the articles. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that examined EEN therapy in people with severe burns. We compared the effects of EEN and non-EEN therapy in severely burned patients. The outcomes were mortality, gastrointestinal complications, nutritional indicators, gastrointestinal hormones, sepsis, length of hospital stay and wound healing time. Categorical variables were expressed as OR and 95% CI was calculated, and continuous variables were expressed as MD and 95% CI was calculated. The protocol for this systematic review was registered in PROSPERO on May 12, 2023 (identifier CRD42023422895).ResultsNineteen studies with a total of 1066 participants met the inclusion criteria. When comparing EEN therapy with non-EEN therapy, the experiment group had significantly lower mortality [OR = 0.39, 95% CI (0.20, 0.74), P = .004], lower wound healing time [MD = -10.77, 95% CI (-13.66,-7.88), P < .00001], fewer gastrointestinal complications [OR = 0.18, 95% CI (0.09, 0.36), P < .00001], lower rates of gastrointestinal hemorrhage [OR = 0.12, 95% CI (0.04, 0.36), P = .0001], lower rates of sepsis [OR = 0.40, 95% CI (0.24, 0.66), P = .0005], shorter length of hospital stay [MD = -12.08, 95% CI (-13.61, 9.19-10.56), P < .00001], and higher prealbumin levels [MD = 29.04, 95% CI (21.98, 36.10), P < .00001], higher total albumin levels [MD = 6.74, 95% CI (4.29, 9.19), P < .00001], and gastrin levels [MD = 15.93, 95% CI (10.12, 21.73), P < .00001]. However, there was no significant difference in albumin between the 2 groups [MD = 2.62, 95% CI (-0.30, 5.55), P = .08] or motilin levels [MD = 12.48, 95% CI (-43.59, 68.56), P = .66].ConclusionsEEN plays an important role in the rehabilitation of patients with severe burns. EEN is beneficial to reduce complications and the length of hospital stay, maintain organ function, optimize the nutritional status of patients, promote wound healing, and improve the survival rate of patients.

Dataset Information

Enteral nutrition in acute pancreatitis: a review of the current evidence.

Publications

Enteral nutrition in acute pancreatitis: a review of the current evidence.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets