Early versus delayed enteral nutrition in critically ill children under 12 years of age: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Q3 Nursing
Marianne E. Visser , Roselyn Chipojola , Sarah Gordon , Amanda Brand , Nyanyiwe Mbeye , Gertrude Kunje , Talitha Mpando , Suzgika Lakudzala , Elodie Besnier , Celeste E. Naude
{"title":"Early versus delayed enteral nutrition in critically ill children under 12 years of age: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials","authors":"Marianne E. Visser ,&nbsp;Roselyn Chipojola ,&nbsp;Sarah Gordon ,&nbsp;Amanda Brand ,&nbsp;Nyanyiwe Mbeye ,&nbsp;Gertrude Kunje ,&nbsp;Talitha Mpando ,&nbsp;Suzgika Lakudzala ,&nbsp;Elodie Besnier ,&nbsp;Celeste E. Naude","doi":"10.1016/j.nutos.2025.03.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background &amp; aims</h3><div>Enteral nutrition (EN) is key to reducing malnutrition risk in critically ill children, with timing of EN initiation being an important consideration. This systematic review aimed to assess the effects of early enteral nutrition (EEN) compared to delayed enteral nutrition (DEN) in critically ill children as part of the Global Evidence, Local Adaptation (GELA) project.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We searched PubMed, Embase and two trial registries (January 2000–November 2023) and included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing EEN (typically within 24–48 hours of admission) to DEN (typically &gt;48 hours of admission) in children aged one month to 12 years, and excluding studies in children with severe acute malnutrition, or conditions requiring long-term EN. Guided by Cochrane methods, we conducted random-effects meta-analyses to obtain pooled effect estimates for outcomes selected by the guideline development group, assessed risk of bias using Cochrane's Risk-of-Bias-2 tool and assessed certainty of the evidence using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Four RCTs randomising 899 children in critical care settings in India, Iran and USA were included. Overall risk of bias was assessed as ‘high risk’ or ‘some concerns’ for all outcomes. Low-certainty evidence suggests that EEN may reduce in-hospital mortality (absolute effect (AE) 53 fewer deaths per 1000, 95% CI -85 to -12, I<sup>2</sup>=0%, 3 RCTs, n=869) and length of hospital stay on average (mean difference (MD) -2.98 days, 95% CI -9.79 to 3.83, I<sup>2</sup>=0%, 2 RCTs, n=760) compared to DEN, and may result in little to no difference in nosocomial infections (wound and blood stream infections) (AE 5 fewer cases per 1000, 95% CI -52 to 52, I<sup>2</sup>=0%, 3 RCTs, n=869). Evidence is very uncertain about effects on length of paediatric intensive care unit stay, number of days on the ventilator, sepsis, ventilator-associated pneumonia, and time to wound healing.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>EEN may reduce in-hospital mortality and length of hospital stay in critically ill children, but our confidence in the effect estimates is limited. More high-quality studies comparing EEN to DEN in relation to patient-relevant and clinically important outcomes in paediatric critical illness are needed.</div></div><div><h3>Prospective registration</h3><div>PROSPERO CRD42023487325.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36134,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Nutrition Open Science","volume":"61 ","pages":"Pages 108-128"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Nutrition Open Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667268525000312","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background & aims

Enteral nutrition (EN) is key to reducing malnutrition risk in critically ill children, with timing of EN initiation being an important consideration. This systematic review aimed to assess the effects of early enteral nutrition (EEN) compared to delayed enteral nutrition (DEN) in critically ill children as part of the Global Evidence, Local Adaptation (GELA) project.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Embase and two trial registries (January 2000–November 2023) and included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing EEN (typically within 24–48 hours of admission) to DEN (typically >48 hours of admission) in children aged one month to 12 years, and excluding studies in children with severe acute malnutrition, or conditions requiring long-term EN. Guided by Cochrane methods, we conducted random-effects meta-analyses to obtain pooled effect estimates for outcomes selected by the guideline development group, assessed risk of bias using Cochrane's Risk-of-Bias-2 tool and assessed certainty of the evidence using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).

Results

Four RCTs randomising 899 children in critical care settings in India, Iran and USA were included. Overall risk of bias was assessed as ‘high risk’ or ‘some concerns’ for all outcomes. Low-certainty evidence suggests that EEN may reduce in-hospital mortality (absolute effect (AE) 53 fewer deaths per 1000, 95% CI -85 to -12, I2=0%, 3 RCTs, n=869) and length of hospital stay on average (mean difference (MD) -2.98 days, 95% CI -9.79 to 3.83, I2=0%, 2 RCTs, n=760) compared to DEN, and may result in little to no difference in nosocomial infections (wound and blood stream infections) (AE 5 fewer cases per 1000, 95% CI -52 to 52, I2=0%, 3 RCTs, n=869). Evidence is very uncertain about effects on length of paediatric intensive care unit stay, number of days on the ventilator, sepsis, ventilator-associated pneumonia, and time to wound healing.

Conclusion

EEN may reduce in-hospital mortality and length of hospital stay in critically ill children, but our confidence in the effect estimates is limited. More high-quality studies comparing EEN to DEN in relation to patient-relevant and clinically important outcomes in paediatric critical illness are needed.

Prospective registration

PROSPERO CRD42023487325.
12岁以下危重儿童早期与延迟肠内营养:随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析
背景,目的肠外营养(EN)是降低危重儿童营养不良风险的关键,肠外营养的起始时间是一个重要的考虑因素。作为全球证据,局部适应(GELA)项目的一部分,本系统综述旨在评估早期肠内营养(EEN)与延迟肠内营养(DEN)对危重儿童的影响。方法:我们检索了PubMed、Embase和两个试验注册中心(2000年1月至2023年11月),纳入了比较1个月至12岁儿童EEN(通常在入院24-48小时内)和DEN(通常在入院48小时内)的随机对照试验(rct),排除了严重急性营养不良或需要长期EN的儿童的研究。在Cochrane方法的指导下,我们进行了随机效应荟萃分析,以获得指南制定组选择的结果的综合效应估计,使用Cochrane的风险-偏倚-2工具评估偏倚风险,并使用推荐、评估、发展和评价分级(GRADE)评估证据的确定性。结果纳入4项随机对照试验,共纳入印度、伊朗和美国重症监护儿童899名。所有结果的总体偏倚风险被评估为“高风险”或“一些关注”。确定性的证据表明,甚至可能降低住院死亡率(绝对效应(AE) 53少每1000人死亡,95% CI -85年到-12年,I2 = 0%, 3相关,n = 869)和住院时间平均(平均差(MD) -2.98天,95%可信区间-9.79到3.83,I2 = 0%, 2相关,n = 760)相比,窝,并可能导致院内感染没有区别(伤口和血液感染)(AE 5每1000人少的情况下,95%可信区间-52 - 52,I2 = 0%, 3相关,n = 869)。证据非常不确定对儿科重症监护病房住院时间、呼吸机天数、败血症、呼吸机相关性肺炎和伤口愈合时间的影响。结论een可降低危重儿童的住院死亡率和住院时间,但我们对效果估计的信心有限。需要更多高质量的研究来比较EEN和DEN在儿科危重疾病中与患者相关和临床重要结果的关系。预期注册号prospero CRD42023487325。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Clinical Nutrition Open Science
Clinical Nutrition Open Science Nursing-Nutrition and Dietetics
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
55
审稿时长
18 weeks
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信