Nasogastric versus nasojejunal tube feeding for severe acute pancreatitis: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Q4 Medicine
Andrea Carlin-Ronquillo, Harold Benites-Goñi, Carlos Diaz-Arocutipa, Paulo Alosilla Sandoval, Alejandro Piscoya-Rivera, Lesly Calixto, Adrian V Hernández
{"title":"Nasogastric versus nasojejunal tube feeding for severe acute pancreatitis: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials.","authors":"Andrea Carlin-Ronquillo,&nbsp;Harold Benites-Goñi,&nbsp;Carlos Diaz-Arocutipa,&nbsp;Paulo Alosilla Sandoval,&nbsp;Alejandro Piscoya-Rivera,&nbsp;Lesly Calixto,&nbsp;Adrian V Hernández","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Early enteral nutrition through a feeding tube is essential for the management of severe acute pancreatitis (SAP). Nasojejunal tube nutrition has been preferred on the assumption that it provided pancreatic rest in comparison to the nasogastric tube. However, nasojejunal tube placement is complex, may delay feeding initiation and can increase hospital costs. Our aim was to compare the efficacy and safety of enteral feeding with a nasogastric tube versus nasojejunal tube in patients with SAP. We searched four databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase) until December 1, 2022. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing enteral feeding by nasogastric and nasojejunal tubes in patients with SAP. Primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were organ failure, infection, complications, surgical intervention, duration of tube feeding and length of hospital stay. Risk of bias assessment was completed independently by two investigators using the Cochrane RoB 2.0 tool. We performed random effects model meta-analyses using the inverse variance method. Effect measures were reported as relative risks (RR) and their 95% CIs for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MD) and their 95% CIs for continuous outcomes. We included four RCTs involving 192 patients with SAP. The mean ages ranged between 36 and 62 years old. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality between the nasogastric and nasojejunal feeding arms (18/98 vs. 23/93; RR 1.34, 95%CI 0.77-2.30; p=0.30). There were no significant differences in all secondary outcomes between feeding arms. There were three RCTs with some concerns of bias, in the randomization process. In conclusion, in patients with SAP, enteral feeding delivered by nasogastric tube was as efficacious and safe as nasojejunal tube. Further randomized controlled trials with more participants and better design are needed to confirm these findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":35807,"journal":{"name":"Revista de gastroenterologia del Peru : organo oficial de la Sociedad de Gastroenterologia del Peru","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista de gastroenterologia del Peru : organo oficial de la Sociedad de Gastroenterologia del Peru","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Early enteral nutrition through a feeding tube is essential for the management of severe acute pancreatitis (SAP). Nasojejunal tube nutrition has been preferred on the assumption that it provided pancreatic rest in comparison to the nasogastric tube. However, nasojejunal tube placement is complex, may delay feeding initiation and can increase hospital costs. Our aim was to compare the efficacy and safety of enteral feeding with a nasogastric tube versus nasojejunal tube in patients with SAP. We searched four databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase) until December 1, 2022. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing enteral feeding by nasogastric and nasojejunal tubes in patients with SAP. Primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were organ failure, infection, complications, surgical intervention, duration of tube feeding and length of hospital stay. Risk of bias assessment was completed independently by two investigators using the Cochrane RoB 2.0 tool. We performed random effects model meta-analyses using the inverse variance method. Effect measures were reported as relative risks (RR) and their 95% CIs for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MD) and their 95% CIs for continuous outcomes. We included four RCTs involving 192 patients with SAP. The mean ages ranged between 36 and 62 years old. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality between the nasogastric and nasojejunal feeding arms (18/98 vs. 23/93; RR 1.34, 95%CI 0.77-2.30; p=0.30). There were no significant differences in all secondary outcomes between feeding arms. There were three RCTs with some concerns of bias, in the randomization process. In conclusion, in patients with SAP, enteral feeding delivered by nasogastric tube was as efficacious and safe as nasojejunal tube. Further randomized controlled trials with more participants and better design are needed to confirm these findings.

鼻胃与鼻空肠管饲治疗重症急性胰腺炎:随机对照试验的系统综述。
通过饲管进行早期肠内营养对重症急性胰腺炎(SAP)的治疗至关重要。Nasojejunal管营养是首选的,因为与鼻胃管相比,它可以提供胰腺休息。然而,鼻空肠导管的放置是复杂的,可能会延迟进食开始,并可能增加医院费用。我们的目的是比较SAP患者使用鼻胃导管和鼻空肠导管进行肠内喂养的疗效和安全性。我们搜索了四个数据库(PubMed、Web of Science、Scopus和Embase),直到2022年12月1日。我们纳入了随机对照试验(RCT),比较了SAP患者通过鼻胃管和鼻空肠管进行的肠内喂养。主要结果是全因死亡率。次要结果是器官衰竭、感染、并发症、手术干预、管饲持续时间和住院时间。两名研究人员使用Cochrane RoB 2.0工具独立完成了偏倚风险评估。我们使用逆方差方法进行了随机效应模型荟萃分析。效果测量报告为相对风险(RR)及其95%CI(用于二分结果)和平均差异(MD)及其95%置信区间(用于连续结果)。我们纳入了四项随机对照试验,涉及192名SAP患者。平均年龄在36至62岁之间。鼻胃和鼻空肠喂养组的全因死亡率没有显著差异(18/98 vs.23/93;RR 1.34,95%CI 0.77-2.30;p=0.30)。喂养组之间的所有次要结果没有显著差异。在随机化过程中,有三项随机对照试验存在一些偏倚问题。总之,在SAP患者中,鼻胃导管肠内喂养与鼻空肠导管一样有效和安全。需要有更多参与者和更好设计的进一步随机对照试验来证实这些发现。
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
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
49
期刊介绍: La REVISTA DE GASTROENTEROLOGíA DEL PERÚ, es la publicación oficial de la Sociedad de Gastroenterología del Perú que publica artículos originales, artículos de revisión, reporte de casos, cartas e información general de la especialidad; dirigido a los profesionales de la salud con especial interés en la gastroenterología. La Revista de Gastroenterología del Perú es una publicación de periodicidad trimestral y tiene como objetivo la publicación de artículos científicos inéditos en el campo de la gastroenterología, proporcionando información actualizada y relevante de la especialidad y áreas afines. La Revista de Gastroenterología del Perú publica artículos en dos idiomas, español e inglés, a texto completo en la versión impresa yelectrónica. Los artículos científicos son sometidos a revisores o árbitros nacionales e internacionales, especialistas que opinan bajo la modalidad de doble ciego y de manera anónima sobre la calidad y validez de los mismos. El número de revisores depende del tipo de artículo, dos revisores como mínimo para artículos originales y uno como mínimo para otros tipos de artículos.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信