Matthew L Bechtold, Zahid Ijaz Tarar, Muhammad N Yousaf, Ghady Moafa, Abdul M Majzoub, Xheni Deda, Michelle L Matteson-Kome, Srinivas R Puli
{"title":"经皮内镜胃造口术后何时进食?随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Matthew L Bechtold, Zahid Ijaz Tarar, Muhammad N Yousaf, Ghady Moafa, Abdul M Majzoub, Xheni Deda, Michelle L Matteson-Kome, Srinivas R Puli","doi":"10.1002/ncp.11184","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Initiation of feeding after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) placement has been debated. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been performed on early feeding compared with delayed feeding after PEG placement with varying results. Therefore, a meta-analysis was conducted examining early vs delayed feeding after placement of a PEG.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive search of databases was conducted in January 2024. Peer-reviewed published RCTs comparing early feeding (≤4 h) with delayed feeding (>4 h) were identified and included in the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis was completed using pooled estimates of overall complications, individual complications, mortality ≤72 h, and number of day 1 significant gastric residual volumes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six RCTs (n = 467) were included in the analysis. Comparison of early feeding with delayed feeding after PEG showed no statistically significant differences for overall complications (P = 0.18), mortality ≤72 h (P = 0.3), and number of day 1 significant gastric residual volumes (P = 0.05). No differences were also noted for individual complications, including vomiting, wound infection, bleeding, or diarrhea.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Feeding ≤4 h after PEG have no differences in minor and major complications compared with that of delayed feeding. Early feeding ≤4 h is safe and should be recommended in future guidelines.</p>","PeriodicalId":19354,"journal":{"name":"Nutrition in Clinical Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"When to feed after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.\",\"authors\":\"Matthew L Bechtold, Zahid Ijaz Tarar, Muhammad N Yousaf, Ghady Moafa, Abdul M Majzoub, Xheni Deda, Michelle L Matteson-Kome, Srinivas R Puli\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ncp.11184\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Initiation of feeding after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) placement has been debated. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been performed on early feeding compared with delayed feeding after PEG placement with varying results. Therefore, a meta-analysis was conducted examining early vs delayed feeding after placement of a PEG.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive search of databases was conducted in January 2024. Peer-reviewed published RCTs comparing early feeding (≤4 h) with delayed feeding (>4 h) were identified and included in the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis was completed using pooled estimates of overall complications, individual complications, mortality ≤72 h, and number of day 1 significant gastric residual volumes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six RCTs (n = 467) were included in the analysis. Comparison of early feeding with delayed feeding after PEG showed no statistically significant differences for overall complications (P = 0.18), mortality ≤72 h (P = 0.3), and number of day 1 significant gastric residual volumes (P = 0.05). No differences were also noted for individual complications, including vomiting, wound infection, bleeding, or diarrhea.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Feeding ≤4 h after PEG have no differences in minor and major complications compared with that of delayed feeding. Early feeding ≤4 h is safe and should be recommended in future guidelines.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19354,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nutrition in Clinical Practice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nutrition in Clinical Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/ncp.11184\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"NUTRITION & DIETETICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nutrition in Clinical Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ncp.11184","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
When to feed after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Background: Initiation of feeding after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) placement has been debated. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been performed on early feeding compared with delayed feeding after PEG placement with varying results. Therefore, a meta-analysis was conducted examining early vs delayed feeding after placement of a PEG.
Methods: A comprehensive search of databases was conducted in January 2024. Peer-reviewed published RCTs comparing early feeding (≤4 h) with delayed feeding (>4 h) were identified and included in the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis was completed using pooled estimates of overall complications, individual complications, mortality ≤72 h, and number of day 1 significant gastric residual volumes.
Results: Six RCTs (n = 467) were included in the analysis. Comparison of early feeding with delayed feeding after PEG showed no statistically significant differences for overall complications (P = 0.18), mortality ≤72 h (P = 0.3), and number of day 1 significant gastric residual volumes (P = 0.05). No differences were also noted for individual complications, including vomiting, wound infection, bleeding, or diarrhea.
Conclusion: Feeding ≤4 h after PEG have no differences in minor and major complications compared with that of delayed feeding. Early feeding ≤4 h is safe and should be recommended in future guidelines.
期刊介绍:
NCP is a peer-reviewed, interdisciplinary publication that publishes articles about the scientific basis and clinical application of nutrition and nutrition support. NCP contains comprehensive reviews, clinical research, case observations, and other types of papers written by experts in the field of nutrition and health care practitioners involved in the delivery of specialized nutrition support. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).