Peter John Victor, Moran John L, Phillips-Hughes Jennie
Intensive Care Unit, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Woodville, South Australia.
Crit Care Med. 2005 Jan;33(1):213-20; discussion 260-1. doi: 10.1097/01.ccm.0000150960.36228.c0.
Nutritional support as enteral or parenteral nutrition (PN) is used in hospitalized patients to reduce catabolism. This study compares outcomes of early enteral nutrition (EN) with early PN in hospitalized patients.
The authors conducted a metaanalysis of randomized, controlled trials (RCT) comparing early EN with PN. Studies on immunonutrition were excluded. Studies were categorized as medical, surgical, or trauma.
RCTs of early EN/PN were identified by search of 1) MEDLINE (1966-2002), 2) published abstracts from scientific meetings, and 3) bibliographies of relevant articles.
Thirty RCTs (ten medical, 11 surgical, and nine trauma) compared early EN with PN. The effect of nutrition type on hospital mortality and complication rates was reported as risk difference (RD%) and hospital length of stay (LOS) as mean weighted difference (MWD days). Missing data, by outcomes, varied from 20% to 63%. As a result of heterogeneity of treatment effects, the DerSimonian-Laird random-effects estimator was reported. There was no differential treatment effect of nutrition type on hospital mortality for all patients (0.6%, p = .4) and subgroups. PN was associated with increases in infective complications (7.9%, p = .001), catheter-related blood stream infections (3.5%, p = .003), noninfective complications (4.9%, p = .04), and hospital LOS (1.2 days, p = .004). There was no effect of nutrition type on technical complications (4.1%, p = .2). EN was associated with a significant increase in diarrheal episodes (8.7%, p = .001). Publication bias was not demonstrated. Metaanalytic regression analysis did not demonstrate any effect of age, time to initiate treatment, and average albumin on mortality estimates. Cumulative metaanalysis showed no change in the mortality estimates with time.
There was no mortality effect with the type of nutritional supplementation. Although early EN significantly reduced complication rates, this needs to be interpreted in the light of missing data and heterogeneity. The enthusiasm that early EN, as compared with early PN, would reduce mortality appears misplaced.
肠内营养或肠外营养(PN)作为营养支持手段用于住院患者以减少分解代谢。本研究比较了住院患者早期肠内营养(EN)与早期PN的效果。
作者对比较早期EN与PN的随机对照试验(RCT)进行了荟萃分析。排除了免疫营养方面的研究。研究分为医学、外科或创伤类。
通过检索1)MEDLINE(1966 - 2002年)、2)科学会议发表的摘要以及3)相关文章的参考文献,确定早期EN/PN的RCT。
30项RCT(10项医学类、11项外科类和9项创伤类)比较了早期EN与PN。营养类型对医院死亡率和并发症发生率的影响以风险差异(RD%)表示,住院时间(LOS)以平均加权差异(MWD天)表示。按结局指标计算,缺失数据从20%到63%不等。由于治疗效果存在异质性,报告采用DerSimonian - Laird随机效应估计器。营养类型对所有患者(0.6%,p = 0.4)及各亚组的医院死亡率无差异治疗效果。PN与感染性并发症增加(7.9%,p = 0.001)、导管相关血流感染增加(3.5%,p = 0.003)、非感染性并发症增加(4.9%,p = 0.04)以及住院时间延长(1.2天,p = 0.004)相关。营养类型对技术并发症无影响(4.1%,p = 0.2)。EN与腹泻发作显著增加相关(8.7%,p = 0.001)。未显示出发表偏倚。荟萃分析回归分析未显示年龄、开始治疗时间和平均白蛋白对死亡率估计有任何影响。累积荟萃分析显示死亡率估计随时间无变化。
营养补充类型对死亡率无影响。尽管早期EN显著降低了并发症发生率,但鉴于缺失数据和异质性,这一结果需谨慎解读。与早期PN相比,认为早期EN会降低死亡率的观点似乎有误。