Mah Jia Yee, Choy Suet Wan, Roberts Matthew A, Desai Anne Marie, Corken Melissa, Gwini Stella M, McMahon Lawrence P
Integrated Renal Service, Eastern Health, Box Hill, Australia.
Eastern Health Clinical School, Monash University, Box Hill, Australia.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 May 11;5(5):CD012616. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012616.pub2.
Malnutrition is common in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) on dialysis. Oral protein-based nutritional supplements are often provided to patients whose oral intake is otherwise insufficient to meet their energy and protein needs. Evidence for the effectiveness of oral protein-based nutritional supplements in this population is limited.
The aims of this review were to determine the benefits and harms of using oral protein-based nutritional supplements to improve the nutritional state of patients with CKD requiring dialysis.
We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 12 December 2019 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of patients with CKD requiring dialysis that compared oral protein-based nutritional supplements to no oral protein-based nutritional supplements or placebo.
Two authors independently assessed studies for eligibility, risk of bias, and extracted data from individual studies. Summary estimates of effect were obtained using a random-effects model, and results were expressed as risk ratios and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes, and mean difference and 95% CI for continuous outcomes.
Twenty-two studies (1278 participants) were included in this review. All participants were adults on maintenance dialysis of whom 79% were on haemodialysis (HD) and 21% peritoneal dialysis. The follow-up period ranged from one to 12 months. The majority of studies were at unclear risk of selection, performance, and reporting bias. The detection bias was high for self-reported outcomes. Oral protein-based nutritional supplements probably lead to a higher mean change in serum albumin compared to the control group (16 studies, 790 participants: MD 0.19 g/dL, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.33; moderate certainty evidence), although there was considerable heterogeneity in the combined analysis (I = 84%). The increase was more evident in HD participants (10 studies, 526 participants: MD 0.28 g/dL, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.46; P = 0.001 for overall effect) and malnourished participants (8 studies, 405 participants: MD 0.31 g/dL, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.52, P = 0.003 for overall effect). Oral protein-based nutritional supplements also probably leads to a higher mean serum albumin at the end of the intervention (14 studies, 715 participants: MD 0.14 g/dL, 95% CI 0 to 0.27; moderate certainty evidence), however heterogeneity was again high (I = 80%). Again the increase was more evident in HD participants (9 studies, 498 participants: MD 0.21 g/dL, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.38; P = 0.02 for overall effect) and malnourished participants (7 studies, 377 participants: MD 0.25 g/dL, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.47; P = 0.03 for overall effect). Compared to placebo or no supplement, low certainty evidence showed oral protein-based nutritional supplements may result in a higher serum prealbumin (4 studies, 225 participants: MD 2.81 mg/dL, 95% CI 2.19 to 3.43), and mid-arm muscle circumference (4 studies, 216 participants: MD 1.33 cm, 95% CI 0.24 to 2.43) at the end of the intervention. Compared to placebo or no supplement, oral protein-based nutritional supplements may make little or no difference to weight (8 studies, 365 participants: MD 2.83 kg, 95% CI -0.43 to 6.09; low certainty evidence), body mass index (9 studies, 368 participants: MD -0.04 kg/m, 95% CI -0.74 to 0.66; moderate certainty evidence) and lean mass (5 studies, 189 participants: MD 1.27 kg, 95% CI -1.61 to 4.51; low certainty evidence). Due to very low quality of evidence, it is uncertain whether oral protein-based nutritional supplements affect triceps skinfold thickness, mid-arm circumference, C-reactive protein, Interleukin 6, serum potassium, or serum phosphate. There may be little or no difference in the risk of developing gastrointestinal intolerance between participants who received oral protein-based nutritional supplements compared with placebo or no supplement (6 studies, 426 participants: RR 2.81, 95% CI 0.58 to 13.65, low certainty evidence). It was not possible to draw conclusions about cost or quality of life, and deaths were not reported as a study outcome in any of the included studies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall, it is likely that oral protein-based nutritional supplements increase both mean change in serum albumin and serum albumin at end of intervention and may improve serum prealbumin and mid-arm muscle circumference. The improvement in serum albumin was more evident in haemodialysis and malnourished participants. However, it remains uncertain whether these results translate to improvement in nutritional status and clinically relevant outcomes such as death. Large well-designed RCTs in this population are required.
营养不良在接受透析的慢性肾脏病(CKD)患者中很常见。对于那些经口摄入量不足以满足其能量和蛋白质需求的患者,通常会提供基于蛋白质的口服营养补充剂。关于此类营养补充剂在该人群中有效性的证据有限。
本综述的目的是确定使用基于蛋白质的口服营养补充剂改善需要透析的CKD患者营养状况的益处和危害。
我们通过与信息专员联系,使用与本综述相关的检索词,检索了截至2019年12月12日的Cochrane肾脏与移植研究注册库。注册库中的研究通过检索CENTRAL、MEDLINE、EMBASE、会议论文集、国际临床试验注册平台(ICTRP)检索入口和ClinicalTrials.gov来识别。
对需要透析的CKD患者进行的随机对照试验(RCT),比较基于蛋白质的口服营养补充剂与非基于蛋白质的口服营养补充剂或安慰剂。
两位作者独立评估研究的纳入资格、偏倚风险,并从各个研究中提取数据。使用随机效应模型获得效应的汇总估计值,结果以二分类结局的风险比及其95%置信区间(CI)表示,连续结局以均值差和95%CI表示。
本综述纳入了22项研究(1278名参与者)。所有参与者均为接受维持性透析的成年人,其中79%接受血液透析(HD),21%接受腹膜透析。随访期为1至12个月。大多数研究在选择、实施和报告偏倚方面的风险不明确。自我报告结局的检测偏倚较高。与对照组相比,基于蛋白质的口服营养补充剂可能导致血清白蛋白的平均变化更高(16项研究,790名参与者:均值差0.19g/dL,95%CI 0.05至0.33;中等确定性证据),尽管在合并分析中存在相当大的异质性(I² = 84%)。在HD参与者(10项研究,526名参与者:均值差0.28g/dL,95%CI 0.11至0.46;总体效应P = 0.001)和营养不良参与者(8项研究,405名参与者:均值差0.31g/dL,95%CI 0.10至0.52,总体效应P = 0.003)中,这种增加更为明显。基于蛋白质的口服营养补充剂在干预结束时也可能导致更高的平均血清白蛋白水平(14项研究,715名参与者:均值差0.14g/dL,95%CI 0至0.27;中等确定性证据),然而异质性仍然很高(I² = 80%)。同样,在HD参与者(9项研究,498名参与者:均值差0.21g/dL,95%CI 0.03至0.38;总体效应P = 0.02)和营养不良参与者(7项研究,377名参与者:均值差0.25g/dL,95%CI 0.02至0.47;总体效应P = 0.03)中,增加更为明显。与安慰剂或无补充剂相比,低确定性证据表明基于蛋白质的口服营养补充剂可能导致干预结束时血清前白蛋白水平更高(4项研究,225名参与者:均值差2.81mg/dL,95%CI 2.19至3.43),以及上臂中部肌肉周长更大(4项研究,216名参与者:均值差1.33cm,95%CI 0.24至2.43)。与安慰剂或无补充剂相比,基于蛋白质的口服营养补充剂对体重(8项研究,365名参与者:均值差2.83kg,95%CI -0.43至6.09;低确定性证据)、体重指数(9项研究,368名参与者:均值差-0.04kg/m²,95%CI -0.74至0.66;中等确定性证据)和瘦体重(5项研究,189名参与者:均值差1.27kg,95%CI -1.61至4.51;低确定性证据)可能几乎没有影响。由于证据质量极低,不确定基于蛋白质的口服营养补充剂是否会影响三头肌皮褶厚度、上臂围、C反应蛋白、白细胞介素6、血清钾或血清磷酸盐。与接受安慰剂或无补充剂的参与者相比,接受基于蛋白质的口服营养补充剂的参与者发生胃肠道不耐受的风险可能几乎没有差异或无差异(6项研究,426名参与者:风险比2.81,95%CI 0.58至13.65,低确定性证据)。无法得出关于成本或生活质量的结论,并且在任何纳入研究中均未将死亡作为研究结局报告。
总体而言,基于蛋白质的口服营养补充剂可能会增加血清白蛋白的平均变化以及干预结束时的血清白蛋白水平,并可能改善血清前白蛋白和上臂中部肌肉周长。血清白蛋白的改善在血液透析和营养不良的参与者中更为明显。然而,这些结果是否能转化为营养状况的改善以及诸如死亡等临床相关结局仍不确定。需要在该人群中进行大型的精心设计的随机对照试验。