Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15175229›Full record

SynthesisBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2004

Meta-analysis of parenteral nutrition versus enteral nutrition in patients with acute pancreatitis.

Paul E Marik, Gary P Zaloga

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00995098 (The Impact of Early Enteral Nutrition on the Clinical Outcomes of Severe Acute Pancreatitis Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 87 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
87citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT00995098 phase4completednot on this mapstarted 2009, after this paper: background citation

The Impact of Early Enteral Nutrition on the Clinical Outcomes of Severe Acute Pancreatitis Patients: A Randomized Control Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorSichuan Academy of Medical SciencesRan2009 to 2010Enrolled42ConditionsAcute Necrotizing PancreatitisArmsearly enteral nutrition, Parenteral nutrition
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

87 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Enteral versus parenteral nutrition for acute pancreatitis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2010
    Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Guideline
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Turkish Society of Gastroenterology: Pancreas Working Group, Acute Pancreatitis Committee Consensus Report.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2024
    Review

27 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Paul E MarikDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA 15261, USA. maripe@ccm.upmc.edu
Gary P Zaloga

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the safety and clinical outcomes of enteral and parenteral nutrition in patients with acute pancreatitis. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, Cochrane controlled trials register, and citation review of relevant primary and review articles. STUDY SELECTION: Randomised controlled studies that compared enteral nutrition with parenteral nutrition in patients with acute pancreatitis. From 117 articles screened, six were identified as randomised controlled trials and were included for data extraction. DATA EXTRACTION: Six studies with 263 participants were analysed. Descriptive and outcome data were extracted. Main outcome measures were infections, complications other than infections, operative interventions, length of hospital stay, and mortality. The meta-analysis was performed with the random effects model. DATA SYNTHESIS: Enteral nutrition was associated with a significantly lower incidence of infections (relative risk 0.45; 95% confidence interval 0.26 to 0.78, P = 0.004), reduced surgical interventions to control pancreatitis (0.48, 0.22 to 1.0, P = 0.05), and a reduced length of hospital stay (mean reduction 2.9 days, 1.6 days to 4.3 days, P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in mortality (relative risk 0.66, 0.32 to 1.37, P = 0.3) or non-infectious complications (0.61, 0.31 to 1.22, P = 0.16) between the two groups of patients.

conclusionsEnteral nutrition should be the preferred route of nutritional support in patients with acute pancreatitis.

Indexed as

Acute DiseaseCommunicable DiseasesEnteral NutritionHospital MortalityHumansLength of StayPancreatitisParenteral NutritionRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID15175229
PMCPMC421778

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.