Trial reportEuropean journal of clinical nutrition2008
A double-blind, randomized, controlled crossover trial of glutamine supplementation in home parenteral nutrition.
Trial report in European journal of clinical nutrition, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Chronic Intestinal Failure and Short Bowel Syndrome in Adults: The State of the Art.GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterology · 2024Review
- Amino acid composition in parenteral nutrition: what is the evidence?Current opinion in clinical nutrition and metabolic care · 2011Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveStudies suggest clinical benefit of glutamine-supplemented parenteral nutrition. The aim was to determine if the inclusion of 10 g of glutamine as part of the nitrogen source of home parenteral nutrition (HPN) reduces infectious complications. SUBJECTS/
methodsThirty-five patients on HPN were recruited and 22 completed the study. Patients were randomized to receive either standard HPN or glutamine-supplemented HPN. Patients were assessed at randomization, 3 and 6 months later then they were crossed over to the alternative HPN and reassessed at 3 and 6 months. Assessments included plasma amino acid concentrations, intestinal permeability and absorption, nutritional status, oral and parenteral intake, quality of life, routine biochemistry and haematology.
resultsNo difference was seen between the groups at randomization. No difference was detected between the treatment phases for infective complications (55% in the standard treatment phase and 36% in the glutamine-supplemented phase P=0.67). There were no differences in nutritional status, intestinal permeability, plasma glutamine concentrations or quality of life.
conclusionAlthough limited by the sample size, the study has shown that glutamine as part of the nitrogen source of parenteral nutrition can be given to patients on HPN for 6 months without any adverse effects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.