Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20811543›Full record

ArticleGastroenterology research and practice2011

Enteral nutrition and acute pancreatitis: a review.

B W M Spanier, M J Bruno, E M H Mathus-Vliegen

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Gastroenterology research and practice, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. ACVIM consensus statement on pancreatitis in cats.Journal of veterinary internal medicine · 2021
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. [Gastrointestinal emergencies - acute pancreatitis].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2013
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

B W M SpanierDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Rijnstate Hospital, P.O. Box 9555, 6800 TA Arnhem, The Netherlands.
M J Bruno
E M H Mathus-Vliegen
Academic Medical Center · NLErasmus MC · NLRijnstate Hospital · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction. In patients with acute pancreatitis (AP), nutritional support is required if normal food cannot be tolerated within several days. Enteral nutrition is preferred over parenteral nutrition. We reviewed the literature about enteral nutrition in AP. Methods. A MEDLINE search of the English language literature between 1999-2009. Results. Nasogastric tube feeding appears to be safe and well tolerated in the majority of patients with severe AP, rendering the concept of pancreatic rest less probable. Enteral nutrition has a beneficial influence on the outcome of AP and should probably be initiated as early as possible (within 48 hours). Supplementation of enteral formulas with glutamine or prebiotics and probiotics cannot routinely be recommended. Conclusions. Nutrition therapy in patients with AP emerged from supportive adjunctive therapy to a proactive primary intervention. Large multicentre studies are needed to confirm the safety and effectiveness of nasogastric feeding and to investigate the role of early nutrition support.

Identifiers

PMID20811543
PMCPMC2929521
OpenAlexW1975141626

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.