Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21249659›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2011

Enteral tube feeding for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis/motor neuron disease.

Hans Dieter Katzberg, Michael Benatar

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 138 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Treatment of fatigue in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis/motor neuron disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Medically assisted nutrition for adult palliative care patients.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Enteral tube feeding for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis/motor neuron disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Cui bono? PEG feeding.Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Hans Dieter KatzbergUniversity of Toronto Toronto General Hospital / UHN, 200 Elizabeth Street, 5EC-306 Toronto, Canada, ON M5G 2C4.
Michael Benatar
University of Miami · USUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEnteral feeding (tube feeding) is offered to many people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis/motor neuron disease experiencing difficulty swallowing (dysphagia) and maintaining adequate nutritional intake leading to weight loss.

objectivesTo examine the efficacy of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy placement or other tube feeding placement on: (1) survival;(2) nutritional status; (3) quality of life;(4) minor and major complications of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Trials Register (24 November 2009), MEDLINE (from January 1966 to September 2009), and EMBASE (from January 1980 to September 2009) for all papers on enteral tube feeding in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis/motor neuron disease. The results were screened to identify randomised controlled trials and to identify non-randomized studies that might be worthy of review and discussion. We checked references in published articles and enlisted personal communications to identify any additional references. SELECTION CRITERIA: A priori selection criteria included randomised and quasi-randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy or other feeding tube placement. Since no such trials were discovered, all prospective and retrospective controlled studies were reviewed in the 'Background' or 'Discussion' sections of the review. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently assessed study design and extracted data. We considered the following outcomes: (1) survival rate in months (of primary interest), (2) nutritional status measured by weight change, change in body mass index, or other quantitative index of nutritional status, (3) self-perceived quality of life and (4) safety of the procedure as indicated by minor and major complications of surgical or radiological guided PEG tube insertion. MAIN

resultsWe found no randomised controlled trials comparing the efficacy of enteral tube feeding with those people who continued to eat orally, without enteral feeding. We summarized the results of retrospective and prospective studies in the 'Discussion' section. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThere are no randomised controlled trials to indicate whether enteral tube feeding is beneficial compared to continuation of oral feeding for any of the outcome measures. The 'best' evidence to date suggests a survival advantage for some people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis/motor neuron disease, but these conclusions are tentative. Evidence for improved nutrition is also incomplete but tentatively favorable.  Quality of life has been addressed in studies and needs more attention. Based on a number of recent non-randomized studies comparing surgical and radiographic approaches to feeding tube insertion these two procedures for PEG tube insertion appear to be equivalent.

Indexed as

Enteral NutritionAmyotrophic Lateral SclerosisDeglutition DisordersGastrostomyHumansMotor Neuron DiseaseProspective StudiesRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID21249659
PMCPMC7163276
OpenAlexW1693537582

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.