Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33428672›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2021

The efficacy and safety of prokinetics in critically ill adults receiving gastric feeding tubes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Rong Peng, Hailong Li, Lijun Yang, Linan Zeng, Qiusha Yi, Peipei Xu, Xiangcheng Pan, Lingli Zhang

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05828758 (Efficacy of Amoxicillin for Treatment of Enteral Nutrition Intolerance in Pediatric Intensive Care Unit), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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.

NCT05828758 phase2 / phase3unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Efficacy of Amoxicillin for Treatment of Enteral Nutrition Intolerance in Pediatric Intensive Care Unit

TypeinterventionalSponsorSohag UniversityRan2023 to 2024Enrolled90ConditionsEnteral Feeding IntoleranceArmsAmoxicillin, Placebo
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Comparison of enteral prucaloprideFrontiers in pharmacology · 2024
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rong PengDepartment of Pharmacy, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Hailong LiDepartment of Pharmacy, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Lijun YangDepartment of General Practice Medicine, Affiliated Hospital of Chengdu University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Linan ZengDepartment of Pharmacy, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Qiusha YiDepartment of Pharmacy, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Peipei XuDepartment of Pharmacy, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Xiangcheng PanDepartment of Pharmacy, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Lingli ZhangDepartment of Pharmacy, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.ORCID 0000-0002-9600-1088
Sichuan University · CNChengdu University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntolerance to gastric feeding tubes is common among critically ill adults and may increase morbidity. Administration of prokinetics in the ICU is common. However, the efficacy and safety of prokinetics are unclear in critically ill adults with gastric feeding tubes. We conducted a systematic review to determine the efficacy and safety of prokinetics for improving gastric feeding tube tolerance in critically ill adults.

methodsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified by systematically searching the Medline, Cochrane and Embase databases. Two independent reviewers extracted the relevant data and assessed the quality of the studies. We calculated pooled relative risks (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes and the mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology to rate the quality of the evidence.

resultsFifteen RCTs met the inclusion criteria. A total of 10 RCTs involving 846 participants were eligible for the quantitative analysis. Most studies (10 of 13, 76.92%) showed that prokinetics had beneficial effects on feeding intolerance in critically ill adults. In critically ill adults receiving gastric feeding, prokinetic agents may reduce the ICU length of stay (MD -2.03, 95% CI -3.96, -0.10; P = 0.04; low certainty) and the hospital length of stay (MD -3.21, 95% CI -5.35, -1.06; P = 0.003; low certainty). However, prokinetics failed to improve the outcomes of reported adverse events and all-cause mortality.

conclusionAs a class of drugs, prokinetics may improve tolerance to gastric feeding to some extent in critically ill adults. However, the certainty of the evidence suggesting that prokinetics reduce the ICU or hospital length of stay is low. Prokinetics did not significantly decrease the risks of reported adverse events or all-cause mortality among critically ill adults.

Indexed as

Critical IllnessPharmaceutical PreparationsAdultEnteral NutritionGastrointestinal DiseasesHumansIntensive Care UnitsLength of StayPublication BiasRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRiskTreatment OutcomePharmaceutical Preparations

Identifiers

PMID33428672
PMCPMC7799841
OpenAlexW3119580302

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.