Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35268095›Full record

SynthesisNutrients2022

The Effects of Enteral Nutrition in Critically Ill Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Omorogieva Ojo, Osarhumwese Osaretin Ojo, Qianqian Feng, Joshua Boateng, Xiaohua Wang, Joanne Brooke, Amanda Rodrigues Amorim Adegboye

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Nutrients, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.5field-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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Enteral nutrition support in patients with cancer: association of short-term prognosis and medical costs with inflammation.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Combined Effect of the Timing of Initiation of Nutrition and Nutrition Risk on Outcomes in a Mixed Intensive Care Unit of a Tertiary Hospital in a Middle-income Country.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Innovative strategy to improve enteral nutrition in prone positioning with patients with COVID-19.Nutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition · 2023
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Omorogieva OjoFaculty of Education, School of Health Sciences, Health and Human Sciences, University of Greenwich, Avery Hill Campus, Avery Hill Road, London SE9 2UG, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0071-3652
Osarhumwese Osaretin OjoSmoking Cessation Department, University Hospital, South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, Lewisham High Street, London SE13 6LH, UK.
Qianqian FengThe School of Nursing, Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, China.
Joshua BoatengSchool of Science, University of Greenwich, Medway Campus, Central Ave, Gillingham, Chatham Maritime, Kent ME4 4TB, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6310-729X
Xiaohua WangThe School of Nursing, Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, China.
Joanne BrookeFaculty of Health, Education and Life Sciences, Ravensbury House, Birmingham City University, City South Campus, Birmingham B15 3TN, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0325-2142
Amanda Rodrigues Amorim AdegboyeCentre for Healthcare Research, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, School of Nursing, Midwifery and Health, Coventry University, Priory Street, Coventry CV1 5FB, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2780-0350
South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust · GBBirmingham City University · GBSoochow University · CNCoventry University · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Patients who are critically ill with COVID-19 could have impaired nutrient absorption due to disruption of the normal intestinal mucosa. They are often in a state of high inflammation, increased stress and catabolism as well as a significant increase in energy and protein requirements. Therefore, timely enteral nutrition support and the provision of optimal nutrients are essential in preventing malnutrition in these patients. Aim: This review aims to evaluate the effects of enteral nutrition in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Method: This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted based on the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-Analysis framework and PICO. Searches were conducted in databases, including EMBASE, Health Research databases and Google Scholar. Searches were conducted from database inception until 3 February 2022. The reference lists of articles were also searched for relevant articles. Results: Seven articles were included in the systematic review, and four articles were included in the meta-analysis. Two distinct areas were identified from the results of the systematic review and meta-analysis: the impact of enteral nutrition and gastrointestinal intolerance associated with enteral nutrition. The impact of enteral nutrition was further sub-divided into early enteral nutrition versus delayed enteral nutrition and enteral nutrition versus parenteral nutrition. The results of the meta-analysis of the effects of enteral nutrition in critically ill patients with COVID-19 showed that, overall, enteral nutrition was effective in significantly reducing the risk of mortality in these patients compared with the control with a risk ratio of 0.89 (95% CI, 0.79, 0.99, p = 0.04). Following sub-group analysis, the early enteral nutrition group also showed a significant reduction in the risk of mortality with a risk ratio of 0.89 (95% CI, 0.79, 1.00, p = 0.05). The Relative Risk Reduction (RRR) of mortality in patients with COVID-19 by early enteral nutrition was 11%. There was a significant reduction in the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score in the early enteral nutrition group compared with the delayed enteral nutrition group. There was no significant difference between enteral nutrition and parenteral nutrition in relation to mortality (RR = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.59, 1.28, p = 0.48). Concerning the length of hospital stay, length of ICU stay and days on mechanical ventilation, while there were reductions in the number of days in the enteral nutrition group compared to the control (delayed enteral nutrition or parenteral nutrition), the differences were not significant (p > 0.05). Conclusion: The results showed that early enteral nutrition significantly (p < 0.05) reduced the risk of mortality among critically ill patients with COVID-19. However, early enteral nutrition or enteral nutrition did not significantly (p > 0.05) reduce the length of hospital stay, length of ICU stay and days on mechanical ventilation compared to delayed enteral nutrition or parenteral nutrition. More studies are needed to examine the effect of early enteral nutrition in patients with COVID-19.

Indexed as

COVID-19Enteral NutritionCritical IllnessHumansParenteral NutritionSARS-CoV-2COVID-19days on mechanical ventilationdelayed enteral nutritionearly enteral nutritionenteral nutritiongastrointestinal intolerancelength of hospital staymortalityparenteral nutrition

Identifiers

PMID35268095
PMCPMC8912272
OpenAlexW4220730206

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.