SynthesisChinese journal of traumatology = Zhonghua chuang shang za zhi2024
Enteral glutamine supplements for patients with severe burns: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Chinese journal of traumatology = Zhonghua chuang shang za zhi, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeOur previous study in 2009 concluded that glutamine may shorten the length of hospital stay (LOS) in patients with severe burns. Recent large-scale studies have suggested a decline in the effectiveness of glutamine in treating patients with severe burns over the last decade. Therefore, we conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to update the status of glutamine uses in patients with severe burns.
methodsWe retrieved related literature prior to December 2022 from the PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, SinoMed, Wanfang, and CNKI databases. Terms such as glutamine, enteral and burn were linked for searching. Adults patients with severe burns were included and non-randomized controlled trials were excluded. Data from studies that compared enteral glutamine for severe burns with a control group were extracted. The primary outcomes of mortality and infectious morbidities were pooled and analyzed. The modified Jadad scale and Cochrane collaboration's tool were used to assess the risk of bias in RCTs, and the Review Manager 5.4 was used to pool and analyze the data.
resultsSix randomized controlled trials involving 1398 patients were included in the analysis. There were no significant differences in overall mortality (risk ratio (RR) = 0.37; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.06 - 2.37; p = 0.300) or infectious morbidities (RR = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.41 - 1.31; p = 0.290). The incidence of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome was similar between the 2 groups (RR = 0.27; 95% CI: 0.03 - 2.24; p = 0.220). The LOS (mean difference (MD) = -8.97; 95% CI: -15.22 to -2.71; p = 0.005) and LOS/total burn surface area (MD = -0.27; 95% CI: -0.54 to 0.00; p = 0.050) decreased in the enteral glutamine group. The incidence of wound infection was significantly reduced (RR = 0.42; 95% CI: 0.16 - 1.06; p = 0.070).
conclusionCompared to the control group, enteral glutamine administration may not improve the mortality, although it may be associated with a shorter LOS, a lower LOS/total burn surface area ratio, and may reduce the risk of wound infection in patients with severe burns.
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.