Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37513620›Full record

SynthesisNutrients2023

The Effectiveness of Early Enteral Nutrition on Clinical Outcomes in Critically Ill Sepsis Patients: A Systematic Review.

Sun Jae Moon, Ryoung-Eun Ko, Chi-Min Park, Gee Young Suh, Jinseub Hwang, Chi Ryang Chung

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Nutrients, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. [S3 guideline on sepsis-prevention, diagnosis, therapy, and follow-up care-update 2025].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2025
    Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Feeding Intolerance in Critically Ill Patients with Enteral Nutrition: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.Journal of critical care medicine (Universitatea de Medicina si Farmacie din Targu-Mures) · 2024
    Review
  20. Review
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sun Jae MoonDepartment of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul 06351, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-3786-6935
Ryoung-Eun KoDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul 06351, Republic of Korea.
Chi-Min ParkDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul 06351, Republic of Korea.
Gee Young SuhDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul 06351, Republic of Korea.
Jinseub HwangDepartment of Data Science, Daegu University, Gyeongsan 38453, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-3805-1546
Chi Ryang ChungDepartment of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul 06351, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-1830-307X
Samsung Medical Center · KRDaegu University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The optimal timing of enteral nutrition (EN) in sepsis patients is controversial among societal guidelines. We aimed to evaluate the evidence of early EN's impact on critically ill sepsis patients' clinical outcomes. We searched the MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ICTRP databases on 10 March 2023. We included studies published after 2004 that compared early EN versus delayed EN in sepsis patients. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-RCTs, cohort studies, and case-control studies. Forest plots were used to summarize risk ratios (RRs), including mortality and mean difference (MD) of continuous variables such as intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay and ventilator-free days. We identified 11 eligible studies with sample sizes ranging from 31 to 2410. The RR of short-term mortality from three RCTs was insignificant, and the MD of ICU length of stay from two RCTs was -2.91 and -1.00 days (95% confidence interval [CI], -5.53 to -0.29 and -1.68 to -0.32). Although the RR of intestinal-related complications from one RCT was 3.82 (95% CI, 1.43 to 10.19), indicating a significantly higher risk for the early EN group than the control group, intestinal-related complications of EN reported in five studies were inconclusive. This systematic review did not find significant benefits of early EN on mortality in sepsis patients. Evidence, however, is weak due to inconsistent definitions, heterogeneity, risk of bias, and poor methodology in the existing studies.

Indexed as

Enteral NutritionSepsisCase-Control StudiesCritical IllnessHumansIntensive Care UnitsLength of Stayenteral nutritionintensive care unitsepsisseptic shocksystematic review

Identifiers

PMID37513620
PMCPMC10383540
OpenAlexW4384821032

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.