ArticleCureus2023
Enteral Nutrition Versus Parenteral Nutrition on Outcomes in Acute Pancreatitis: Insights From the Nationwide Inpatient Sample.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Total enteral vs. parenteral nutrition in severe acute pancreatitis: an updated systematic review and GRADE-assessed meta-analysis.BMC nutrition · 2026Pooled it
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of oral frailty prevalence among older hospitalized patients.Frontiers in public health · 2025Pooled it
- Comparison of the Clinical Course, Management and Outcomes of Acute Pancreatitis in Aged and Young Patients.Biomedicines · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDespite considerable research on the comparison of enteral and parenteral nutrition in patients with acute pancreatitis, there is an ongoing debate about the optimal timing of nutrition initiation, invasiveness of interventions, impact on outcomes, and patient tolerance. Given the gap that still exists in the literature, we investigated the relationship between the mode of nutrition and critical outcomes such as mortality rates, inpatient complications, length of hospitalization, and discharge disposition, using comprehensive national-level data. In addition, we investigated the impact of early enteral nutrition on outcomes in acute pancreatitis.
methodsAll adult discharges for acute pancreatitis between 2016 and 2018 were analyzed from the National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sample (NIS). Discharges of minors and those involving mixed nutrition were excluded from the analysis. Enteral nutrition and parenteral nutrition subgroups were identified using the International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision (ICD-10) codes. Disease severity was defined using the 2013 revised Atlanta Classification of Acute Pancreatitis, along with the All Patient Refined Diagnosis Related Group (APR-DRG)'s severity of illness and likelihood of mortality variables. Complications were identified using ICD-10 codes from the secondary diagnoses variables within the NIS dataset. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were employed to assess associations between the mode of nutrition and the outcomes of interest.
resultsA total of 379,410 hospitalizations were studied. About 2,011 (0.53%) received enteral nutrition, while 4,174 (1.1%) received parenteral nutrition. The mean age of the study was 51.7 years (SD 0.1). About 2,280 mortalities were recorded in the study. After adjustments, enteral nutrition was associated with significantly lower odds of mortality (adjusted OR (aOR): 0.833; 95%CI: 0.497-0.933; P<0.001). Parenteral nutrition was linked with significantly greater odds of mortality (aOR: 6.957; 95%CI: 4.730-10.233; P<0.001). Both enteral nutrition and parenteral nutrition were associated with augmented odds of complications and prolonged hospitalization (P<0.001) compared to normal oral feeding. Initiation of enteral nutrition within 24 hours of admission did not improve the odds of mortality in this study (aOR: 5.619; 95%CI: 1.900-16.615; P=0.002).
conclusionEnteral nutrition demonstrates better outcomes in mortality rates and systemic complications compared to parenteral nutrition in patients unable to maintain normal oral feeding.
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.