SynthesisBMC gastroenterology2024
Comparative safety assessment of nasogastric versus nasojejunal feeding initiated within 48 hours post-admission versus unrestricted timing in moderate or severe acute pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC gastroenterology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
- Acute Necrotizing Pancreatitis-Advances and Challenges in Management for Optimal Clinical Outcomes.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- Diagnostic and therapeutic management of severe acute pancreatitis. Evidence based medicine (EBM) clinical practice guidelines.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe primary objective of this study is to comparatively assess the safety of nasogastric (NG) feeding versus nasojejunal (NJ) feeding in patients with acute pancreatitis (AP), with a special focus on the initiation of these feeding methods within the first 48 h of hospital admission.
methodsStudies were identified through a systematic search in PubMed, EMbase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science. Four studies involving 217 patients were included. This systematic review assesses the safety and efficacy of nasogastric versus nasojejunal feeding initiated within 48 h post-admission in moderate/severe acute pancreatitis, with a specific focus on the timing of initiation and patient age as influential factors.
resultsThe results showed that the mortality rates were similar between NG and NJ feeding groups (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.77, P = 0.68). Significant differences were observed in the incidence of diarrhea (RR 2.75, 95% CI 1.21 to 6.25, P = 0.02) and pain (RR 2.91, 95% CI 1.50 to 5.64, P = 0.002) in the NG group. The NG group also showed a higher probability of infection (6.67% vs. 3.33%, P = 0.027) and a higher frequency of multiple organ failures. Subgroup analysis for early intervention (within 48 h) showed a higher risk of diarrhea in the NG group (RR 2.80, P = 0.02). No significant differences were found in the need for surgical intervention, parenteral nutrition, or success rates of feeding procedures.
conclusionThis meta-analysis highlights the importance of considering the method and timing of nutritional support in acute pancreatitis. While NG feeding within 48 h of admission increases the risk of certain complications such as diarrhea and infection, it does not significantly impact mortality or the need for surgical intervention.
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.