ArticleCureus2025
Provision of Enteral Nutrition in a Critically Ill Patient Requiring Multiple Prone Ventilation Sessions.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
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
Timely and adequate nutrition support in critical care is necessary to prevent metabolic deterioration and preserve lean body mass. However, providing enteral nutrition during prone ventilation carries certain risks. The potential for gastrointestinal intolerance and ventilator-associated pneumonia is a concern in this context. Furthermore, healthcare providers are often hesitant to start or continue enteral nutrition for patients in prone ventilation due to fears of gastrointestinal complications. Here we describe a case involving a 53-year-old male patient admitted to the critical care unit, diagnosed with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), requiring mechanical ventilation and multiple rounds of prone ventilation. Enteral feeding was initiated and increased to a maximum rate of 65 ml/hour, allowing the patient to meet his energy and protein needs while in prone ventilation. The feeding rate was well tolerated, with no adverse effects reported. Complete nutritional requirements could be satisfied even amid the demands of multiple prone ventilation sessions in a critically ill patient.
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.