Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40661675›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in nutrition2025

Current status and influencing factors of enteral nutrition interruption among critical patients: a systematic review.

Xiaoyan Lu, Xin Wang, Weixia Yu, Jianzheng Cai, Yuyu Wang, Yongzhi Cao, Limi Dan, Qingling Wang

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

8 authors.

Xiaoyan Lu *Department of Intensive Care Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, China.
Xin Wang *Department of Intensive Care Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, China.
Weixia Yu *Department of Intensive Care Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, China.
Jianzheng CaiDepartment of Nursing, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, China.
Yuyu WangDepartment of Nursing, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, China.
Yongzhi CaoDepartment of Nursing, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, China.
Limi DanDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, China.
Qingling WangDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: This study systematically reviewed and elucidated the current status and key determinants of enteral nutrition interruption (ENI) in critically ill patients. By shedding light on these factors, we aimed to furnish compelling evidence to mitigate the occurrence of ENI in this critical setting. Methods: We embarked on a comprehensive search across seven prominent databases, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Scopus, EBSCO, and Ovid Medline, spanning from their inception to 27 May 2024. Two independent researchers meticulously screened and assessed the quality of the literature, extracting data on the current status and influencing factors of ENI. This rigorous approach culminated in a descriptive systematic review and analysis. Results: From an initial pool of 2,984 studies, 28 were deemed suitable for inclusion in this review, comprising 20 cross-sectional and eight cohort studies. Moreover, 16 studies highlighted ENI incidence rates ranging from 4.7% to a staggering 100%, with an overall average of 48.3%. Among 17 studies, a total of 4,890 ENI episodes were reported involving 2,008 critically ill patients, translating to an average of 2-3 episodes per patient. Four studies detailed the cumulative ENI duration in 327 critically ill patients, totaling 11037.2 h, with an individual average of 33.8 h per patient. The analysis revealed four primary factors influencing ENI: procedures, gastrointestinal events, feeding tube problems, and hemodynamic instability. Procedures accounted for 29.8%-85.0% of ENI frequency and 34.6%-81.2% of duration, with averages of 63.4% and 52.1%, respectively. Gastrointestinal events contributed to 9.4%-59.7% of ENI frequency and 11.5%-21.4% of duration, averaging 19.2% and 18.1%. Feeding tube problems ranged from 0.9% to 29.3% in frequency and 1.3%-25.6% in duration, with averages of 9.3% and 11.6%. Hemodynamic instability was responsible for 0.9%-20.0% of ENI frequency and 1.1%-5.1% of duration, averaging 3.9% and 2.6%. Conclusion: The incidence and frequency of ENI in critically ill patients are notably high, with interruptions lasting for extended durations. The primary culprits, procedures, gastrointestinal events, feeding tube problems, and hemodynamic instability, influenced ENI occurrence. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_recordphp?ID=CRD42024554417, identifier CRD42024554417.

Indexed as

current statusenteral nutrition interruptioninfluencing factorsintensive caresystematic review

Identifiers

PMID40661675
PMCPMC12258065

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.