ArticleNutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition2026
Continuation of enteral nutrition in critically ill patients with nonclinically important nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: A retrospective cohort study.
Article in Nutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Continuation of enteral nutrition in critically ill patients with nonclinically important nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: A retrospective cohort study.Nutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEnteral nutrition (EN) is the preferred method of nutrition support for critically ill patients, but its continuation during nonclinically important nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) remains controversial.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study was conducted in patients in an intensive care unit (ICU) who developed nonclinically important NVUGIB while receiving EN. Patients were categorized into two groups: continued EN group and suspended EN group after the bleeding episode. The primary outcome was progression to clinically important GIB. Secondary outcomes included mortality and being mechanical ventilation free at 28 days. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to account for potential confounding variables.
resultsAmong 590 eligible patients, 400 (67.8%) continued EN and 190 (32.2%) had EN suspended. Progression to clinically important GIB was similar between groups (6.0% vs 6.3%, P = 0.88), a finding confirmed after PSM (7.3% vs 7.3%, P > 0.99). Patients continuing EN had more ventilation-free days (9 vs 6 days, P < 0.001; matched: 10 vs 6 days, P = 0.005). Unmatched analysis showed higher in-hospital mortality in the suspension group (45.5% vs 54.7%, P = 0.036), but this was nonsignificant post-PSM (53.3% vs 46.7%, P = 0.12). Continuation of EN was not found to be significantly associated with clinically important GIB (odds ratio = 1.913, P = 0.30).
conclusionContinuing EN in critically ill patients with nonclinically important NVUGIB appears to be safe and may be associated with a reduced duration of mechanical ventilation. These findings suggest that EN can be safely continued in patients with nonclinically important NVUGIB, potentially offering benefits in terms of respiratory outcomes and nutrition support.
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.