Cargando…
Comparative effects of different enteral feeding methods in head and neck cancer patients receiving radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy: a network meta-analysis
Nasogastric tube (NGT) and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy were frequently used in the head and neck cancer patients when malnutrition was present. Nevertheless, the evidence was inclusive in terms of the choice and the time of tube placement. The aim of this network meta-analysis was to evaluat...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Dove Medical Press
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4876095/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27274283 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OTT.S101983 |
_version_ | 1782433185829748736 |
---|---|
author | Zhang, Zhihong Zhu, Yu Ling, Yun Zhang, Lijuan Wan, Hongwei |
author_facet | Zhang, Zhihong Zhu, Yu Ling, Yun Zhang, Lijuan Wan, Hongwei |
author_sort | Zhang, Zhihong |
collection | PubMed |
description | Nasogastric tube (NGT) and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy were frequently used in the head and neck cancer patients when malnutrition was present. Nevertheless, the evidence was inclusive in terms of the choice and the time of tube placement. The aim of this network meta-analysis was to evaluate the comparative effects of prophylactic percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (pPEG), reactive percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (rPEG), and NGT in the head and neck cancer patients receiving radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy. Databases of PubMed, Web of Science, and Elsevier were searched from inception to October 2015. Thirteen studies enrolling 1,631 participants were included in this network meta-analysis. The results indicated that both pPEG and NGT were superior to rPEG in the management of weight loss. pPEG was associated with the least rate of treatment interruption and nutrition-related hospital admission among pPEG, rPEG, and NGT. Meanwhile, there was no difference in tube-related complications. Our study suggested that pPEG might be a better choice in malnutrition management in the head and neck cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy. However, its effects need to be further investigated in more randomized controlled trials. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4876095 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Dove Medical Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-48760952016-06-07 Comparative effects of different enteral feeding methods in head and neck cancer patients receiving radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy: a network meta-analysis Zhang, Zhihong Zhu, Yu Ling, Yun Zhang, Lijuan Wan, Hongwei Onco Targets Ther Review Nasogastric tube (NGT) and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy were frequently used in the head and neck cancer patients when malnutrition was present. Nevertheless, the evidence was inclusive in terms of the choice and the time of tube placement. The aim of this network meta-analysis was to evaluate the comparative effects of prophylactic percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (pPEG), reactive percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (rPEG), and NGT in the head and neck cancer patients receiving radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy. Databases of PubMed, Web of Science, and Elsevier were searched from inception to October 2015. Thirteen studies enrolling 1,631 participants were included in this network meta-analysis. The results indicated that both pPEG and NGT were superior to rPEG in the management of weight loss. pPEG was associated with the least rate of treatment interruption and nutrition-related hospital admission among pPEG, rPEG, and NGT. Meanwhile, there was no difference in tube-related complications. Our study suggested that pPEG might be a better choice in malnutrition management in the head and neck cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy. However, its effects need to be further investigated in more randomized controlled trials. Dove Medical Press 2016-05-18 /pmc/articles/PMC4876095/ /pubmed/27274283 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OTT.S101983 Text en © 2016 Zhang et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. |
spellingShingle | Review Zhang, Zhihong Zhu, Yu Ling, Yun Zhang, Lijuan Wan, Hongwei Comparative effects of different enteral feeding methods in head and neck cancer patients receiving radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy: a network meta-analysis |
title | Comparative effects of different enteral feeding methods in head and neck cancer patients receiving radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy: a network meta-analysis |
title_full | Comparative effects of different enteral feeding methods in head and neck cancer patients receiving radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy: a network meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Comparative effects of different enteral feeding methods in head and neck cancer patients receiving radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy: a network meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparative effects of different enteral feeding methods in head and neck cancer patients receiving radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy: a network meta-analysis |
title_short | Comparative effects of different enteral feeding methods in head and neck cancer patients receiving radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy: a network meta-analysis |
title_sort | comparative effects of different enteral feeding methods in head and neck cancer patients receiving radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy: a network meta-analysis |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4876095/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27274283 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OTT.S101983 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zhangzhihong comparativeeffectsofdifferententeralfeedingmethodsinheadandneckcancerpatientsreceivingradiotherapyorchemoradiotherapyanetworkmetaanalysis AT zhuyu comparativeeffectsofdifferententeralfeedingmethodsinheadandneckcancerpatientsreceivingradiotherapyorchemoradiotherapyanetworkmetaanalysis AT lingyun comparativeeffectsofdifferententeralfeedingmethodsinheadandneckcancerpatientsreceivingradiotherapyorchemoradiotherapyanetworkmetaanalysis AT zhanglijuan comparativeeffectsofdifferententeralfeedingmethodsinheadandneckcancerpatientsreceivingradiotherapyorchemoradiotherapyanetworkmetaanalysis AT wanhongwei comparativeeffectsofdifferententeralfeedingmethodsinheadandneckcancerpatientsreceivingradiotherapyorchemoradiotherapyanetworkmetaanalysis |