Cargando…

Is discard better than return gastric residual aspirates: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: The assessment of residual gastric volume is common practice in critical care units. However, the effects and safety of discarding or returning gastric aspirates remain uncertain. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the role of discarding or returning gastric aspirates on the gastric residua...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wen, Zunjia, Xie, Ailing, Peng, Mingqi, Bian, Lanzheng, Wei, Li, Li, Mei
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6599274/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31253100
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12876-019-1028-7
_version_ 1783430929576886272
author Wen, Zunjia
Xie, Ailing
Peng, Mingqi
Bian, Lanzheng
Wei, Li
Li, Mei
author_facet Wen, Zunjia
Xie, Ailing
Peng, Mingqi
Bian, Lanzheng
Wei, Li
Li, Mei
author_sort Wen, Zunjia
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The assessment of residual gastric volume is common practice in critical care units. However, the effects and safety of discarding or returning gastric aspirates remain uncertain. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the role of discarding or returning gastric aspirates on the gastric residual volumes in critically ill patients. METHODS: A comprehensive, systematic meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy and safety of discarding or returning gastric aspirates in critical ill patients was performed. Studies were identified by searching Pubmed and other databases (from inception to 31 Sept 2018). Summary odd ratios (ORs) or mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using fixed- or random-effects model for outcome assessment. Results: Four RCTs, with a total number of 314 adult patients, were included in the analysis. No significant differences were found in the 48th hour residual volume (MD = 8.89, 95% CI: 11.97 to 29.74), the average potassium level (MD = 0.00, 95% CI: − 0.16 to 0.16), the episodes of gastric emptying delay (OR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.35 to 2.80), the incidence of aspiration pneumonia (OR = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.14 to 6.17), the episodes of nausea or vomiting (OR = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.07 to 4.13) and diarrhea (OR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.58 to 1.70). CONCLUSIONS: No evidence confirms that returning residual gastric aspirates provides more benefits than discarding them without increasing potential complications. Rigorously designed, multi-center, large-sample randomized controlled trials must be further conducted to validate the role of discarding or returning residual gastric aspirates.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6599274
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65992742019-07-11 Is discard better than return gastric residual aspirates: a systematic review and meta-analysis Wen, Zunjia Xie, Ailing Peng, Mingqi Bian, Lanzheng Wei, Li Li, Mei BMC Gastroenterol Research Article BACKGROUND: The assessment of residual gastric volume is common practice in critical care units. However, the effects and safety of discarding or returning gastric aspirates remain uncertain. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the role of discarding or returning gastric aspirates on the gastric residual volumes in critically ill patients. METHODS: A comprehensive, systematic meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy and safety of discarding or returning gastric aspirates in critical ill patients was performed. Studies were identified by searching Pubmed and other databases (from inception to 31 Sept 2018). Summary odd ratios (ORs) or mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using fixed- or random-effects model for outcome assessment. Results: Four RCTs, with a total number of 314 adult patients, were included in the analysis. No significant differences were found in the 48th hour residual volume (MD = 8.89, 95% CI: 11.97 to 29.74), the average potassium level (MD = 0.00, 95% CI: − 0.16 to 0.16), the episodes of gastric emptying delay (OR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.35 to 2.80), the incidence of aspiration pneumonia (OR = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.14 to 6.17), the episodes of nausea or vomiting (OR = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.07 to 4.13) and diarrhea (OR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.58 to 1.70). CONCLUSIONS: No evidence confirms that returning residual gastric aspirates provides more benefits than discarding them without increasing potential complications. Rigorously designed, multi-center, large-sample randomized controlled trials must be further conducted to validate the role of discarding or returning residual gastric aspirates. BioMed Central 2019-06-28 /pmc/articles/PMC6599274/ /pubmed/31253100 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12876-019-1028-7 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Wen, Zunjia
Xie, Ailing
Peng, Mingqi
Bian, Lanzheng
Wei, Li
Li, Mei
Is discard better than return gastric residual aspirates: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Is discard better than return gastric residual aspirates: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Is discard better than return gastric residual aspirates: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Is discard better than return gastric residual aspirates: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Is discard better than return gastric residual aspirates: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Is discard better than return gastric residual aspirates: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort is discard better than return gastric residual aspirates: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6599274/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31253100
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12876-019-1028-7
work_keys_str_mv AT wenzunjia isdiscardbetterthanreturngastricresidualaspiratesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT xieailing isdiscardbetterthanreturngastricresidualaspiratesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT pengmingqi isdiscardbetterthanreturngastricresidualaspiratesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT bianlanzheng isdiscardbetterthanreturngastricresidualaspiratesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT weili isdiscardbetterthanreturngastricresidualaspiratesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT limei isdiscardbetterthanreturngastricresidualaspiratesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis