Cargando…

Continuous versus Intermittent Enteral Feeding in Critically Ill Children: A Systematic Review

Administration of enteral nutrition (EN) in critically ill pediatric patients admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) constitutes a major challenge due to the increased risk of complications, as well as the lack of well-trained healthcare professionals. EN is usually delivered via cycli...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Theodoridis, Xenophon, Chrysoula, Lydia, Evripidou, Kleo, Kalaitzopoulou, Ioustini, Chourdakis, Michail
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9867148/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36678158
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/nu15020288
_version_ 1784876270501232640
author Theodoridis, Xenophon
Chrysoula, Lydia
Evripidou, Kleo
Kalaitzopoulou, Ioustini
Chourdakis, Michail
author_facet Theodoridis, Xenophon
Chrysoula, Lydia
Evripidou, Kleo
Kalaitzopoulou, Ioustini
Chourdakis, Michail
author_sort Theodoridis, Xenophon
collection PubMed
description Administration of enteral nutrition (EN) in critically ill pediatric patients admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) constitutes a major challenge due to the increased risk of complications, as well as the lack of well-trained healthcare professionals. EN is usually delivered via cyclic, continuous, or intermittent feeding; however, a number of potential barriers have been reported in the literature regarding different feeding regimens. The purpose of this review was to assess the effectiveness of continuous and intermittent bolus feeding on critically ill children. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and a clinical trial registry up to September 2022, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in the English language. Four studies met the inclusion criteria with a total population of 288 patients admitted to the PICU. Three studies were rated with a high risk of bias and one with some concerns. There was high heterogeneity between the studies in regard to the reporting of outcomes. Three studies measured the total time needed to reach prescribed caloric intake with conflicting results, while two studies evaluated the length of stay (LOS) in PICU with no difference between the two arms. One study assessed the time weaning from mechanical ventilation, favoring the bolus group. No data were provided for gastric residual volume (GRV), anthropometric measurements, and biochemical markers. Additional randomized trials with better methodology are needed to assess the efficacy of the two enteral feeding regimens in critically ill PICU patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9867148
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98671482023-01-22 Continuous versus Intermittent Enteral Feeding in Critically Ill Children: A Systematic Review Theodoridis, Xenophon Chrysoula, Lydia Evripidou, Kleo Kalaitzopoulou, Ioustini Chourdakis, Michail Nutrients Systematic Review Administration of enteral nutrition (EN) in critically ill pediatric patients admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) constitutes a major challenge due to the increased risk of complications, as well as the lack of well-trained healthcare professionals. EN is usually delivered via cyclic, continuous, or intermittent feeding; however, a number of potential barriers have been reported in the literature regarding different feeding regimens. The purpose of this review was to assess the effectiveness of continuous and intermittent bolus feeding on critically ill children. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and a clinical trial registry up to September 2022, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in the English language. Four studies met the inclusion criteria with a total population of 288 patients admitted to the PICU. Three studies were rated with a high risk of bias and one with some concerns. There was high heterogeneity between the studies in regard to the reporting of outcomes. Three studies measured the total time needed to reach prescribed caloric intake with conflicting results, while two studies evaluated the length of stay (LOS) in PICU with no difference between the two arms. One study assessed the time weaning from mechanical ventilation, favoring the bolus group. No data were provided for gastric residual volume (GRV), anthropometric measurements, and biochemical markers. Additional randomized trials with better methodology are needed to assess the efficacy of the two enteral feeding regimens in critically ill PICU patients. MDPI 2023-01-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9867148/ /pubmed/36678158 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/nu15020288 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Systematic Review
Theodoridis, Xenophon
Chrysoula, Lydia
Evripidou, Kleo
Kalaitzopoulou, Ioustini
Chourdakis, Michail
Continuous versus Intermittent Enteral Feeding in Critically Ill Children: A Systematic Review
title Continuous versus Intermittent Enteral Feeding in Critically Ill Children: A Systematic Review
title_full Continuous versus Intermittent Enteral Feeding in Critically Ill Children: A Systematic Review
title_fullStr Continuous versus Intermittent Enteral Feeding in Critically Ill Children: A Systematic Review
title_full_unstemmed Continuous versus Intermittent Enteral Feeding in Critically Ill Children: A Systematic Review
title_short Continuous versus Intermittent Enteral Feeding in Critically Ill Children: A Systematic Review
title_sort continuous versus intermittent enteral feeding in critically ill children: a systematic review
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9867148/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36678158
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/nu15020288
work_keys_str_mv AT theodoridisxenophon continuousversusintermittententeralfeedingincriticallyillchildrenasystematicreview
AT chrysoulalydia continuousversusintermittententeralfeedingincriticallyillchildrenasystematicreview
AT evripidoukleo continuousversusintermittententeralfeedingincriticallyillchildrenasystematicreview
AT kalaitzopoulouioustini continuousversusintermittententeralfeedingincriticallyillchildrenasystematicreview
AT chourdakismichail continuousversusintermittententeralfeedingincriticallyillchildrenasystematicreview