首页> 外文OA文献 >Slow advancement of enteral feed volumes to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants
【2h】

Slow advancement of enteral feed volumes to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

机译:肠内饲料量的缓慢进展,以防止极低出生体重儿的坏死性小肠结肠炎

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

BACKGROUND: Early enteral feeding practices are potentially modifiable risk factors for necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) in very preterm or very low birth weight (VLBW) infants. Observational studies suggest that conservative feeding regimens, including slowly advancing enteral feed volumes, reduce the risk of NEC. However, slow feed advancement may delay establishment of full enteral feeding and may be associated with metabolic and infectious morbidities secondary to prolonged exposure to parenteral nutrition. OBJECTIVES: To determine effects of slow rates of enteral feed advancement on the incidence of NEC, mortality, and other morbidities in very preterm or VLBW infants. SEARCH METHODS: We used the standard Cochrane Neonatal search strategy to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 5), MEDLINE via PubMed (1966 to June 2017), Embase (1980 to June 2017), and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL; 1982 to June 2017). We searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, previous reviews, and reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that assessed effects of slow (up to 24 mL/kg/d) versus faster rates of advancement of enteral feed volumes upon the incidence of NEC in very preterm or VLBW infants. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias and independently extracted data. We analysed treatment effects in individual trials and reported risk ratio (RR) and risk difference (RD) for dichotomous data, and mean difference (MD) for continuous data, with respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used a fixed-effect model for meta-analyses and explored potential causes of heterogeneity via sensitivity analyses. We assessed the quality of evidence at the outcome level using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 10 RCTs in which a total of 3753 infants participated (2804 infants participated in one large trial). Most participants were stable very preterm infants of birth weight appropriate for gestation. About one-third of all participants were extremely preterm or extremely low birth weight (ELBW), and about one-fifth were small for gestational age (SGA), growth-restricted, or compromised in utero, as indicated by absent or reversed end-diastolic flow velocity (AREDFV) in the fetal umbilical artery. Trials typically defined slow advancement as daily increments of 15 to 20 mL/kg, and faster advancement as daily increments of 30 to 40 mL/kg. Trials generally were of good methodological quality, although none was blinded.Meta-analyses did not show effects on risk of NEC (typical RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.39; RD 0.0, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.02) or all-cause mortality (typical RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.42; typical RD 0.01, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.03). Subgroup analyses of extremely preterm or ELBW infants, or of SGA or growth-restricted or growth-compromised infants, showed no evidence of an effect on risk of NEC or death. Slow feed advancement delayed establishment of full enteral nutrition by between about one and five days. Meta-analysis showed borderline increased risk of invasive infection (typical RR 1.15, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.32; typical RD 0.03, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.05). The GRADE quality of evidence for primary outcomes was "moderate", downgraded from "high" because of lack of blinding in the included trials. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Available trial data do not provide evidence that advancing enteral feed volumes at daily increments of 15 to 20 mL/kg (compared with 30 to 40 mL/kg) reduces the risk of NEC or death in very preterm or VLBW infants, extremely preterm or ELBW infants, SGA or growth-restricted infants, or infants with antenatal AREDFV. Advancing the volume of enteral feeds at a slow rate results in several days of delay in establishing full enteral feeds and may increase the risk of invasive infection.
机译:背景:早期的肠内喂养习惯是极早产或极低出生体重(VLBW)婴儿坏死性小肠结肠炎(NEC)的潜在危险因素。观察性研究表明,保守的喂养方案(包括缓慢增加肠内饲料的量)可降低NEC的风险。但是,缓慢的饲料前进可能会延迟完全肠内喂养的建立,并且可能与长期暴露于肠胃外营养导致的代谢和传染病相关。目的:确定肠道早进速度对早产或极早产儿NEC,死亡率和其他发病率的影响。搜索方法:我们使用标准的Cochrane新生儿搜索策略搜索了Cochrane对照试验中央注册簿(CENTRAL; 2017,第5期),MEDLINE(通过PubMed(1966年至2017年6月),Embase(1980年至2017年6月)和累积护理和相关健康文献索引(CINAHL; 1982年至2017年6月)。我们搜索了临床试验数据库,会议记录,以前的评论以及检索到的文章的参考列表,以查找随机对照试验(RCT)和准随机试验。选择标准:随机或半随机对照试验评估了早产儿或VLBW婴儿对NEC发生率缓慢(最高24 mL / kg / d)与更快的肠内饲料进给速度的影响。数据收集和分析:两位评价作者评估了试验的资格和偏倚风险,并独立提取了数据。我们分析了各个试验中的治疗效果,并报告了二分类数据的风险比(RR)和风险差异(RD),以及连续数据的均数差异(MD),分别具有95%的置信区间(CIs)。我们使用固定效应模型进行荟萃分析,并通过敏感性分析探索了异质性的潜在原因。我们使用建议评估,发展和评估分级(GRADE)方法在结果级别评估证据的质量。主要结果:我们确定了10个RCT,共有3753例婴儿参加(其中2804例婴儿参加了一项大型试验)。大多数参与者是稳定的非常早产儿,其出生体重适合妊娠。所有参与者中约有三分之一为极早产或极低出生体重(ELBW),约有五分之一为胎龄(SGA),生长受限或宫内发育不全的婴儿,表现为末期体重不足或倒退。胎儿脐动脉的舒张期流速(AREDFV)。试验通常将缓慢进展定义为每日增加15至20 mL / kg,将更快进展定义为每日增加30至40 mL / kg。尽管没有盲法,但试验通常具有良好的方法学质量。荟萃分析未显示出对NEC风险的影响(典型RR 1.07,95%CI 0.83至1.39; RD 0.0,95%CI -0.01至0.02)或全导致死亡率(典型RR 1.15,95%CI 0.93至1.42;典型RD 0.01,95%CI -0.01至0.03)。对极早产或ELBW婴儿,SGA或生长受限或生长受损的婴儿进行的亚组分析没有证据显示对NEC或死亡的风险有影响。缓慢的饲喂进度将完全肠内营养的建立延迟了大约一到五天。荟萃分析显示侵入性感染的危险性增加(典型RR 1.15,95%CI 1.00至1.32;典型RD 0.03,95%CI 0.00至0.05)。由于所纳入试验的不盲目性,GRADE的主要结局证据质量为“中等”,从“高”下调为“高”。作者的结论:现有的试验数据无法提供证据,表明以每天增量15至20 mL / kg(相比之下,以30至40 mL / kg的速度)增加肠内饲料的量可以降低NEC或极早产婴儿或VLBW婴儿死亡的风险,极早产或ELBW婴儿,SGA或生长受限的婴儿,或具有产前AREDFV的婴儿。缓慢增加肠内饲料的量会导致建立完整肠内饲料的时间延迟几天,并可能增加侵袭性感染的风险。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号