Different definitions of feeding intolerance and their associations with outcomes of critically ill adults receiving enteral nutrition: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Authors' conclusion
In critically ill adult patients receiving EN, the large-GRV-centered GIS to define FI seemed to be superior to 3-day EF-insufficiency in terms of both close associations with all-cause hospital mortality and acceptable hospital prevalence
Study context
- Population
- Critically ill adults receiving enteral nutrition
- Participants
- 25,189 adults · 26 studies
- Comparison
- Feeding intolerance (FI) vs non-FI, by FI definition
- Outcome
- Associations of FI definitions with outcomes
Methodological detailsrandom-effects meta-analysis, GRADE certainty rating
- Random-effects meta-analysis
- GRADE certainty rating
Pooled result
As reported in the abstract
Odds ratio (95% CI)
FI (large GRV ≥ 250 ± 50 mL + any other GIS) vs non-FIall-cause hospital mortality; low to very low certainty
1.90(1.40–2.57)
FI (large GRV ≥ 250 ± 50 mL + any other GIS) vs non-FIpneumonia
1.54(1.13–2.09)
3-day EF delivered percentage < 80%all-cause hospital mortality; marginally significant
1.90(1.03–3.50)
Mean difference (95% CI)
FI (large GRV ≥ 250 ± 50 mL + any other GIS) vs non-FIlength of hospital stay
4.20(2.08–6.32)
- Hospital prevalence, large gastric residual volume (GRV) + gastrointestinal symptoms (GIS) definition
- 41.49%
- Hospital prevalence, 3-day enteral feeding (EF) < 80% definition
- 38.23%
Original publication
Different definitions of feeding intolerance and their associations with outcomes of critically ill adults receiving enteral nutrition: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Intensive Care. Published 5 July 2023. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →