The efficacy of fiber-supplemented enteral nutrition in critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with trial sequential analysis
Pooled result · 12 studiesResult — go to the resultRelative risk 0.66 95% CI 0.47–0.92Authors' conclusion
Very low-certainty evidence suggests that fiber-supplemented EN has clinical benefits.
Study context
- Population
- Adult critically ill patients
- Participants
- 1,405 patients · 20 studies
- Comparison
- Fiber-supplemented enteral nutrition (EN) vs placebo or usual care
- Outcome
- Overall mortality
Methodological detailsrandom-effect meta-analysis, trial sequential analysis
- Random-effect meta-analysis
- Trial sequential analysis
Pooled result
12 studies
Relative risk
0.66
95% CI 0.47–0.92
P = 0.01
Fiber-supplemented EN vs Placebo or usual care
RR 0.66 (95% CI 0.47–0.92); P = 0.01
As reported in the abstract
Further pooled results
| Outcome | RR (95% CI) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Diarrhea incidenceI2 = 51%; 11 studies | 0.70 (0.51–0.96) | P = 0.03 | |
| 0.512Relative risk (log scale) |
- Diarrhea incidence: very serious risk of bias; per trial sequential analysis (TSA) a type-1 error cannot be ruled out
Overall mortality (subgroup)
- No subgroup differences found for the primary outcome
Original publication
The efficacy of fiber-supplemented enteral nutrition in critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with trial sequential analysis. Crit Care. Published 7 November 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →