Glutamine enteral therapy for critically ill adult patients: An updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and trial sequential analysis.

Published
December 03, 2023
Journal
Clinical nutrition (Edinburgh, Scotland)
PICOID
16b290d3
DOI
Citations
3
Keywords
Critically ill, Enteral, Glutamine, Meta-analysis, Mortality, Randomized controlled trials
Copyright
Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd and European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism. All rights reserved.
Patients/Population/Participants

adult critical illness patients

Intervention

enteral glutamine (GLN)

Comparison

no enteral GLN or parenteral GLN only

Outcome

hospital mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), infectious complications, hospital LOS

Abstract

P
I
C
O

The efficacy of supplemental enteral glutamine (GLN) in critical illness patients remains uncertainty. Based on a recently published large-scale randomized controlled trials (RCTs) as regards the use of enteral GLN, we updated a meta-analysis of RCTs for further investigating the effects of enteral GLN administration in critically ill patients. We searched RCTs reporting the impact of supplemental enteral GLN about clinical outcomes in adult critical illness patients from EMBASE, PubMed, Clinical Trials.gov, Scopus and Web of Science and subsequently registered the protocol in the PROSPERO (CRD42023399770). RCTs of combined enteral-parenteral GLN or parenteral GLN only were excluded. Hospital mortality was designated as the primary outcome. We conducted subgroup analyses of primary outcome based on specific patient populations, dosages and therapy regimens, and further performed trial sequential analysis (TSA) for clinical outcomes. Eighteen RCTs involving 2552 adult critically ill patients were identified. There were no remarkable influences on hospital mortality regardless of different subgroups (OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.85-1.30; p = 0.67), intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS) (MD, -0.07; 95% CI, -1.12 - 0.98; p = 0.89) and infectious complications (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.75-1.10; p = 0.31) with enteral GLN supplementation. Additionally, the results of hospital mortality were confirmed by TSA. However, enteral GLN therapy was related to a reduction of hospital LOS (MD, -2.85; 95% CI, -5.27 to -0.43; p = 0.02). In this meta-analysis, it seems that enteral GLN supplementation is unlikely ameliorate clinical outcomes in critical illness patients except for the reduction of hospital LOS. Our data do not support enteral GLN supplementation used routinely in critical illness patients.

Similar article map

CEO: Hwi-yeol YunCOO: Jung-woo ChaeCTO: Sangkeun Jung
Location: 204, W6, Chungnam National University, 99, Daehak-ro, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon, Republic of Korea
Tel: 042-821-7328E-mail: webmaster@lilac-co.kr
Copyright © 2024 by LiLac. All Rights Reserved.