IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0058838.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Nutritional Support for Patients Sustaining Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prospective Studies

Author

Listed:
  • Xiang Wang
  • Yan Dong
  • Xi Han
  • Xiang-Qian Qi
  • Cheng-Guang Huang
  • Li-Jun Hou

Abstract

Background: In traumatic brain injury (TBI), the appropriate timing and route of feeding, and the efficacy of immune-enhancing formulae have not been well established. We performed this meta-analysis aiming to compare the effects of different nutritional support modalities on clinical outcomes of TBI patients. Methods: We systematically searched Pubmed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library until October, 2012. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized prospective studies (NPSs) that compared the effects of different routes, timings, or formulae of feeding on outcomes in TBI patients were selected. The primary outcomes included mortality and poor outcome. The secondary outcomes included the length of hospital stay, the length of ventilation days, and the rate of infectious or feeding-related complications. Findings: 13 RCTs and 3 NPSs were included. The pooled data demonstrated that, compared with delayed feeding, early feeding was associated with a significant reduction in the rate of mortality (relative risk [RR] = 0.35; 95% CI, 0.24–0.50), poor outcome (RR = 0.70; 95% CI, 0.54–0.91), and infectious complications (RR = 0.77; 95% CI, 0.59–0.99). Compared with enteral nutrition, parenteral nutrition showed a slight trend of reduction in the rate of mortality (RR = 0.61; 95% CI, 0.34–1.09), poor outcome (RR = 0.73; 95% CI, 0.51–1.04), and infectious complications (RR = 0.89; 95% CI, 0.66–1.22), whereas without statistical significances. The immune-enhancing formula was associated with a significant reduction in infection rate compared with the standard formula (RR = 0.54; 95% CI, 0.35–0.82). Small-bowel feeding was found to be with a decreasing rate of pneumonia compared with nasogastric feeding (RR = 0.41; 95% CI, 0.22–0.76). Conclusion: After TBI, early initiation of nutrition is recommended. It appears that parenteral nutrition is superior to enteral nutrition in improving outcomes. Our results lend support to the use of small-bowel feeding and immune-enhancing formulae in reducing infectious complications.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiang Wang & Yan Dong & Xi Han & Xiang-Qian Qi & Cheng-Guang Huang & Li-Jun Hou, 2013. "Nutritional Support for Patients Sustaining Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prospective Studies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(3), pages 1-14, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0058838
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0058838
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0058838
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0058838&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0058838?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0058838. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.