Literature DB >> 22258965

High-carbohydrate, high-protein, low-fat versus low-carbohydrate, high-protein, high-fat enteral feeds for burns.

Bronwen Masters1, Shahram Aarabi, Feroze Sidhwa, Fiona Wood.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Severe burn injuries increase patients' metabolic needs. Aggressive high-protein enteral feeding is used in the post-burn period to improve recovery and healing.
OBJECTIVES: To examine the evidence for improved clinical outcomes in burn patients treated with high-carbohydrate, high-protein, low-fat enteral feeds (high-carbohydrate enteral feeds) compared with those treated with low-carbohydrate, high-protein, high-fat enteral enteral feeds (high-fat enteral feeds). SEARCH
METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group Specialised Register (searched 28 Nov 2011), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 4), MEDLINE (Ovid) 1950 to Nov (Week 3) 2011, EMBASE (Ovid), ISI Web of Science: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED) (1970 to Nov 2011), ISI Web of Science: Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (CPCI-S) (1990 to Nov 2011), PubMed (Searched 28 Nov 2011). Online trials registers and conference proceedings were also searched to April 2010. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing high-carbohydrate enteral feeds to high-fat enteral feeds for treatment of patients with 10% or greater total body surface area (TBSA) burns in the immediate post-burn period, with data for at least one of the pre-specified outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors collected and analysed the following data: mortality, incidence of pneumonia and days on ventilator. Meta-analysis could only be performed for the outcomes mortality and incidence of pneumonia. A random-effects model was used for all comparisons. MAIN
RESULTS: Two RCTs, reporting results from 93 patients, were included in this review. Patients given a high-carbohydrate feeding formula had an odds ratio (OR) of 0.12 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04 to 0.39) for developing pneumonia compared to patients given a high-fat enteral formula (P value = 0.0004). Patients given a high-carbohydrate formula had an OR of 0.36 (95% CI 0.11 to 1.15) for risk of death compared to patients given a high-fat enteral formula; this difference did not reach statistical significance (P value = 0.08). Risk of bias in these studies was assessed as high and moderate. AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence suggests that use of high-carbohydrate, high-protein, low-fat enteral feeds in patients with at least 10% TBSA burns might reduce the incidence of pneumonia compared with use of a low-carbohydrate, high-protein, high-fat diet. The available evidence is inconclusive regarding the effect of either enteral feeding regimen on mortality. Note that the available evidence is limited to two small studies judged to be of moderate risk of bias. Further research is needed in this area before strong conclusions can be drawn.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22258965     DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006122.pub3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  9 in total

Review 1.  Early Enteral Nutrition for Burn Injury.

Authors:  Samuel P Mandell; Nicole S Gibran
Journal:  Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle)       Date:  2014-01-01       Impact factor: 4.730

Review 2.  Poor methodological quality and reporting standards of systematic reviews in burn care management.

Authors:  Jason Wasiak; Zephanie Tyack; Robert Ware; Nicholas Goodwin; Clovis M Faggion
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2016-12-18       Impact factor: 3.315

Review 3.  Current problems in burn hypermetabolism.

Authors:  Christian Sommerhalder; Elizabeth Blears; Andrew J Murton; Craig Porter; Celeste Finnerty; David N Herndon
Journal:  Curr Probl Surg       Date:  2019-11-11       Impact factor: 1.909

4.  Low-protein diet accelerates wound healing in mice post-acute injury.

Authors:  Jonathan J Hew; Roxanne J Parungao; Craig P Mooney; Julian K Smyth; Sarah Kim; Kevin H-Y Tsai; Huaikai Shi; Cassandra Chong; Renee C F Chan; Beba Attia; Caroline Nicholls; Zhe Li; Samantha M Solon-Biet; David G Le Couteur; Stephen J Simpson; Marc G Jeschke; Peter K Maitz; Yiwei Wang
Journal:  Burns Trauma       Date:  2021-08-09

5.  Guideline for diagnosis, prophylaxis and treatment of invasive fungal infection post burn injury in China 2013.

Authors:  Gaoxing Luo; Jianglin Tan; Yizhi Peng; Jun Wu; Yuesheng Huang; Daizhi Peng; Xu Wang; Dahai Hu; Songtao Xie; Guoan Zhang; Chunmao Han; Xiaoyuan Huang; Ciyu Jia; Jiake Chai; Jingning Huan; Guanghua Guo; Jianhua Zhan; Weiguo Xie; Ying Cen; Rong Yu; Huade Chen; Xihua Niu; Yibing Wang; Jinfeng Fu; Baosheng Xue
Journal:  Burns Trauma       Date:  2014-04-06

6.  Agreement on what to measure in randomised controlled trials in burn care: study protocol for the development of a core outcome set.

Authors:  Amber Young; Sara Brookes; Nichola Rumsey; Jane Blazeby
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-07-02       Impact factor: 2.692

7.  Systematic review of clinical outcome reporting in randomised controlled trials of burn care.

Authors:  Amber E Young; Anna Davies; Sophie Bland; Sara Brookes; Jane M Blazeby
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-02-15       Impact factor: 2.692

8.  Effects of Different Ratios of Carbohydrate-Fat in Enteral Nutrition on Metabolic Pattern and Organ Damage in Burned Rats.

Authors:  Yongjun Yang; Sen Su; Yong Zhang; Dan Wu; Chao Wang; Yan Wei; Xi Peng
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2022-09-04       Impact factor: 6.706

Review 9.  Enteral nutrition support in burn care: a review of current recommendations as instituted in the Ross Tilley Burn Centre.

Authors:  Kathryn L Hall; Shahriar Shahrokhi; Marc G Jeschke
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2012-10-29       Impact factor: 5.717

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.