Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Odgođeno uvođenje progresivne enteralne prehrane u svrhu spriječavanja nekrotizirajućeg enterokolitisa u novorođenčadi s vrlo niskom porođajnom težinom

Esta versión no es la más reciente

Información

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001970.pub5Copiar DOI
Base de datos:
  1. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Versión publicada:
  1. 01 diciembre 2014see what's new
Tipo:
  1. Intervention
Etapa:
  1. Review
Grupo Editorial Cochrane:
  1. Grupo Cochrane de Neonatología

Copyright:
  1. Copyright © 2014 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cifras del artículo

Altmetric:

Citado por:

Citado 0 veces por enlace Crossref Cited-by

Contraer

Autores

  • Jessie Morgan

    Hull York Medical School & Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK

  • Lauren Young

    Neonatal Unit, Mercy Hospital for Women, Heidelberg, Australia

  • William McGuire

    Correspondencia a: Hull York Medical School & Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK

    [email protected]

Contributions of authors

Lauren Young and William McGuire updated the search, independently determined the eligibility of identified studies, assessed the methodological quality of the included trials, and extracted the relevant information and data.

All authors completed the final review.

Sources of support

Internal sources

  • Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, Hull York Medical School, UK.

External sources

  • National Institute for Health Research, UK.

  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, USA.

    Editorial support of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group was funded with Federal funds from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, USA, under Contract No. HHSN267200603418C

Declarations of interest

None known.

Acknowledgements

This report is independent research funded by a UK National Institute of Health Research Grant (NIHR) Cochrane Programme Grant (13/89/12). The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the National Health Service (NHS), the NIHR or the UK Department of Health.

Version history

Published

Title

Stage

Authors

Version

2022 Jan 20

Delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

Review

Lauren Young, Sam J Oddie, William McGuire

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001970.pub6

2014 Dec 01

Delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

Review

Jessie Morgan, Lauren Young, William McGuire

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001970.pub5

2013 May 31

Delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

Review

Jessie Morgan, Lauren Young, William McGuire

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001970.pub4

2011 Mar 16

Delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

Review

Jessie Morgan, Lauren Young, William McGuire

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001970.pub3

2008 Apr 23

Delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

Review

Sarah Bombell, William McGuire

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001970.pub2

2000 Jan 24

Early versus delayed initiation of progressive enteral feedings for parenterally fed low birth weight or preterm infants

Review

Kathleen A Kennedy, Jon E Tyson

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001970

Keywords

MeSH

PICO

Population
Intervention
Comparison
Outcome

El uso y la enseñanza del modelo PICO están muy extendidos en el ámbito de la atención sanitaria basada en la evidencia para formular preguntas y estrategias de búsqueda y para caracterizar estudios o metanálisis clínicos. PICO son las siglas en inglés de cuatro posibles componentes de una pregunta de investigación: paciente, población o problema; intervención; comparación; desenlace (outcome).

Para saber más sobre el uso del modelo PICO, puede consultar el Manual Cochrane.

'Risk of bias' graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 1

'Risk of bias' graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Delayed versus early introduction of progressive enteral feeding, outcome: 1.1 Necrotising enterocolitis.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 2

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Delayed versus early introduction of progressive enteral feeding, outcome: 1.1 Necrotising enterocolitis.

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Delayed versus early introduction of progressive enteral feeding, outcome: 1.2 Mortality prior to discharge.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 3

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Delayed versus early introduction of progressive enteral feeding, outcome: 1.2 Mortality prior to discharge.

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Delayed versus early introduction of progressive enteral feeding, outcome: 1.3 Feed intolerance.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 4

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Delayed versus early introduction of progressive enteral feeding, outcome: 1.3 Feed intolerance.

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Delayed versus early introduction of progressive enteral feeding, outcome: 1.5 Duration of hospital admission (days).
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 5

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Delayed versus early introduction of progressive enteral feeding, outcome: 1.5 Duration of hospital admission (days).

Comparison 1 Delayed versus early introduction of progressive enteral feeding, Outcome 1 Necrotising enterocolitis.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Delayed versus early introduction of progressive enteral feeding, Outcome 1 Necrotising enterocolitis.

Comparison 1 Delayed versus early introduction of progressive enteral feeding, Outcome 2 Mortality prior to discharge.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Delayed versus early introduction of progressive enteral feeding, Outcome 2 Mortality prior to discharge.

Comparison 1 Delayed versus early introduction of progressive enteral feeding, Outcome 3 Feed intolerance.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Delayed versus early introduction of progressive enteral feeding, Outcome 3 Feed intolerance.

Comparison 1 Delayed versus early introduction of progressive enteral feeding, Outcome 4 Incidence of invasive infection.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Delayed versus early introduction of progressive enteral feeding, Outcome 4 Incidence of invasive infection.

Comparison 1 Delayed versus early introduction of progressive enteral feeding, Outcome 5 Duration of hospital admission (days).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1 Delayed versus early introduction of progressive enteral feeding, Outcome 5 Duration of hospital admission (days).

Comparison 1. Delayed versus early introduction of progressive enteral feeding

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Necrotising enterocolitis Show forest plot

8

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

1.1 All trials

8

1092

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.93 [0.64, 1.34]

1.2 Trials of infants with intrauterine growth restriction or abnormal antenatal Doppler flow velocities

4

673

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.87 [0.54, 1.41]

2 Mortality prior to discharge Show forest plot

7

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

2.1 All trials

7

967

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.18 [0.75, 1.88]

2.2 Trials of infants with intrauterine growth restriction or abnormal antenatal Doppler flow velocities

3

548

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.06 [0.55, 2.05]

3 Feed intolerance Show forest plot

3

288

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.84 [0.62, 1.15]

4 Incidence of invasive infection Show forest plot

2

457

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.27 [0.95, 1.70]

5 Duration of hospital admission (days) Show forest plot

3

346

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.11 [0.31, 3.90]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. Delayed versus early introduction of progressive enteral feeding