Limits...
Effect of glutamine enriched nutrition support on surgical patients with gastrointestinal tumor: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Kang K, Shu XL, Zhang YS, Liu XL, Zhao J - Chin. Med. J. (2015)

Bottom Line: Thirteen RCTs, involving 1034 patients, were included in the meta-analysis.Meanwhile, it was more significant in decreasing the incidence of infectious complications (RR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.50-0.90; P < 0.05) and shortening the length of hospital stay (MD: -1.72; 95% CI: -3.31--0.13; P < 0.05).Glutamine enriched nutrition support was superior in improving immune function, reducing the incidence of infectious complications and shortening the length of hospital stay, playing an important role in the rehabilitation of surgical GI cancer patients.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Nutrition, East Hospital, Tong Ji University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200120, China.

ABSTRACT

Background: Associations between glutamine (Gln) enriched nutrition support and surgical patients with gastrointestinal (GI) tumor remain controversy. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to assess the effect of Gln enriched nutrition support on surgical patients with GI tumor in term of relevant biochemical indices, immune indices, and clinical outcomes.

Methods: Six databases were systematically searched to find eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from 1966 to May 2014. When estimated the analysis indexes, the relative risk (RR) was used as the effect size of the categorical variable, while the weighted mean difference (MD) was used as the effect size of a continuous variable. Meta-analysis was conducted with Rev Man 5.2.

Results: Thirteen RCTs, involving 1034 patients, were included in the meta-analysis. The analysis showed that Gln enriched nutrition support was more effective in increasing serum albumin (MD: 0.10; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.02-0.18; P < 0.05), serum prealbumin (MD: 1.98; 95% CI: 1.40-2.55; P < 0.05) and serum transferring (MD: 0.35; 95% CI: 0.12-0.57; P < 0.05), concentration of IgG (MD: 1.26; 95% CI: 0.90-1.63; P < 0.05), IgM (MD: 0.18; 95% CI: 0.11-0.25; P < 0.05), IgA (MD: 0.22; 95% CI: 0.10-0.33; P < 0.05), CD3 + (MD: 3.71; 95% CI: 2.57-4.85; P < 0.05) and CD4/CD8 ratio (MD: 0.27; 95% CI: 0.12-0.42; P < 0.05). Meanwhile, it was more significant in decreasing the incidence of infectious complications (RR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.50-0.90; P < 0.05) and shortening the length of hospital stay (MD: -1.72; 95% CI: -3.31--0.13; P < 0.05).

Conclusions: Glutamine enriched nutrition support was superior in improving immune function, reducing the incidence of infectious complications and shortening the length of hospital stay, playing an important role in the rehabilitation of surgical GI cancer patients.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Forest plot of relevant biochemical indices between Glutamine and control group. (a) Change of serum total protein between glutamine and control group: Fixed-effects model. (b) Change of serum albumin between glutamine and control group: Fixed-effects model. (c) Change of serum prealbumin between glutamine and control group: Fixed-effects model. (d) Change of serum transferrin between glutamine and control group: Subgroup analysis with random-effects model.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4837846&req=5

Figure 2: Forest plot of relevant biochemical indices between Glutamine and control group. (a) Change of serum total protein between glutamine and control group: Fixed-effects model. (b) Change of serum albumin between glutamine and control group: Fixed-effects model. (c) Change of serum prealbumin between glutamine and control group: Fixed-effects model. (d) Change of serum transferrin between glutamine and control group: Subgroup analysis with random-effects model.

Mentions: Totally 122 participants from three studies[182427] were enrolled to evaluate the change of serum total protein (g/L), the heterogeneity of which (I2 = 58%; P = 0.09; Chi-square = 4.81) was acceptable, so the fixed-effects model was used. The analysis showed that there was no statistically significant difference between the Gln and control group (MD: 0.86; 95% CI: −0.28–1.99; P > 0.05), from which we could draw the conclusion that Gln enriched nutrition support had no more difference in changing the serum total protein than control group [Figure 2a].


Effect of glutamine enriched nutrition support on surgical patients with gastrointestinal tumor: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Kang K, Shu XL, Zhang YS, Liu XL, Zhao J - Chin. Med. J. (2015)

Forest plot of relevant biochemical indices between Glutamine and control group. (a) Change of serum total protein between glutamine and control group: Fixed-effects model. (b) Change of serum albumin between glutamine and control group: Fixed-effects model. (c) Change of serum prealbumin between glutamine and control group: Fixed-effects model. (d) Change of serum transferrin between glutamine and control group: Subgroup analysis with random-effects model.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4837846&req=5

Figure 2: Forest plot of relevant biochemical indices between Glutamine and control group. (a) Change of serum total protein between glutamine and control group: Fixed-effects model. (b) Change of serum albumin between glutamine and control group: Fixed-effects model. (c) Change of serum prealbumin between glutamine and control group: Fixed-effects model. (d) Change of serum transferrin between glutamine and control group: Subgroup analysis with random-effects model.
Mentions: Totally 122 participants from three studies[182427] were enrolled to evaluate the change of serum total protein (g/L), the heterogeneity of which (I2 = 58%; P = 0.09; Chi-square = 4.81) was acceptable, so the fixed-effects model was used. The analysis showed that there was no statistically significant difference between the Gln and control group (MD: 0.86; 95% CI: −0.28–1.99; P > 0.05), from which we could draw the conclusion that Gln enriched nutrition support had no more difference in changing the serum total protein than control group [Figure 2a].

Bottom Line: Thirteen RCTs, involving 1034 patients, were included in the meta-analysis.Meanwhile, it was more significant in decreasing the incidence of infectious complications (RR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.50-0.90; P < 0.05) and shortening the length of hospital stay (MD: -1.72; 95% CI: -3.31--0.13; P < 0.05).Glutamine enriched nutrition support was superior in improving immune function, reducing the incidence of infectious complications and shortening the length of hospital stay, playing an important role in the rehabilitation of surgical GI cancer patients.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Nutrition, East Hospital, Tong Ji University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200120, China.

ABSTRACT

Background: Associations between glutamine (Gln) enriched nutrition support and surgical patients with gastrointestinal (GI) tumor remain controversy. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to assess the effect of Gln enriched nutrition support on surgical patients with GI tumor in term of relevant biochemical indices, immune indices, and clinical outcomes.

Methods: Six databases were systematically searched to find eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from 1966 to May 2014. When estimated the analysis indexes, the relative risk (RR) was used as the effect size of the categorical variable, while the weighted mean difference (MD) was used as the effect size of a continuous variable. Meta-analysis was conducted with Rev Man 5.2.

Results: Thirteen RCTs, involving 1034 patients, were included in the meta-analysis. The analysis showed that Gln enriched nutrition support was more effective in increasing serum albumin (MD: 0.10; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.02-0.18; P < 0.05), serum prealbumin (MD: 1.98; 95% CI: 1.40-2.55; P < 0.05) and serum transferring (MD: 0.35; 95% CI: 0.12-0.57; P < 0.05), concentration of IgG (MD: 1.26; 95% CI: 0.90-1.63; P < 0.05), IgM (MD: 0.18; 95% CI: 0.11-0.25; P < 0.05), IgA (MD: 0.22; 95% CI: 0.10-0.33; P < 0.05), CD3 + (MD: 3.71; 95% CI: 2.57-4.85; P < 0.05) and CD4/CD8 ratio (MD: 0.27; 95% CI: 0.12-0.42; P < 0.05). Meanwhile, it was more significant in decreasing the incidence of infectious complications (RR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.50-0.90; P < 0.05) and shortening the length of hospital stay (MD: -1.72; 95% CI: -3.31--0.13; P < 0.05).

Conclusions: Glutamine enriched nutrition support was superior in improving immune function, reducing the incidence of infectious complications and shortening the length of hospital stay, playing an important role in the rehabilitation of surgical GI cancer patients.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus