Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Parenteral versus enteral nutrition in the critically ill patient: additional sensitivity analysis supports benefit of early parenteral compared to delayed enteral nutrition

  • Correspondence
  • Published:
Intensive Care Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

References

  1. Marik PE (2013) Parenteral vs. enteral nutrition in the critically ill patient: a re-analysis of a flawed meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med. doi:10.1007/s00134-013-2865-4

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Simpson F, Doig GS (2005) Parenteral vs. enteral nutrition in the critically ill patient: a meta-analysis of trials using the intention to treat principle. Intensive Care Med 31:12–23

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Doig GS, Simpson F, Finfer S et al (2008) Effect of evidence-based feeding guidelines on mortality of critically ill adults: a cluster randomized trial. J Am Med Assoc 300:2731–2741

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Rapp RP, Young B, Twyman D et al (1983) The favorable effect of early parenteral feeding on survival in head-injured patients. J Neurosurg 58:906–912

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. McClave SA, Martindale RG, Vanek VW et al (2009) Guidelines for the provision and assessment of nutrition support therapy in the adult critically ill patient: Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) and American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN). JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 33:277–316

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Rice TW, Wheeler AP, Thompson BT et al (2012) Initial trophic vs. full enteral feeding in patients with acute lung injury: the EDEN randomized trial. JAMA 307:795–803

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Lachin JM (2000) Statistical considerations in the intent-to-treat principle. Control Clin Trials 21:167–189

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Doig GS, Simpson F, Delaney A (2005) A review of the true methodological quality of nutritional support trials conducted in the critically ill: time for improvement. Anesth Analg 100:527–533

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Wood AM, White IR, Thompson SG (2004) Are missing outcome data adequately handled? A review of published randomized controlled trials in major medical journals. Clin Trials 1:368–376

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflicts of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gordon Stuart Doig.

Additional information

This reply refers to the comment available at: doi:10.1007/s00134-013-2865-4.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Doig, G.S. Parenteral versus enteral nutrition in the critically ill patient: additional sensitivity analysis supports benefit of early parenteral compared to delayed enteral nutrition. Intensive Care Med 39, 981–982 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-013-2856-5

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-013-2856-5

Keywords

Navigation