Glutamine may be an essential amino acid in patients with catabolic disease, as it has been demonstrated that circulating glutamine levels drop during critical illness and following major surgery; this may result in an increase in secondary infection risk, recovery time and mortality rates. However, there is much discrepancy in the literature with regards to randomized controlled studies, and therefore, the present study is an umbrella review of published meta-analyses, conducted to examine the effectiveness of glutamine's role as a therapeutic agent. A search using PubMed, Cochrane Library and CINAHL from January 1st, 1980 to December 31st, 2016 was conducted using the following strategy: ‘Glutamine AND (meta-analysis OR systematic review)’ and publications were retrieved, which provided quantitative statistical analysis of pooled treatment effects on the relative risks of infectious complications, mortality and length of stay in hospital. A total of 22 meta-analyses were entered into the current umbrella review. As displayed in Tables I, II and III, these analyses are split into three groups, based on different parameters. Of the 19 meta-analyses investigating the effects of infectious complications, 15 identified statistically significant reductions in complications, with relative risks ranging between 0.42 and 0.93. In addition, 12 of the 18 meta-analyses analyzing the length of hospital stays presented statistically significant reductions in the length of stay, with reductions ranging between 0.19 to 4.73 days. Only 4 of the 15 meta-analyses studying mortality effects identified statistically significant reductions in mortality with relative risks ranging between 0.64 and 1.28. Statistically significant heterogeneity was observed in 16 of 22 meta-analyses, and publication bias was observed in five of 11 meta-analyses. Glutamine supplementation for critically ill or surgical patients through parenteral or enteral routes appears to reduce the rate of hospital acquired infectious complications and shortening of the length of stay in hospital. Furthermore, glutamine supplementation appeared to reduce the rate of in-patient mortality, but the majority of meta-analyses did not reach statistical significance. However, researchers must appreciate the positive results with caution in light of the fact that there exists statistically significant heterogeneity for the majority of meta-analyses, and statistically significant publication bias in almost half.
Revista»Digestive and liver disease : official journal of the Italian Society of Gastroenterology and the Italian Association for the Study of the Liver
In the 20th century early management of acute pancreatitis often included surgical intervention, despite overwhelming mortality. The emergence of high-quality evidence (randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses) over the past two decades has notably shifted the treatment paradigm towards predominantly non-surgical management early in the course of acute pancreatitis. The present evidence-based review focuses on contemporary aspects of early management (which include analgesia, fluid resuscitation, antibiotics, nutrition, and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography) with a view to providing clear and succinct guidelines on early management of patients with acute pancreatitis in 2017 and beyond.
No existe claridad sobre el efecto del uso de glutamina en pacientes con pancreatitis aguda. Utilizando la base de datos Epistemonikos, la cual es mantenida mediante búsquedas en 30 bases de datos, identificamos 15 revisiones sistemáticas que en conjunto incluyen 31 estudios aleatorizados pertinentes a la pregunta. Realizamos un metanálisis y tablas de resumen de los resultados utilizando el método GRADE. Concluimos que la glutamina podría disminuir las complicaciones infecciosas en la pancreatitis aguda, pero no está claro si tiene algún efecto sobre la mortalidad o el tiempo de hospitalización porque la certeza de la evidencia es muy baja.
Glutamine may be an essential amino acid in patients with catabolic disease, as it has been demonstrated that circulating glutamine levels drop during critical illness and following major surgery; this may result in an increase in secondary infection risk, recovery time and mortality rates. However, there is much discrepancy in the literature with regards to randomized controlled studies, and therefore, the present study is an umbrella review of published meta-analyses, conducted to examine the effectiveness of glutamine's role as a therapeutic agent. A search using PubMed, Cochrane Library and CINAHL from January 1st, 1980 to December 31st, 2016 was conducted using the following strategy: ‘Glutamine AND (meta-analysis OR systematic review)’ and publications were retrieved, which provided quantitative statistical analysis of pooled treatment effects on the relative risks of infectious complications, mortality and length of stay in hospital. A total of 22 meta-analyses were entered into the current umbrella review. As displayed in Tables I, II and III, these analyses are split into three groups, based on different parameters. Of the 19 meta-analyses investigating the effects of infectious complications, 15 identified statistically significant reductions in complications, with relative risks ranging between 0.42 and 0.93. In addition, 12 of the 18 meta-analyses analyzing the length of hospital stays presented statistically significant reductions in the length of stay, with reductions ranging between 0.19 to 4.73 days. Only 4 of the 15 meta-analyses studying mortality effects identified statistically significant reductions in mortality with relative risks ranging between 0.64 and 1.28. Statistically significant heterogeneity was observed in 16 of 22 meta-analyses, and publication bias was observed in five of 11 meta-analyses. Glutamine supplementation for critically ill or surgical patients through parenteral or enteral routes appears to reduce the rate of hospital acquired infectious complications and shortening of the length of stay in hospital. Furthermore, glutamine supplementation appeared to reduce the rate of in-patient mortality, but the majority of meta-analyses did not reach statistical significance. However, researchers must appreciate the positive results with caution in light of the fact that there exists statistically significant heterogeneity for the majority of meta-analyses, and statistically significant publication bias in almost half.
Síntesis amplia»Revisión panorámica de revisiones sistemáticas
