Oral nutritional supplement helps to improve nutritional status of dialysis dependent patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BackgroundThe prevention and treatment of malnutrition holds remarkable implications in the overall management of dialysis patients. However, there remains a dearth of comprehensive evaluations regarding the impact of oral nutrition supplement (ONS) on all pertinent dimensions of malnutrition in the dialysis population.MethodsA systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Library. RCTs that had assessed the effects of oral nutritional supplement in dialysis-dependent populations were considered eligible. Outcomes included laboratory indicators, anthropometric measures, nutritional indices, dialysis adequacy, body composition analysis measures, and systemic inflammation indicators. The risk of bias was assessed according to Cochrane guidelines. Weighted mean difference (WMD) or standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using a random-effects model.ResultsIn all, 22 RCTs with 1,281 patients were included. The pooled analyses revealed the serum ALB, BMI, nPCR, and MIS improved by 1.44 g/L (95% CI: 0.76, 2.57), 0.35 kg/m2 (95% CI: 0.17, 0.52), 0.07 g/(kg d) (95% CI, 0.05, 0.10), and −2.75 (95% CI, −3.95, −1.54), respectively following ONS treatments when compared to control treatments. However, no significant differences were observed in relation to the other outcomes examined. 15 studies were rated as having high risk of bias. Visual inspection of the funnel plot and Egger test argued against the presence of publication bias.ConclusionONS treatments helps to improve the nutritional status of dialysis dependent patients. More evidence is needed from future investigations with longer study duration and standardized procedures to support long-term use of ONS in this population.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, Identifier CRD 42023441987

Actively implementing an evidence-based feeding guideline for critically ill patients (NEED): a multicenter, cluster-randomized, controlled trial

Background: Previous cluster-randomized controlled trials evaluating the impact of implementing evidence-based guidelines for nutrition therapy in critical illness do not consistently demonstrate patient benefits. A large-scale, sufficiently powered study is therefore warranted to ascertain the effects of guideline implementation on patient-centered outcomes. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, cluster-randomized, parallel-controlled trial in intensive care units (ICUs) across China. We developed an evidence-based feeding guideline. ICUs randomly allocated to the guideline group formed a local "intervention team", which actively implemented the guideline using standardized educational materials, a graphical feeding protocol, and live online education outreach meetings conducted by members of the study management committee. ICUs assigned to the control group remained unaware of the guideline content. All ICUs enrolled patients who were expected to stay in the ICU longer than seven days. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality within 28 days of enrollment. Results: Forty-eight ICUs were randomized to the guideline group and 49 to the control group. From March 2018 to July 2019, the guideline ICUs enrolled 1399 patients, and the control ICUs enrolled 1373 patients. Implementation of the guideline resulted in significantly earlier EN initiation (1.20 vs. 1.55 mean days to initiation of EN; difference − 0.40 [95% CI − 0.71 to − 0.09]; P = 0.01) and delayed PN initiation (1.29 vs. 0.80 mean days to start of PN; difference 1.06 [95% CI 0.44 to 1.67]; P = 0.001). There was no significant difference in 28-day mortality (14.2% vs. 15.2%; difference − 1.6% [95% CI − 4.3% to 1.2%]; P = 0.42) between groups. Conclusions: In this large-scale, multicenter trial, active implementation of an evidence-based feeding guideline reduced the time to commencement of EN and overall PN use but did not translate to a reduction in mortality from critical illness. Trial registration: ISRCTN, ISRCTN12233792. Registered November 20th, 2017

Actively implementing an evidence-based feeding guideline for critically ill patients (NEED): a multicenter, cluster-randomized, controlled trial.

BackgroundPrevious cluster-randomized controlled trials evaluating the impact of implementing evidence-based guidelines for nutrition therapy in critical illness do not consistently demonstrate patient benefits. A large-scale, sufficiently powered study is therefore warranted to ascertain the effects of guideline implementation on patient-centered outcomes.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter, cluster-randomized, parallel-controlled trial in intensive care units (ICUs) across China. We developed an evidence-based feeding guideline. ICUs randomly allocated to the guideline group formed a local "intervention team", which actively implemented the guideline using standardized educational materials, a graphical feeding protocol, and live online education outreach meetings conducted by members of the study management committee. ICUs assigned to the control group remained unaware of the guideline content. All ICUs enrolled patients who were expected to stay in the ICU longer than seven days. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality within 28 days of enrollment.ResultsForty-eight ICUs were randomized to the guideline group and 49 to the control group. From March 2018 to July 2019, the guideline ICUs enrolled 1399 patients, and the control ICUs enrolled 1373 patients. Implementation of the guideline resulted in significantly earlier EN initiation (1.20 vs. 1.55 mean days to initiation of EN; difference - 0.40 [95% CI - 0.71 to - 0.09]; P = 0.01) and delayed PN initiation (1.29 vs. 0.80 mean days to start of PN; difference 1.06 [95% CI 0.44 to 1.67]; P = 0.001). There was no significant difference in 28-day mortality (14.2% vs. 15.2%; difference - 1.6% [95% CI - 4.3% to 1.2%]; P = 0.42) between groups.ConclusionsIn this large-scale, multicenter trial, active implementation of an evidence-based feeding guideline reduced the time to commencement of EN and overall PN use but did not translate to a reduction in mortality from critical illness.Trial registrationISRCTN, ISRCTN12233792 . Registered November 20th, 2017

Actively implementing an evidence-based feeding guideline for critically ill patients (NEED): a multicenter, cluster-randomized, controlled trial (vol 26, 46, 2022)

BackgroundPrevious cluster-randomized controlled trials evaluating the impact of implementing evidence-based guidelines for nutrition therapy in critical illness do not consistently demonstrate patient benefits. A large-scale, sufficiently powered study is therefore warranted to ascertain the effects of guideline implementation on patient-centered outcomes.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter, cluster-randomized, parallel-controlled trial in intensive care units (ICUs) across China. We developed an evidence-based feeding guideline. ICUs randomly allocated to the guideline group formed a local "intervention team", which actively implemented the guideline using standardized educational materials, a graphical feeding protocol, and live online education outreach meetings conducted by members of the study management committee. ICUs assigned to the control group remained unaware of the guideline content. All ICUs enrolled patients who were expected to stay in the ICU longer than seven days. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality within 28 days of enrollment.ResultsForty-eight ICUs were randomized to the guideline group and 49 to the control group. From March 2018 to July 2019, the guideline ICUs enrolled 1399 patients, and the control ICUs enrolled 1373 patients. Implementation of the guideline resulted in significantly earlier EN initiation (1.20 vs. 1.55 mean days to initiation of EN; difference - 0.40 [95% CI - 0.71 to - 0.09]; P = 0.01) and delayed PN initiation (1.29 vs. 0.80 mean days to start of PN; difference 1.06 [95% CI 0.44 to 1.67]; P = 0.001). There was no significant difference in 28-day mortality (14.2% vs. 15.2%; difference - 1.6% [95% CI - 4.3% to 1.2%]; P = 0.42) between groups.ConclusionsIn this large-scale, multicenter trial, active implementation of an evidence-based feeding guideline reduced the time to commencement of EN and overall PN use but did not translate to a reduction in mortality from critical illness.Trial registrationISRCTN, ISRCTN12233792 . Registered November 20th, 2017

Transverse-momentum and pseudorapidity distributions of charged hadrons in pp collisions at √s=0.9 and 2.36 TeV

Measurements of inclusive charged-hadron transverse-momentum and pseudorapidity distributions are presented for proton-proton collisions at root s = 0.9 and 2.36 TeV. The data were collected with the CMS detector during the LHC commissioning in December 2009. For non-single-diffractive interactions, the average charged-hadron transverse momentum is measured to be 0.46 +/- 0.01 (stat.) +/- 0.01 (syst.) GeV/c at 0.9 TeV and 0.50 +/- 0.01 (stat.) +/- 0.01 (syst.) GeV/c at 2.36 TeV, for pseudorapidities between -2.4 and +2.4. At these energies, the measured pseudorapidity densities in the central region, dN(ch)/d eta vertical bar(vertical bar eta vertical bar and pp collisions. The results at 2.36 TeV represent the highest-energy measurements at a particle collider to date

The value of non-invasive measurement of cardiac output and total peripheral resistance to categorize significant changes of intradialytic blood pressure: a prospective study

Abstract Background Blood pressure (BP) is currently the main hemodynamic parameter used to assess the influence of fluid removal during hemodialysis session. Since BP is dependent on cardiac output (CO) and total peripheral resistance (TPRI), investigating these parameters may help to better understand the influence of fluid removal on patient’s hemodynamics. We used a novel non-invasive whole-body bio-impedance cardiography device, recently validated in hemodialysis patients, to examine mechanisms of intradialytic hemodynamics in a Chinese dialysis population. Methods Chronic hemodialysis patients in Sichuan Provincial People’s Hospital were enrolled. Demographic data and dialysis prescriptions were collected. Hemodynamic measurements were made pre-treatment, every 20 min during treatment and immediately after treatment in each random dialysis session. These included blood pressure, cardiac index (CI), total peripheral resistance (TPRI) and cardiac power index (CPI). Patients were divided into 5 hemodynamic groups as per their major hemodynamic response to fluid removal: low CPI, low TPRI, high TPRI, High CPI and those with normal hemodynamics. Results Twenty-seven patients were enrolled, with 12 (44.4%) males. The average age was 65 ± 12 y. The average body mass index (BMI) was 23.7 ± 3.9 kg/m2. 12 (44.4%) patients were diabetic. Three hundred twenty-four hemodynamic measurements were made. Weight, BMI, total fluid removal, pretreatment systolic BP, CI, TPRI and CI differed significantly among the 5 hemodynamic groups.11.1% of patients had low CPI, 25.9% had low TPRI, 18.5% had high CPI, 3.7% had high TPRI and 40.7% had normal hemodynamics. Hemodynamic differences among the 5 subgroups were significant. Conclusion This technology provides multi-dimensional insight into intradialytic hemodynamic parameters, which may be more informative than blood pressure only. Using hemodynamic parameters to describe patients’ status is more specific and accurate, and could help to work out specific and effective therapeutic actions according to underlying abnormalities

Prediction Models of Primary Membranous Nephropathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Several statistical models for predicting prognosis of primary membranous nephropathy (PMN) have been proposed, most of which have not been as widely accepted in clinical practice. Methods: A systematic search was performed in MEDLINE and EMBASE. English studies that developed any prediction models including two or more than two predictive variables were eligible for inclusion. The study population was limited to adult patients with pathologically confirmed PMN. The outcomes in eligible studies should be events relevant to prognosis of PMN, either disease progression or response profile after treatments. The risk of bias was assessed according to the PROBAST. Results: In all, eight studies with 1237 patients were included. The pooled AUC value of the seven studies with renal function deterioration and/or ESRD as the predicted outcomes was 0.88 (95% CI: 0.85 to 0.90; I2 = 77%, p = 0.006). The paired forest plots for sensitivity and specificity with corresponding 95% CIs for each of these seven studies indicated the combined sensitivity and specificity were 0.76 (95% CI: 0.64 to 0.85) and 0.84 (95% CI: 0.80 to 0.88), respectively. All seven studies included in the meta-analysis were assessed as high risk of bias according to the PROBAST tool. Conclusions: The reported discrimination ability of included models was good; however, the insufficient calibration assessment and lack of validation studies precluded drawing a definitive conclusion on the performance of these prediction models. High-grade evidence from well-designed studies is needed in this field