Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2020 Mar;28(3):979-1010.
doi: 10.1007/s00520-019-05145-w. Epub 2019 Dec 7.

Enteral and parenteral nutrition in cancer patients, a comparison of complication rates: an updated systematic review and (cumulative) meta-analysis

Ronald Chow  1   2   3 , Eduardo Bruera  4 , Jann Arends  5 , Declan Walsh  6 , Florian Strasser  7 , Elisabeth Isenring  8 , Egidio G Del Fabbro  9 , Alex Molassiotis  10 , Monica Krishnan  11 , Leonard Chiu  12 , Nicholas Chiu  12 , Stephanie Chan  12 , Tian Yi Tang  13 , Henry Lam  12 , Michael Lock  13 , Carlo DeAngelis  12   14
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Enteral and parenteral nutrition in cancer patients, a comparison of complication rates: an updated systematic review and (cumulative) meta-analysis

Ronald Chow et al. Support Care Cancer. 2020 Mar.

Erratum in

Abstract

Introduction: Weight loss in cancer patients is a worrisome constitutional change predicting disease progression and shortened survival time. A logical approach to counter some of the weight loss is to provide nutritional support, administered through enteral nutrition (EN) or parenteral nutrition (PN). The aim of this paper was to update the original systematic review and meta-analysis previously published by Chow et al., while also assessing publication quality and effect of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the meta-conclusion over time.

Methods: A literature search was carried out; screening was conducted for RCTs published in January 2015 up until December 2018. The primary endpoints were the percentage of patients achieving no infection and no nutrition support complications. Secondary endpoints included proportion of patients achieving no major complications and no mortality. Review Manager (RevMan 5.3) by Cochrane IMS and Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (version 3) by Biostat were used for meta-analyses of endpoints and assessment of publication quality.

Results: An additional seven studies were identified since our prior publication, leading to 43 papers included in our review. The results echo those previously published; EN and PN are equivalent in all endpoints except for infection. Subgroup analyses of studies only containing adults indicate identical risks across all endpoints. Cumulative meta-analysis suggests that meta-conclusions have remained the same since the beginning of publication time for all endpoints except for the endpoint of infection, which changed from not favoring to favoring EN after studies published in 1997. There was low risk of bias, as determined by assessment tool and visual inspection of funnel plots.

Conclusions: The results support the current European Society of Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism guidelines recommending enteral over parenteral nutrition, when oral nutrition is inadequate, in adult patients. Further studies comparing EN and PN for these critical endpoints appear unnecessary, given the lack of change in meta-conclusion and low publication bias over the past decades.

Keywords: Cancer patients; Enteral nutrition (EN); Malnutrition; Parenteral nutrition (PN); Standard care (SC); Tube feeding (TF).

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2015 Aug 15;8(8):13937-45 - PubMed
    1. J Surg Oncol. 1981;16(4):391-402 - PubMed
    1. Nutrients. 2017 Apr 10;9(4):null - PubMed
    1. J Med Invest. 2011 Feb;58(1-2):75-80 - PubMed
    1. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2005 May;3(5):466-74 - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources