Glutamine-supplemented total parenteral nutrition in major abdominal surgery

The Effect of Amino Acids on Wound Healing: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on Arginine and Glutamine

Under stress conditions, the metabolic demand for nutrients increases, which, if not met, may slow down or indeed stop the wound from healing, thus, becoming chronic wounds. This study aims to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of arginine and glutamine supplementation on wound healing. PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines were followed for the systematic review and ten electronic databases were used. Five and 39 human studies met the inclusion criteria for arginine and glutamine, respectively. The overall meta-analysis demonstrated a significant effect of arginine supplementation on hydroxyproline content (MD: 4.49, 95% CI: 3.54, 4.45, p < 0.00001). Regarding glutamine supplementation, there was significant effect on nitrogen balance levels (MD: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.21, 0.58, p < 0.0001), IL-6 levels (MD: −5.78, 95% CI: −8.71, −2.86, p = 0.0001), TNFα levels (MD: −8.15, 95% CI: −9.34, −6.96, p < 0.00001), lactulose/mannitol (L/M) ratio (MD: −0.01, 95% CI: −0.02, −0.01, p < 0.00001), patient mortality (OR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.32, 0.72, p = 0.0004), C-reactive protein (CRP) levels (MD: −1.10, 95% CI: −1.26, −0.93, p < 0.00001) and length of hospital stay (LOS) (MD: −2.65, 95% CI: −3.10, −2.21, p < 0.00001). Regarding T-cell lymphocytes, a slight decrease was observed, although it failed to reach significance (MD: −0.16, 95% CI: −0.33, 0.01, p = 0.07). Conclusion: The wound healing might be enhanced in one or at various stages by nutritional supplementation in the right dose.

The Impact of Perioperative Glutamine-supplemented Parenteral Nutrition on Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Abdominal Surgery: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of perioperative glutamine-supplemented parenteral nutrition (GLN-PN) on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Clinical Trials Register were searched to retrieve the eligible studies. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the effect of GLN-PN and standard PN on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. Clinical outcomes of interest were postoperative mortality, length of hospital stay, morbidity of infectious complication, and cumulative nitrogen balance. Statistical analysis was conducted by RevMan 5.0 software from the Cochrane Collaboration. Sixteen RCTs with 773 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed a significant decrease in the infectious complication rates of patients undergoing abdominal surgery receiving GLN-PN (risk ratio [RR], 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.32 to 0.72; P = 0.0004). The overall effect indicated glutamine significantly reduced the length of hospital stay in the form of alanyl-glutamine (weighted mean difference [WMD], -3.17; 95% CI, -5.51 to -0.82; P = 0.008) and in the form of glycyl-glutamine (WMD, -3.40; 95% CI, -5.82 to -0.97; P = 0.006). A positive effect in improving postoperative cumulative nitrogen balance was observed between groups (WMD, 7.40; 95% CI, 3.16 to 11.63; P = 0.0006), but no mortality (RR, 1.52; 95% CI, 0.21 to 11.9; P = 0.68). Perioperative GLN-PN is effective and safe to shorten the length of hospital stay, reduce the morbidity of postoperative infectious complications, and improve nitrogen balance in patients undergoing abdominal surgery.

Early enteral nutrition within 24 hours of lower gastrointestinal surgery versus later commencement for length of hospital stay and postoperative complications

BACKGROUND

This is an update of the review last published in 2011. It focuses on early postoperative enteral nutrition after lower gastrointestinal surgery. Traditional management consisted of 'nil by mouth', where patients receive fluids followed by solids after bowel function has returned. Although several trials have reported lower incidence of infectious complications and faster wound healing upon early feeding, other trials have shown no effect. The immediate advantage of energy intake (carbohydrates, protein or fat) could enhance recovery with fewer complications, and this warrants a systematic evaluation.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate whether early commencement of postoperative enteral nutrition (within 24 hours), oral intake and any kind of tube feeding (gastric, duodenal or jejunal), compared with traditional management (delayed nutritional supply) is associated with a shorter length of hospital stay (LoS), fewer complications, mortality and adverse events in patients undergoing lower gastrointestinal surgery (distal to the ligament of Treitz).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, the Cochrane Library 2017, issue 10), Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to 15 November 2017), Ovid Embase (1974 to 15 November 2017). We also searched for ongoing trials in ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (15 November 2017). We handsearched reference lists of identified studies and previous systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing early commencement of enteral nutrition (within 24 hours) with no feeding in adult participants undergoing lower gastrointestinal surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study quality using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool tailored to this review and extracted data. Data analyses were conducted according to the Cochrane recommendations.We rated the quality of evidence according to GRADE.Primary outcomes were LoS and postoperative complications (wound infections, intraabdominal abscesses, anastomotic dehiscence, pneumonia).Secondary outcomes were: mortality, adverse events (nausea, vomiting), and quality of life (QoL).LoS was estimated using mean difference (MD (presented as mean +/- SD). For other outcomes we estimated the common risk ratio (RR) and calculated the associated 95% confidence intervals. For analysis, we used an inverse-variance random-effects model for the primary outcome (LoS) and Mantel-Haenszel random-effects models for the secondary outcomes. We also performed Trial Sequential Analyses (TSA).

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 17 RCTs with 1437 participants undergoing lower gastrointestinal surgery. Most studies were at high or unclear risk of bias in two or more domains. Six studies were judged as having low risk of selection bias for random sequence generation and insufficient details were provided for judgement on allocation concealment in all 17 studies. With regards to performance and deception bias; 14 studies reported no attempt to blind participants and blinding of personnel was not discussed either. Only one study was judged as low risk of bias for blinding of outcome assessor. With regards to incomplete outcome data, three studies were judged to be at high risk because they had more than 10% difference in missing data between groups. For selective reporting, nine studies were judged as unclear as protocols were not provided and eight studies had issues with either missing data or incomplete reporting of results.LOS was reported in 16 studies (1346 participants). The mean LoS ranged from four days to 16 days in the early feeding groups and from 6.6 days to 23.5 days in the control groups. Mean difference (MD) in LoS was 1.95 (95% CI, -2.99 to -0.91, P < 0.001) days shorter in the early feeding group. However, there was substantial heterogeneity between included studies (I² = 81, %, Chi² = 78.98, P < 0.00001), thus the overall quality of evidence for LoS is low. These results were confirmed by the TSA showing that the cumulative Z-curve crossed the trial sequential monitoring boundary for benefit.We found no differences in the incidence of postoperative complications: wound infection (12 studies, 1181 participants, RR 0.99, 95%CI 0.64 to 1.52, very low-quality evidence), intraabdominal abscesses (6 studies, 554 participants, RR 1.00, 95%CI 0.26 to 3.80, low-quality evidence), anastomotic leakage/dehiscence (13 studies, 1232 participants, RR 0.78, 95%CI 0.38 to 1.61, low-quality evidence; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) = 100), and pneumonia (10 studies, 954 participants, RR 0.88, 95%CI 0.32 to 2.42, low-quality evidence; NNTB = 333).Mortality was reported in 12 studies (1179 participants), and showed no between-group differences (RR = 0.56, 95%CI, 0.21 to 1.52, P = 0.26, I² = 0%, Chi² = 3.08, P = 0.96, low-quality evidence). The most commonly reported cause of death was anastomotic leakage, sepsis and acute myocardial infarction.Seven studies (613 participants) reported vomiting (RR 1.23, 95%CI, 0.96 to 1.58, P = 0.10, I² = 0%, Chi² = 4.98, P = 0.55, low-quality evidence; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) = 19), and two studies (118 participants) reported nausea (RR 0.95, 0.71 to 1.26, low-quality evidence). Four studies reported combined nausea and vomiting (RR 0.94, 95%CI 0.51 to 1.74, very low-quality evidence). One study reported QoL assessment; the scores did not differ between groups at 30 days after discharge on either QoL scale EORTC QLQ-C30 or EORTC QlQ-OV28 (very low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review suggests that early enteral feeding may lead to a reduced postoperative LoS, however cautious interpretation must be taken due to substantial heterogeneity and low-quality evidence. For all other outcomes (postoperative complications, mortality, adverse events, and QoL) the findings are inconclusive, and further trials are justified to enhance the understanding of early feeding for these. In this updated review, only a few additional studies have been included, and these were small and of poor quality.To improve the evidence, future trials should address quality issues and focus on clearly defining and measuring postoperative complications to allow for better comparison between studies. However due to the introduction of fast track protocols which already include an early feeding component, future trials may be challenging. A more feasible trial may be to investigate the effect of differing postoperative energy intake regimens on relevant outcomes.

Early enteral nutrition within 24 hours of lower gastrointestinal surgery versus later commencement for length of hospital stay and postoperative complications

BACKGROUND

This is an update of the review last published in 2011. It focuses on early postoperative enteral nutrition after lower gastrointestinal surgery. Traditional management consisted of 'nil by mouth', where patients receive fluids followed by solids after bowel function has returned. Although several trials have reported lower incidence of infectious complications and faster wound healing upon early feeding, other trials have shown no effect. The immediate advantage of energy intake (carbohydrates, protein or fat) could enhance recovery with fewer complications, and this warrants a systematic evaluation.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate whether early commencement of postoperative enteral nutrition (within 24 hours), oral intake and any kind of tube feeding (gastric, duodenal or jejunal), compared with traditional management (delayed nutritional supply) is associated with a shorter length of hospital stay (LoS), fewer complications, mortality and adverse events in patients undergoing lower gastrointestinal surgery (distal to the ligament of Treitz).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, the Cochrane Library 2017, issue 10), Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to 15 November 2017), Ovid Embase (1974 to 15 November 2017). We also searched for ongoing trials in ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (15 November 2017). We handsearched reference lists of identified studies and previous systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing early commencement of enteral nutrition (within 24 hours) with no feeding in adult participants undergoing lower gastrointestinal surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study quality using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool tailored to this review and extracted data. Data analyses were conducted according to the Cochrane recommendations.We rated the quality of evidence according to GRADE.Primary outcomes were LoS and postoperative complications (wound infections, intraabdominal abscesses, anastomotic dehiscence, pneumonia).Secondary outcomes were: mortality, adverse events (nausea, vomiting), and quality of life (QoL).LoS was estimated using mean difference (MD (presented as mean +/- SD). For other outcomes we estimated the common risk ratio (RR) and calculated the associated 95% confidence intervals. For analysis, we used an inverse-variance random-effects model for the primary outcome (LoS) and Mantel-Haenszel random-effects models for the secondary outcomes. We also performed Trial Sequential Analyses (TSA).

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 17 RCTs with 1437 participants undergoing lower gastrointestinal surgery. Most studies were at high or unclear risk of bias in two or more domains. Six studies were judged as having low risk of selection bias for random sequence generation and insufficient details were provided for judgement on allocation concealment in all 17 studies. With regards to performance and deception bias; 14 studies reported no attempt to blind participants and blinding of personnel was not discussed either. Only one study was judged as low risk of bias for blinding of outcome assessor. With regards to incomplete outcome data, three studies were judged to be at high risk because they had more than 10% difference in missing data between groups. For selective reporting, nine studies were judged as unclear as protocols were not provided and eight studies had issues with either missing data or incomplete reporting of results.LOS was reported in 16 studies (1346 participants). The mean LoS ranged from four days to 16 days in the early feeding groups and from 6.6 days to 23.5 days in the control groups. Mean difference (MD) in LoS was 1.95 (95% CI, -2.99 to -0.91, P < 0.001) days shorter in the early feeding group. However, there was substantial heterogeneity between included studies (I² = 81, %, Chi² = 78.98, P < 0.00001), thus the overall quality of evidence for LoS is low. These results were confirmed by the TSA showing that the cumulative Z-curve crossed the trial sequential monitoring boundary for benefit.We found no differences in the incidence of postoperative complications: wound infection (12 studies, 1181 participants, RR 0.99, 95%CI 0.64 to 1.52, very low-quality evidence), intraabdominal abscesses (6 studies, 554 participants, RR 1.00, 95%CI 0.26 to 3.80, low-quality evidence), anastomotic leakage/dehiscence (13 studies, 1232 participants, RR 0.78, 95%CI 0.38 to 1.61, low-quality evidence; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) = 100), and pneumonia (10 studies, 954 participants, RR 0.88, 95%CI 0.32 to 2.42, low-quality evidence; NNTB = 333).Mortality was reported in 12 studies (1179 participants), and showed no between-group differences (RR = 0.56, 95%CI, 0.21 to 1.52, P = 0.26, I² = 0%, Chi² = 3.08, P = 0.96, low-quality evidence). The most commonly reported cause of death was anastomotic leakage, sepsis and acute myocardial infarction.Seven studies (613 participants) reported vomiting (RR 1.23, 95%CI, 0.96 to 1.58, P = 0.10, I² = 0%, Chi² = 4.98, P = 0.55, low-quality evidence; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) = 19), and two studies (118 participants) reported nausea (RR 0.95, 0.71 to 1.26, low-quality evidence). Four studies reported combined nausea and vomiting (RR 0.94, 95%CI 0.51 to 1.74, very low-quality evidence). One study reported QoL assessment; the scores did not differ between groups at 30 days after discharge on either QoL scale EORTC QLQ-C30 or EORTC QlQ-OV28 (very low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review suggests that early enteral feeding may lead to a reduced postoperative LoS, however cautious interpretation must be taken due to substantial heterogeneity and low-quality evidence. For all other outcomes (postoperative complications, mortality, adverse events, and QoL) the findings are inconclusive, and further trials are justified to enhance the understanding of early feeding for these. In this updated review, only a few additional studies have been included, and these were small and of poor quality.To improve the evidence, future trials should address quality issues and focus on clearly defining and measuring postoperative complications to allow for better comparison between studies. However due to the introduction of fast track protocols which already include an early feeding component, future trials may be challenging. A more feasible trial may be to investigate the effect of differing postoperative energy intake regimens on relevant outcomes.

Critical Care Nutrition: Where's the Evidence?

The surgical critically ill patient is subject to a variable and complex metabolic response, which has detrimental effects on immunity, wound healing, and preservation of lean body muscle. The concept of nutrition support has evolved into nutrition therapy, whereby the primary objectives are to prevent oxidative cell injury, modulate the immune response, and attenuate the metabolic response. This review outlines the metabolic response to critical illness, describes nutritional risk; reviews the evidence for the role, dose, and timing of enteral and parenteral nutrition, and reviews the evidence for immunonutrition in the surgical intensive care unit.

Meta-analysis of immunonutrition in major abdominal surgery

Background

The objective of this study was to evaluate the potential benefits of immunonutrition in major abdominal surgery with special regard to subgroups and influence of bias.

Methods

A systematic literature search from January 1985 to July 2015 was performed in MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL. Only RCTs investigating immunonutrition in major abdominal surgery were included. Outcomes evaluated were mortality, overall complications, infectious complications and length of hospital stay. The influence of different domains of bias was evaluated in sensitivity analyses. Evidence was rated according to the GRADE Working Group grading of evidence.

Results

A total of 83 RCTs with 7116 patients were included. Mortality was not altered by immunonutrition. Taking all trials into account, immunonutrition reduced overall complications (odds ratio (OR) 0·79, 95 per cent c.i. 0·66 to 0·94; P = 0·01), infectious complications (OR 0·58, 0·51 to 0·66; P &lt; 0·001) and shortened hospital stay (mean difference –1·79 (95 per cent c.i. –2·39 to –1·19) days; P &lt; 0·001) compared with control groups. However, these effects vanished after excluding trials at high and unclear risk of bias. Publication bias seemed to be present for infectious complications (P = 0·002). Non-industry-funded trials reported no positive effects for overall complications (OR 1·13, 0·88 to 1·46; P = 0·34), whereas those funded by industry reported large effects (OR 0·66, 0·48 to 0·91; P = 0·01).

Conclusion

Immunonutrition after major abdominal surgery did not seem to alter mortality (GRADE: high quality of evidence). Immunonutrition reduced overall complications, infectious complications and shortened hospital stay (GRADE: low to moderate). The existence of bias lowers confidence in the evidence (GRADE approach).

Effect of glutamine dipeptide supplementation on primary outcomes for elective major surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis

To evaluate if glutamine (GLN) supplementation may affect primary outcomes in patients undergoing major elective abdominal operations, we performed a systematic literature review of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published from 1983 to 2013 and comparing intravenous glutamine dipeptide supplementation to no supplementation in elective surgical abdominal procedures. A meta-analysis for each outcome (overall and infectious morbidity and length of stay) of interest was carried out. The effect size was estimated by the risk ratio (RR) or by the weighted mean difference (WMD). Nineteen RCTs were identified with a total of 1243 patients (640 receiving GLN and 603 controls). In general, the studies were underpowered and of medium or low quality. GLN supplementation did not affect overall morbidity (RR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.36; p = 0.473) and infectious morbidity (RR = 0.64; 95% CI = 0.38 to 1.07; p = 0.087). Patients treated with glutamine had a significant reduction in length of hospital stay (WMD = −2.67; 95% CI = −3.83 to −1.50; p < 0.0001). In conclusion, GLN supplementation appears to reduce hospital stay without affecting the rate of complications. The positive effect of GLN on time of hospitalization is difficult to interpret due to the lack of significant effects on surgery-related morbidity.

Glutamine supplementation for critically ill adults

BACKGROUND

Glutamine is a non-essential amino acid which is abundant in the healthy human body. There are studies reporting that plasma glutamine levels are reduced in patients with critical illness or following major surgery, suggesting that glutamine may be a conditionally essential amino acid in situations of extreme stress. In the past decade, several clinical trials examining the effects of glutamine supplementation in patients with critical illness or receiving surgery have been done, and the systematic review of this clinical evidence has suggested that glutamine supplementation may reduce infection and mortality rates in patients with critical illness. However, two recent large-scale randomized clinical trials did not find any beneficial effects of glutamine supplementation in patients with critical illness.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to:1. assess the effects of glutamine supplementation in critically ill adults and in adults after major surgery on infection rate, mortality and other clinically relevant outcomes;2. investigate potential heterogeneity across different patient groups and different routes for providing nutrition.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Anaesthesia Review Group (CARG) Specialized Register; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library (2013, Issue 5); MEDLINE (1950 to May 2013); EMBASE (1980 to May 2013) and Web of Science (1945 to May 2013).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included controlled clinical trials with random or quasi-random allocation that examined glutamine supplementation versus no supplementation or placebo in adults with a critical illness or undergoing elective major surgery. We excluded cross-over trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted the relevant information from each included study using a standardized data extraction form. For infectious complications and mortality and morbidity outcomes we used risk ratio (RR) as the summary measure with the 95% confidence interval (CI). We calculated, where appropriate, the number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) and the number needed to treat to harm (NNTH). We presented continuous data as the difference between means (MD) with the 95% CI.

MAIN RESULTS

Our search identified 1999 titles, of which 53 trials (57 articles) fulfilled our inclusion criteria. The 53 included studies enrolled a total of 4671 participants with critical illness or undergoing elective major surgery. We analysed seven domains of potential risk of bias. In 10 studies the risk of bias was evaluated as low in all of the domains. Thirty-three trials (2303 patients) provided data on nosocomial infectious complications; pooling of these data suggested that glutamine supplementation reduced the infectious complications rate in adults with critical illness or undergoing elective major surgery (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.87, P ＜ 0.00001, I² = 8%, moderate quality evidence). Thirty-six studies reported short-term (hospital or less than one month) mortality. The combined rate of mortality from these studies was not statistically different between the groups receiving glutamine supplement and those receiving no supplement (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.02, P = 0.10, I² = 22%, low quality evidence). Eleven studies reported long-term (more than six months) mortality; meta-analysis of these studies (2277 participants) yielded a RR of 1.00 (95% CI 0.89 to 1.12, P = 0.94, I² = 30%, moderate quality evidence). Subgroup analysis of infectious complications and mortality outcomes did not find any statistically significant differences between the predefined groups. Hospital length of stay was reported in 36 studies. We found that the length of hospital stay was shorter in the intervention group than in the control group (MD -3.46 days, 95% CI -4.61 to -2.32, P < 0.0001, I² = 63%, low quality evidence). Slightly prolonged intensive care unit (ICU) stay was found in the glutamine supplemented group from 22 studies (2285 participants) (MD 0.18 days, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.29, P = 0.002, I² = 11%, moderate quality evidence). Days on mechanical ventilation (14 studies, 1297 participants) was found to be slightly shorter in the intervention group than in the control group (MD - 0.69 days, 95% CI -1.37 to -0.02, P = 0.04, I² = 18%, moderate quality evidence). There was no clear evidence of a difference between the groups for side effects and quality of life, however results were imprecise for serious adverse events and few studies reported on quality of life. Sensitivity analysis including only low risk of bias studies found that glutamine supplementation had beneficial effects in reducing the length of hospital stay (MD -2.9 days, 95% CI -5.3 to -0.5, P = 0.02, I² = 58%, eight studies) while there was no statistically significant difference between the groups for all of the other outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review found moderate evidence that glutamine supplementation reduced the infection rate and days on mechanical ventilation, and low quality evidence that glutamine supplementation reduced length of hospital stay in critically ill or surgical patients. It seems to have little or no effect on the risk of mortality and length of ICU stay, however. The effects on the risk of serious side effects were imprecise. The strength of evidence in this review was impaired by a high risk of overall bias, suspected publication bias, and moderate to substantial heterogeneity within the included studies.

A systematic literature review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials of parenteral glutamine supplementation

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Glutamine supplementation has been associated with reduced mortality, infections and hospital length of stay in critically ill patients and patients undergoing major surgery. We carried out a meta-analysis to examine randomized clinical trial (RCT)-based evidence of these effects.

METHODS

Based on a systematic database search, RCTs published since 1990 were included if they evaluated the effect of parenteral glutamine supplementation against a background of parenteral nutrition. Enteral (tube) feeding in a proportion of patients was allowable. Information on RCT methodology, quality and outcomes was extracted. Random effects meta-analysis followed the DerSimonian-Laird approach.

RESULTS

Forty RCTs were eligible for meta-analysis. Parenteral glutamine supplementation was associated with a non-significant 11% reduction in short-term mortality (RR = 0.89; 95% CI, 0.77-1.04). Infections were significantly reduced (RR = 0.83; 95% CI, 0.72-0.95) and length of stay was 2.35 days shorter (95% CI, -3.68 to -1.02) in the glutamine arms. Meta-analysis results were strongly influenced by one recent trial. An element of publication bias could not be excluded.

CONCLUSION

Parenteral glutamine supplementation in severely ill patients may reduce infections, length of stay and mortality, but substantial uncertainty remains. Unlike previous meta-analyses, we could not demonstrate a significant reduction in mortality.

The impact of glutamine dipeptide-supplemented parenteral nutrition on outcomes of surgical patients: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of glutamine dipeptide-supplemented parenteral nutrition (GLN-PN) on clinical outcomes in surgical patients.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Controlled Clinical Trials Register were searched to retrieve the eligible studies. The studies were included if they were randomized controlled trials that evaluated the effect of GLN-PN and standard PN on clinical outcomes of surgical patients. Clinical outcomes of interest were postoperative morbidity of infectious complication, mortality, length of hospital stay, and cost. Statistical analysis was conducted by RevMan 4.2 software from the Cochrane Collaboration.

RESULTS

Fourteen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (N = 587) were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed that glutamine dipeptide significantly reduced the length of hospital stay by around 4 days in the form of alanyl-glutamine (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -3.84; 95% confidence interval [CI] -5.40, -2.28; z = 4.82; P < .001) and about 5 days in the form of glycyl-glutamine (WMD = -5.40; 95% CI -8.46, -2.33; z = 3.45; P < .001). The overall effect indicated a significant decrease in the infectious complication rates of surgical patients receiving GLN-PN (risk ratio = 0.69; 95% CI 0.50, 0.95; z = 2.26; P = .02).

CONCLUSION

GLN-PN was beneficial to postoperative patients by shortening the length of hospital stay and reducing the morbidity of postoperative infectious complications.

Amino acids - Guidelines on Parenteral Nutrition, Chapter 4

Protein catabolism should be reduced and protein synthesis promoted with parenteral nutrion (PN). Amino acid (AA) solutions should always be infused with PN. Standard AA solutions are generally used, whereas specially adapted AA solutions may be required in certain conditions such as severe disorders of AA utilisation or in inborn errors of AA metabolism. An AA intake of 0.8 g/kg/day is generally recommended for adult patients with a normal metabolism, which may be increased to 1.2-1.5 g/kg/day, or to 2.0 or 2.5 g/kg/day in exceptional cases. Sufficient non-nitrogen energy sources should be added in order to assure adequate utilisation of AA. A nitrogen calorie ratio of 1:130 to 1:170 (g N/kcal) or 1:21 to 1:27 (g AA/kcal) is recommended under normal metabolic conditions. In critically ill patients glutamine should be administered parenterally if indicated in the form of peptides, for example 0.3-0.4 g glutamine dipeptide/kg body weight/day (=0.2-0.26 g glutamine/kg body weight/day). No recommendation can be made for glutamine supplementation in PN for patients with acute pancreatitis or after bone marrow transplantation (BMT), and in newborns. The application of arginine is currently not warranted as a supplement in PN in adults. N-acetyl AA are only of limited use as alternative AA sources. There is currently no indication for use of AA solutions with an increased content of glycine, branched-chain AAs (BCAA) and ornithine-alpha-ketoglutarate (OKG) in all patients receiving PN. AA solutions with an increased proportion of BCAA are recommended in the treatment of hepatic encephalopathy (III-IV).

Surgery and transplantation - Guidelines on Parenteral Nutrition, Chapter 18

In surgery, indications for artificial nutrition comprise prevention and treatment of catabolism and malnutrition. Thus in general, food intake should not be interrupted postoperatively and the re-establishing of oral (e.g. after anastomosis of the colon and rectum, kidney transplantation) or enteral food intake (e.g. after an anastomosis in the upper gastrointestinal tract, liver transplantation) is recommended within 24 h post surgery. To avoid increased mortality an indication for an immediate postoperatively artificial nutrition (enteral or parenteral nutrition (PN)) also exists in patients with no signs of malnutrition, but who will not receive oral food intake for more than 7 days perioperatively or whose oral food intake does not meet their needs (e.g. less than 60–80%) for more than 14 days. In cases of absolute contraindication for enteral nutrition, there is an indication for total PN (TPN) such as in chronic intestinal obstruction with a relevant passage obstruction e.g. a peritoneal carcinoma. If energy and nutrient requirements cannot be met by oral and enteral intake alone, a combination of enteral and parenteral nutrition is indicated. Delaying surgery for a systematic nutrition therapy (enteral and parenteral) is only indicated if severe malnutrition is present. Preoperative nutrition therapy should preferably be conducted prior to hospital admission to lower the risk of nosocomial infections. The recommendations of early postoperative re-establishing oral feeding, generally apply also to paediatric patients. Standardised operative procedures should be established in order to guarantee an effective nutrition therapy.

Symposium 4: Hot topics in parenteral nutrition Current evidence and ongoing trials on the use of glutamine in critically-ill patients and patients undergoing surgery

The amino acid glutamine has numerous important roles including particularly antioxidant defence, immune function, the inflammatory response, acid–base balance and N economy. The present systematic review of randomised controlled trials of nutrition support with glutamine up to August 2008 has found that parenteral glutamine in critical illness is associated with a non-significant reduction in mortality (risk ratio 0·71 (95% CI 0·49, 1·03)) and may reduce infections. However, poor study quality and the possibility of publication bias mean that these results should be interpreted with caution. There is no evidence to suggest that glutamine is harmful in terms of organ failure and parenteral glutamine may reduce the development of organ failure.

Effects of glutamine-enriched total parenteral nutrition on acute pancreatitis

AIM

This study was performed to determine the effects of glutamine enriched total parenteral nutrition (TPN) on the patients with acute pancreatitis (AP).

METHOD

Forty patients with AP, who had Ranson's score between 2 and 4 received either standard TPN (control group) or TPN with glutamine (treatment group). The patients in the treatment group received TPN containing 0.3 g/kg/days glutamine. At the end of the study, patients were evaluated for nutritional and inflammatory parameters, length of TPN and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

The length of TPN applications were 10.5+/-3.6 days and 11.6+/-2.5 days, and the length of hospital stays were 14.2+/-4.4 and 16.4+/-3.9 days for the treatment and control groups (NS), and the complication rates in the treatment and control groups were 10 and 40%, respectively (P<0.05). The transferrin level increased by 11.7% in the group that received glutamine-enriched TPN (P<0.05), whereas the transferrin level decreased by 12.1% in the control group (NS). At the end of the study, slight but not significant changes were determined in both groups in fasting blood sugar, albumin, blood urea nitrogen (BUN), creatinine, total cholesterol concentrations, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine transaminase (ALT) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) activities, leukocytes, CD(4), CD(8), serum Zn, Ca and P levels compare to the baseline levels (NS). Significant decreases were determined in serum lipase, amylase activities and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels in both groups (P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study have shown that glutamine supplementation to TPN have beneficial effects on the prevention of complications in patients with AP.

Glutamine in critical care: current evidence from systematic reviews

Glutamine, the most abundant amino acid in the body, is thought to become conditionally essential in critical illness. Some of the important roles for glutamine are as a carrier for inter-organ N, a preferred fuel for enterocytes and cells of the immune system, a substrate for renal NH3 formation and a precursor for glutathione. Mechanisms by which glutamine could improve recovery include attenuating oxidant damage and inflammatory cytokine production, reducing gut bacterial translocation and improving N balance. The present systematic review has found trends to suggest that parenteral and enteral glutamine supplementation reduce mortality, the development of infection and organ failure in critical illness. Trials of parenteral nutrition containing glutamine with patients after elective surgery also suggest reduction of infection, but it is unlikely that glutamine-containing parenteral nutrition would be used for such patients. The evidence base is limited by the quality of the reported trials and the suggestion that there is publication bias, with trials suggesting reduced infection being more likely to be published.

Glutamine dipeptide for parenteral nutrition in abdominal surgery: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIM: To assess the clinical and economical validity of glutamine dipeptide supplemented to parenteral nutrition (PN) in patients undergoing abdominal surgery.

METHODS: A meta-analysis of all the relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was performed. The trials compared the standard PN and PN supplemented with glutamine dipeptide in abdominal surgery. RCTs were identified from the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and ISI web of knowledge (SCI). The search was undertaken in April 2006. Literature references were checked by computer or hand at the same time. Clinical trials were extracted and evaluated by two reviewers independently. Statistical analysis was performed by RevMan4.2 software from Cochrane Collaboration. A P value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS: Nine RCTs involving 373 patients were included. The combined results showed that glutamine dipeptide has a positive effect in improving postoperative cumulative nitrogen balance (weighted mean difference (WMD = 8.35, 95% CI [2.98, 13.71], P = 0.002), decreasing postoperative infectious morbidity (OR = 0.24, 95% CI [0.06, 0.93], P = 0.04), shortening the length of hospital stay (WMD= -3.55, 95% CI [-5.26, -1.84], P < 0.00001). No serious adverse effects were found.

CONCLUSION: Postoperative PN supplemented with glutamine dipeptide is effective and safe to decrease the infectious rate, reduce the length of hospital stay and improve nitrogen balance in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. Further high quality trials in children and severe patients are required, and mortality and hospital cost should be considered in future RCTs with sufficient size and rigorous design.