MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995529636 · doi:10.1186/s13054-015-0888-7

Intravenous fish oil lipid emulsions in critically ill patients: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

2015· review· en· W1995529636 on OpenAlexaff
William Manzanares, Pascal L. Langlois, Rupinder Dhaliwal, Margot Lemieux, Daren K. Heyland

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicClinical Nutrition and Gastroenterology
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityClinical Evaluation Research UnitKingston General HospitalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineConfidence intervalMeta-analysisFish oilSubgroup analysisRandomized controlled trialMechanical ventilationInternal medicineRelative riskEnteral administrationParenteral nutritionCritically illStrictly standardized mean differenceQuality of evidenceFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Intravenous fish oil (FO) lipid emulsions (LEs) are rich in ω-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids, which exhibit anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory effects. We previously demonstrated that FO-containing LEs may be able to decrease mortality and ventilation days in patients who are critically ill. Since 2014, several additional randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of FO-containing LEs have been published. Therefore, the purpose of this systematic review was to update our previous systematic review with the aim of elucidating the efficacy of FO-containing LEs on clinical outcomes of patients who are critically ill. METHODS: We searched electronic databases from 1980 to 2014. We included four new RCTs conducted in critically ill adult patients in which researchers evaluated FO-containing LEs in parenterally or enterally fed patients. RESULTS: A total of 10 RCTs (n = 733) met inclusion criteria. The mean methodological score was 8 (range, 3 to 12). No effect on overall mortality was found. When we aggregated the results of five RCTs in which infections were reported, we found that FO-containing LEs significantly reduced infections (risk ratio (RR) = 0.64; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.44 to 0.92; P = 0.02; heterogeneity I (2) = 0%). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that predominantly enteral nutrition-based trials showed a tendency toward a reduction in mortality (RR = 0.69; 95% CI, 0.40 to 1.18; P =0.18; heterogeneity I (2) =35%). High-quality trials showed a significant reduction in hospital length of stay (LOS) (weighted mean difference = -7.42; 95% CI, -11.89 to -2.94; P = 0.001), whereas low-quality trials had no effect (P = 0.45). The results of the test for subgroup differences in hospital LOS was significant (P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: FO-containing LEs may be associated with a reduction in infections and also could be associated with a reduction in duration of ventilation and hospital LOS. Further large-scale RCTs are warranted and should be aimed at consolidating potential positive treatment effects.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.105
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.308 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations113
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical CareSame topicClinical Nutrition and GastroenterologyFrench-language works237,207