Cited by 68Respiratory Support and MechanismsClinical Nutrition and GastroenterologyFatty Acid Research and Health

Enteral omega-3 fatty acid supplementation in adult patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

Zhu, Daojun, Zhang, Yi, Li, Shuo, Gan, Lu, Feng, Huaizhi, Nie, Wei·2014·Intensive Care Medicine

Abstract

Purpose Controversy remains as to whether enteral supplementation of ω-3 fatty acids (FA) could improve outcomes in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Thus, we did a meta-analysis and aimed to investigate the benefit and harm of enteral ω-3 FA supplementation in adult patients with ARDS. Methods Databases including PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar were searched to find relevant articles. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing enteral ω-3 FA supplementation with a control or placebo intervention in adult patients with ARDS were included. The primary outcome was all-cause 28-day mortality. We used the Cochrane Collaboration methodology. Results Seven RCTs with 955 adult patients qualified for inclusion, and all the selected trials were considered as at high risk of bias. The use of enteral ω-3 FA did not significantly reduce all-cause 28-day mortality [relative risk (RR), 0.90; 95 % confidence intervals (CI), 0.68-1.18; p = 0.44; I (2) = 31 %; random effects]. Trial sequential analysis indicated lack of firm evidence for a 20 % RR reduction in all-cause 28-day mortality. PaO2/FiO2 ratio was significantly increased in the ω-3 FA group on day 4 [weighted mean difference (WMD), 45.14; 95 % CI, 16.77-73.51; p = 0.002; I (2) = 86 %; random effects] and day 7 (WMD, 33.10; 95 % CI, 1.67-64.52; p = 0.04; I (2) = 88 %; random effects). Meta-analysis using a random effects model showed no significant differences in ventilator-free days (VFD) (WMD, 2.47 days; 95 % CI, -2.85 to 7.79; p = 0.36; I (2) = 91 %) or intensive care unit-free days (ICU) (WMD, 2.31 days; 95 % CI, -2.34 to 6.97; p = 0.33; I (2) = 89 %) between the two groups. Conclusions Among patients with ARDS, enteral supplementation of ω-3 FA seemed ineffective regarding all-cause 28-day mortality, VFD, and ICU-free days. Routine use of enteral ω-3 FA cannot be recommended based on the available evidence.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00134-014-3244-5

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Based on a meta-analysis of 7 RCTs (n = 955 patients), enteral supplementation with ω-3 PUFAs in patients with ARDS seemed ineffective in terms of 28-day mortality, ventilation-free days, and ICU-free days.

    “Based on a meta-analysis of 7 RCTs (n = 955 patients), Zhu et al. concluded that enteral supplementation with ω-3 PUFAs in patients with ARDS seemed ineffective in terms of 28-day mortality, ventilation-free days, and ICU-free days [68].”

    From Nutrition in Sepsis: A Bench-to-Bedside Review. (2020) · cites this paper as [68]

  • Aggregating all the studies in ICU patients without taking into account the amount of omega-3 FAs or whether they are given as bolus or continuous administration, does not yield any advantage for any formula.

    “Aggregating all the studies in ICU patients without taking into account the amount of omega-3 FAs or whether they are given as bolus or continuous administration, does not yield any advantage for any formula [87].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhu, D., Zhang, Y., Li, S., Gan, L., Feng, H., & Nie, W.
Affiliations
  • West China Hospital of Sichuan University (CN)
  • Shanghai Medical College of Fudan University (CN)
  • Second Military Medical University (CN)
Corresponding author
Nie, Wei
Venue
Intensive Care Medicine
Published
2014-02-21
Volume
40
Issue
4
Pages
504-512
ISSN
  • 0342-4642 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-1238
OpenAlex
W2140233448
Cited by
68
References
3
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 2
FWCI
1.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Intensive Care Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Respiratory Support and Mechanisms
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Clinical Nutrition and Gastroenterology
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Fatty Acid Research and Health
Keywords
acute respiratory distress syndrome, omega-3 fatty acids, enteral supplementation, 28-day mortality, PaO2/FiO2 ratio, ventilator-free days, ICU-free days, trial sequential analysis, critically ill adults, risk of bias, benefit-harm balance, quality-adjusted life years
MeSH terms
Adult, Enteral Nutrition, Humans, Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Meta-Analysis as Topic, Fatty Acids, Omega-3, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome, Dietary Supplements

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review