Cited by 49Clinical Nutrition and GastroenterologyFatty Acid Research and HealthSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment

Current evidence on ω-3 fatty acids in enteral nutrition in the critically ill: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Open access
(Kristine) Koekkoek, WAC, Panteleon, Vasilianna, van Zanten, Arthur RH·2019·Nutrition

Abstract

Fish oil exerts anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory properties that may be beneficial for critically ill patients, thus multiple randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses have been performed. However, controversy remains as to whether fish oil-enriched enteral nutrition can improve clinical outcomes in adult critically ill patients in intensive care units (ICUs). The aim of this study was to provide an up-to-date systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials of fish oil-containing enteral nutrition addressing relevant clinical outcomes in critically ill patients. A systematic literature search was conducted. The primary outcome was 28-d mortality. Secondary outcomes were ICU and hospital mortality, ICU and hospital length of stay (LOS), ventilation duration, and infectious complications. Predefined subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed. Twenty-four trials, enrolling 3574 patients, met the inclusion criteria. The assessment of risk for bias showed that most of included studies were of moderate quality. The overall results revealed no significant effects of enteral fish oil supplementation on 28-d, ICU or hospital mortality. However, ICU LOS and ventilation duration were significantly reduced in patients receiving fish oil supplementation. Furthermore, subgroup analysis revealed a significant reduction in 28-d mortality, ICU LOS, and ventilation duration in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome but not in other subgroups. When comparing high- and low-quality trials, significant reductions in 28-d mortality and ventilation duration in low-quality trials only were observed. Regarding ICU LOS a significant reduction was observed in high-quality trials; whereas only a trend was observed in low-quality trials. No significant effects on hospital LOS or infectious complications were observed in overall or subgroup analyses. Enteral fish oil supplementation cannot be recommended for critically ill patients, as strong scientific evidence for improved clinical benefits was not found. There is a signal of mortality benefit in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome; however, results are based on low-quality studies. Further research should focus on the relation between the individual critically ill patients' immune response, the administration of fish oil, and clinical outcomes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.nut.2018.07.013

Cites

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?

  • Koekkoek et al. reviewed 24 RCTs enrolling 3574 medical, surgical, and trauma patients; enteral fish oil supplementation reduced ICU length of stay and ventilation duration but did not affect 28-day, ICU or hospital mortality.

    “Enteral fish oil supplementation reduced ICU length of stay and ventilation duration but did not affect 28-day, ICU or hospital mortality.”

    From Nutrition in Sepsis: A Bench-to-Bedside Review. (2020) · cites this paper as [67]

  • In the Koekkoek review, 28-day mortality, ICU length of stay, and ventilation duration were significantly decreased in the subgroup of patients with ARDS.

    “However, 28-day mortality, ICU length of stay, and ventilation duration were significantly decreased in the subgroup of patients with ARDS.”

    From Nutrition in Sepsis: A Bench-to-Bedside Review. (2020) · cites this paper as [67]

  • In the Koekkoek review, no significant effects on infectious complications were observed in overall or subgroup analyses.

    “No significant effects on infectious complications were observed in overall or subgroup analyses [67].”

    From Nutrition in Sepsis: A Bench-to-Bedside Review. (2020) · cites this paper as [67]

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 90 · Cited by 49

Authors
(Kristine) Koekkoek, W., Panteleon, V., & van Zanten, A. R.
Affiliations
Wageningen University & Research (NL)
Venue
Nutrition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-03
Volume
59
Pages
56-68
ISSN
0899-9007 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2887590009
Cited by
49
References
90
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 9 · 2018: 1
FWCI
0.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nutrition (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Clinical Nutrition and Gastroenterology
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Fatty Acid Research and Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Keywords
omega-3 fatty acids, fish oil, enteral nutrition, critically ill patients, intensive care unit, mortality, length of hospital stay, mechanical ventilation duration, acute respiratory distress syndrome, infectious complications, anti-inflammatory activity, immunomodulation
MeSH terms
Enteral Nutrition, Fish Oils, Humans, Intensive Care Units, Length of Stay, Respiration, Artificial, Time Factors, Fatty Acids, Omega-3, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Critical Illness, Treatment Outcome, Hospital Mortality

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