Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Métodos Terapêuticos e Terapias MTCI
Base de dados
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Br J Nutr ; 130(8): 1385-1402, 2023 10 28.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36788671

RESUMO

Corticosteroids (CS) and exclusive and partial enteral nutrition (EEN and PEN) are effective therapies in paediatric Crohn's disease (CD). This systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCT) and cohort studies analyses the impact of EEN/PEN v. CS on intestinal microbiota, mucosal healing as well as other clinically important outcomes, including clinical remission, relapse, adherence, adverse events and health-related quality of life (HRQL) in paediatric CD. Three RCT (n 76) and sixteen cohort studies (n 1104) compared EEN v. CS. With limited available data (one RCT), the effect on intestinal microbiome indicated a trend towards EEN regarding Shannon diversity. Based on two RCT, EEN achieved higher mucosal healing than CS (risk ratio (RR) 2·36, 95 % CI (1·22, 4·57), low certainty). Compared with CS, patients on EEN were less likely to experience adverse events based on two RCT (RR 0·32, 95 % CI (0·13, 0·80), low certainty). For HRQL, there was a trend in favour of CS based on data from two published abstracts of cohort studies. Based on thirteen cohort studies, EEN achieved higher clinical remission than CS (RR 1·18, 95 % CI (1·02, 1·38), very low certainty). Studies also reported no important differences in relapse and adherence. Compared with CS, EEN may improve mucosal healing with fewer adverse events based on RCT data. While limited data indicate the need for further trials, this is the first systematic review to comprehensively summarise the data on intestinal microbiome, mucosal healing and HRQOL when comparing enteral nutrition and CS in paediatric CD.


Assuntos
Doença de Crohn , Microbioma Gastrointestinal , Humanos , Criança , Doença de Crohn/tratamento farmacológico , Nutrição Enteral , Indução de Remissão , Corticosteroides/uso terapêutico , Recidiva
2.
Nutrients ; 14(1)2021 Dec 21.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35010879

RESUMO

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic, autoimmune disorder of the gastrointestinal tract with numerous genetic and environmental risk factors. Patients with Crohn's disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC) often demonstrate marked disruptions of their gut microbiome. The intestinal microbiota is strongly influenced by diet. The association between the increasing incidence of IBD worldwide and increased consumption of a westernized diet suggests host nutrition may influence the progression or treatment of IBD via the microbiome. Several nutritional therapies have been studied for the treatment of CD and UC. While their mechanisms of action are only partially understood, existing studies do suggest that diet-driven changes in microbial composition and function underlie the diverse mechanisms of nutritional therapy. Despite existing therapies for IBD focusing heavily on immune suppression, nutrition is an important treatment option due to its superior safety profile, potentially low cost, and benefits for growth and development. These benefits are increasingly important to patients. In this review, we will describe the clinical efficacy of the different nutritional therapies that have been described for the treatment of CD and UC. We will also describe the effects of each nutritional therapy on the gut microbiome and summarize the strength of the literature with recommendations for the practicing clinician.


Assuntos
Microbioma Gastrointestinal , Doenças Inflamatórias Intestinais/dietoterapia , Terapia Nutricional/métodos , Criança , Dieta , Gerenciamento Clínico , Suscetibilidade a Doenças , Nutrição Enteral/métodos , Humanos , Doenças Inflamatórias Intestinais/diagnóstico , Doenças Inflamatórias Intestinais/etiologia , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Fatores de Risco , Resultado do Tratamento
3.
Nutrients ; 12(6)2020 Jun 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32517036

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Exclusive enteral nutrition (EEN) and corticosteroids (CS) are effective induction therapies for pediatric Crohn's Disease (CD). CS are also therapy for ulcerative colitis (UC). Host-microbe interactions may be able to explain the effectiveness of these treatments. This is the first prospective study to longitudinally characterize compositional changes in the bacterial community structure of pediatric UC and CD patients receiving EEN or CS induction therapy. METHODS: Patients with diagnoses of CD or UC were recruited from McMaster Children's Hospital (Hamilton, Canada). Fecal samples were collected from participants aged 5-18 years old undergoing 8 weeks of induction therapy with EEN or CS. Fecal samples were submitted for 16S rRNA sequencing. The Shannon diversity index and the relative abundance of specific bacterial taxa were compared using a linear mixed model. RESULTS: The clustering of microbiota was the highest between patients who achieved remission compared to patients still showing active disease (p = 0.029); this effect was independent of the diagnosis or treatment type. All patients showed a significant increase in Shannon diversity over the 8 weeks of treatment. By week 2, a significant difference was seen in Shannon diversity between patients who would go on to achieve remission and those who would not. CONCLUSION: The gut microbiota of pediatric UC and CD patients was most influenced by patients' success or failure to achieve remission and was largely independent of the choice of treatment or disease type. Significant differences in Shannon diversity indices occurred as early as week 2 between patients who went on to achieve remission and those who continued to have active disease.


Assuntos
Corticosteroides/administração & dosagem , Colite Ulcerativa/microbiologia , Colite Ulcerativa/terapia , Doença de Crohn/microbiologia , Doença de Crohn/terapia , Nutrição Enteral , Microbioma Gastrointestinal , Quimioterapia de Indução , Adolescente , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Feminino , Humanos , Estudos Longitudinais , Masculino , Estudos Prospectivos , Indução de Remissão , Resultado do Tratamento
4.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 4: CD000542, 2018 04 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29607496

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Corticosteroids are often preferred over enteral nutrition (EN) as induction therapy for Crohn's disease (CD). Prior meta-analyses suggest that corticosteroids are superior to EN for induction of remission in CD. Treatment failures in EN trials are often due to poor compliance, with dropouts frequently due to poor acceptance of a nasogastric tube and unpalatable formulations. This systematic review is an update of a previously published Cochrane review. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of exclusive EN as primary therapy to induce remission in CD and to examine the importance of formula composition on effectiveness. SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL from inception to 5 July 2017. We also searched references of retrieved articles and conference abstracts. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials involving patients with active CD were considered for inclusion. Studies comparing one type of EN to another type of EN or conventional corticosteroids were selected for review. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were extracted independently by at least two authors. The primary outcome was clinical remission. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, serious adverse events and withdrawal due to adverse events. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). A random-effects model was used to pool data. We performed intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses for the primary outcome. Heterogeneity was explored using the Chi2 and I2 statistics. The studies were separated into two comparisons: one EN formulation compared to another EN formulation and EN compared to corticosteroids. Subgroup analyses were based on formula composition and age. Sensitivity analyses included abstract publications and poor quality studies. We used the Cochrane risk of bias tool to assess study quality. We used the GRADE criteria to assess the overall quality of the evidence supporting the primary outcome and selected secondary outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies (1,011 participants) were included. Three studies were rated as low risk of bias. Seven studies were rated as high risk of bias and 17 were rated as unclear risk of bias due to insufficient information. Seventeen trials compared different formulations of EN, 13 studies compared one or more elemental formulas to a non-elemental formula, three studies compared EN diets of similar protein composition but different fat composition, and one study compared non-elemental diets differing in glutamine enrichment. Meta-analysis of 11 trials (378 participants) demonstrated no difference in remission rates. Sixty-four per cent (134/210) of patients in the elemental group achieved remission compared to 62% (105/168) of patients in the non-elemental group (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.18; GRADE very low quality). A per-protocol analysis (346 participants) produced similar results (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.18). Subgroup analyses performed to evaluate the different types of elemental and non-elemental diets (elemental, semi-elemental and polymeric) showed no differences in remission rates. An analysis of 7 trials including 209 patients treated with EN formulas of differing fat content (low fat: < 20 g/1000 kCal versus high fat: > 20 g/1000 kCal) demonstrated no difference in remission rates (RR 1.03; 95% CI 0.85 to 1.26). Very low fat content (< 3 g/1000 kCal) and very low long chain triglycerides demonstrated higher remission rates than higher content EN formulas. There was no difference between elemental and non-elemental diets in adverse event rates (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.60; GRADE very low quality), or withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.80 to 2.09; GRADE very low quality). Common adverse events included nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and bloating.Ten trials compared EN to steroid therapy. Meta-analysis of eight trials (223 participants) demonstrated no difference in remission rates between EN and steroids. Fifty per cent (111/223) of patients in the EN group achieved remission compared to 72% (133/186) of patients in the steroid group (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.03; GRADE very low quality). Subgroup analysis by age showed a difference in remission rates for adults but not for children. In adults 45% (87/194) of EN patients achieved remission compared to 73% (116/158) of steroid patients (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.82; GRADE very low quality). In children, 83% (24/29) of EN patients achieved remission compared to 61% (17/28) of steroid patients (RR 1.35, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.97; GRADE very low quality). A per-protocol analysis produced similar results (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.14). The per-protocol subgroup analysis showed a difference in remission rates for both adults (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.95) and children (RR 1.43, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.97). There was no difference in adverse event rates (RR 1.39, 95% CI 0.62 to 3.11; GRADE very low quality). However, patients on EN were more likely to withdraw due to adverse events than those on steroid therapy (RR 2.95, 95% CI 1.02 to 8.48; GRADE very low quality). Common adverse events reported in the EN group included heartburn, flatulence, diarrhea and vomiting, and for steroid therapy acne, moon facies, hyperglycemia, muscle weakness and hypoglycemia. The most common reason for withdrawal was inability to tolerate the EN diet. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Very low quality evidence suggests that corticosteroid therapy may be more effective than EN for induction of clinical remission in adults with active CD. Very low quality evidence also suggests that EN may be more effective than steroids for induction of remission in children with active CD. Protein composition does not appear to influence the effectiveness of EN for the treatment of active CD. EN should be considered in pediatric CD patients or in adult patients who can comply with nasogastric tube feeding or perceive the formulations to be palatable, or when steroid side effects are not tolerated or better avoided. Further research is required to confirm the superiority of corticosteroids over EN in adults. Further research is required to confirm the benefit of EN in children. More effort from industry should be taken to develop palatable polymeric formulations that can be delivered without use of a nasogastric tube as this may lead to increased patient adherence with this therapy.


Assuntos
Doença de Crohn/terapia , Nutrição Enteral/métodos , Corticosteroides/uso terapêutico , Alimentos Formulados/análise , Humanos , Análise de Intenção de Tratamento , Soluções de Nutrição Parenteral , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Indução de Remissão/métodos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA