Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

How Do Specific Nutritional Interventions (e.g., Enteral Nutrition, Protein Supplementation, Micronutrient Support) Affect Mortality, Length of Hospital Stay, and Recovery in Patients with Pneumonia? : A Systematic Review Bayu Anggara H
The International Journal of Medical Science and Health Research Vol. 31 No. 2 (2026): The International Journal of Medical Science and Health Research
Publisher : International Medical Journal Corp. Ltd

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.70070/c74dft31

Abstract

Introduction: Pneumonia remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, with malnutrition significantly exacerbating poor clinical outcomes. Despite growing interest in nutritional interventions, evidence regarding their specific effects on mortality, hospital stay, and recovery in pneumonia patients remains heterogeneous and inconclusive. Methods: This systematic review synthesized evidence from 57 studies evaluating nutritional interventions in pneumonia patients, including 12 randomized controlled trials, 6 systematic reviews/meta-analyses, and 39 observational studies. Studies were screened based on predefined criteria including primary pneumonia diagnosis, specific nutritional interventions, relevant clinical outcomes, and adult populations. Data extraction encompassed intervention characteristics, patient demographics, comparator groups, mortality, length of stay, and recovery indicators. Results: Early enteral nutrition initiated within 24-48 hours significantly reduced mortality (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.21-0.95, p=0.038) and shortened hospital LOS by 3.54 days (p<0.00001). Each 30g/day increase in protein intake was associated with 24% reduced 60-day mortality (OR 0.76, p<0.001). Enteral nutrition demonstrated superior outcomes compared to parenteral nutrition across mortality (13.8% vs 27.1%, p=0.003), LOS (18.0 vs 28.0 days, p<0.05), and complication rates. High-protein feeding (1.8-2.2 g/kg/d) significantly attenuated muscle atrophy (13.97% vs 18.96%, p<0.001). Individualized nutritional programs reduced readmission by 77% (p=0.03) in malnourished elderly. Discussion: Nutritional interventions demonstrate clinically meaningful benefits when appropriately timed, dosed, and delivered via enteral routes. Heterogeneity in mortality findings reflects differential effects of intervention timing, nutritional adequacy thresholds, and baseline nutritional risk. Conclusion: Early enteral nutrition with adequate protein delivery should be standard care in hospitalized pneumonia patients. Future research should focus on optimal protein dosing, immunonutrition strategies, and post-discharge nutritional rehabilitation.
The Comprehensive Systematic Review of Probiotic Interventions and The Gut Lung Axis in Critically ill Patients with Lung Edema Bayu Anggara H
The International Journal of Medical Science and Health Research Vol. 33 No. 2 (2026): The International Journal of Medical Science and Health Research
Publisher : International Medical Journal Corp. Ltd

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.70070/ebp6aj59

Abstract

Introduction: Critically ill patients with lung edema experience significant morbidity and mortality, with the gut-lung axis emerging as a potential therapeutic target. Probiotic interventions may modulate this bidirectional relationship, but evidence remains conflicting. This systematic review synthesizes evidence on probiotic effects on the gut-lung axis in critically ill adults with lung edema. Methods: A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. We screened 200 sources from databases including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science (2000-2026). Included studies were randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and meta-analyses examining probiotic or synbiotic interventions in critically ill adults (≥18 years) with lung edema/ARDS. Primary outcomes included ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), mechanical ventilation duration, and gut-lung axis mechanisms. Quality assessment used Cochrane Risk of Bias tools. Results: Forty-eight primary studies and 52 meta-analyses/systematic reviews were included (total N >15,000 patients). Probiotics reduced VAP incidence (RR 0.52-0.75), with synbiotics showing greater efficacy (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.47-0.80). Mechanical ventilation duration decreased by 1-2.5 days, and ICU length of stay by 1-2 days. Mortality reduction was inconsistent, though severe sepsis subgroups showed benefit (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.16-0.93). Mechanistically, probiotics improved gut barrier function (reduced lactulose-mannitol ratio, enhanced tight junction proteins), modulated systemic inflammation (IL-6 reduction 140 pg/mL, CRP reduction 72.7%), increased short-chain fatty acid production, and reduced pathogenic colonization. The largest trial (PROSPECT, n=2,653) found no VAP reduction, highlighting context-dependent efficacy. Safety concerns included probiotic bacteremia (1.1% vs 0.1% in PROSPECT). Discussion: Probiotic efficacy is population-specific, with consistent benefits in trauma, surgical, and COVID-19 patients, but minimal effects in general mixed ICU populations receiving contemporary care. Synbiotics, higher doses (≥5×10⁹ CFU/day), and longer duration (≥14 days) optimize outcomes. Methodological quality explains discrepancies between early positive meta-analyses and recent negative trials. Conclusion: Probiotics modulate the gut-lung axis through multiple mechanisms, reducing VAP and ICU stay in selected populations. Routine use in unselected ICU patients is not supported, but targeted therapy in trauma and specific subgroups may be beneficial. Further research should optimize strain selection, dosing, and identify responsive phenotypes.