Summary of findings for the main comparison. Re‐feeding compared to discarding gastric residual in preterm infants.
| Re‐feeding compared to discarding gastric residual in preterm infants | ||||||
| Patient or population: preterm infants Setting: neonatal intensive care units Intervention: re‐feeding Comparison: discarding gastric residual | ||||||
| Outcomes | Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | № of participants (studies) | Certainty of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments | |
| Risk with discarding gastric residual | Risk with re‐feeding | |||||
| Time to regain birth weight (days) | Mean time to regain birth weight (ways) was 0 | MD 0.4 higher (2.89 lower to 3.69 higher) | ‐ | 59 (1 RCT) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ VERY LOWa,b | |
| Number of infants with necrotising enterocolitis stage 2 or 3 and/or spontaneous intestinal perforation | Study population | RR 0.71 (0.25 to 2.04) | 72 (1 RCT) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ VERY LOWb,c | ||
| 194 per 1000 | 138 per 1000 (49 to 397) | |||||
| Number of infants with episodes of interruption of feeds ≥ 12 hours | Study population | RR 0.80 (0.42 to 1.52) | 59 (1 RCT) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ VERY LOWb,d | ||
| 433 per 1000 | 347 per 1000 (182 to 659) | |||||
| Mortality before discharge | Study population | RR 0.50 (0.14 to 1.85) | 72 (1 RCT) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ LOWb | ||
| 167 per 1000 | 83 per 1000 (20 to 284) | |||||
| *The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: confidence interval; MD: mean difference; RCT: randomised controlled trial; RR: risk ratio. | ||||||
| GRADE Working Group grades of evidence. High certainty: we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect. Moderate certainty: we are moderately confident in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different. Low certainty: our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect. Very low certainty: we have very little confidence in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect. | ||||||
aConcern due to attrition.
bSerious Imprecision due to wide confidence interval.
cDetection bias as study authors included both NEC and SIP.
dConcern due to attrition and lack of blinding.