Introduction: Guidelines support the use of enteral nutrition to improve clinical outcomes in critical illness; however, the optimal calorie and protein intake remains unclear. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to quantitatively analyze randomised controlled trials with regard to clinical outcomes related to varying calorie and protein administration in critically ill adult patients. Method: We searched Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases to identify randomised controlled trials that compared the effects of initially different calorie and protein intake in critical illness. The risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using random-effects models. The primary endpoint was mortality; secondary endpoints included infection, pneumonia, gastrointestinal intolerance, hospital and intensive care unit lengths of stay, and mechanical ventilation days. Results: In the eight randomised controlled trials that enrolled 1,895 patients there was no statistical difference between the low-energy and high-energy groups in mortality (RR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.71 to 1.15; P = 0.40), infection (RR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.29; P = 0.32), or the risk of gastrointestinal intolerance (RR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.59 to 1.19; P = 0.33). In subgroup analysis, the low-energy subgroup, fed 33.3 to 66.6% of goal energy, showed a lower mortality than the high-energy group (RR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.92; P = 0.01). The improvements in mortality and gastrointestinal intolerance were absent when calorie intake was >66.6% of goal energy in the low-energy group. High-energy intake combined with high-protein intake reduced the infections (RR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.52; P = 0.02); however, when the daily protein intake was similar in both groups, a high-energy intake did not decrease the infections. No statistical differences were observed in other secondary outcomes. Conclusion: This meta-analysis indicates that high-energy intake does not improve outcomes and may increase complications in critically ill patients who are not malnourished. Initial moderate nutrient intake (33.3 to 66.6% of goal energy), compared to high energy, may reduce mortality, and a higher protein intake combined with high energy (≥0.85 g/kg per day) may decrease the infection rate. However, the contribution of energy versus protein intake to outcomes remains unknown.

Lately, long non-coding RNA (lncRNA) is recognized as a key regulator of gastric cancer (GC) which has aroused great interest in the fields of medicine, toxicology, and functional food. Studies related to LncRNA expression microarray data indicate that BX357664 is down-regulated in GC specimens. However, the expression pattern and molecular mechanism of BX357664 in GC have not been studied so far. The purpose of this study was to investigate the expression of lncRNA BX357664 in GC and its function in GC cell lines. Real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) was used to detect the level of BX357664 in 50 pairs of cancer tissues and adjacent non-cancer tissues collected from GC patients. It was found that BX357664 level was lowered in cancer specimens than adjacent non-cancer tissues and correlated with tumor size and TNM stage. Also, we used cell counting kit 8 (CCK8), cell clone formation assay and transwell assay, which affirmed that up-regulation of BX357664 inhibited the proliferation, migration, and invasion of GC cells, but promoted apoptosis. In the dual-luciferase report analysis, BX357664 acted as a miR-183-3p ceRNA to target and regulate the expression of PTEN and affect the PI3K/AKT pathway. These results indicate that BX357664 can inhibit the proliferation and metastasis of GC through the miR-183-3p/PTEN/PI3K/AKT pathway, which may serve as potential targets for the treatment of GC in the future.

There have been several meta-analyses evaluating the effect of n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) in critically ill patients, but of these, none focused on patients with systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS). The objective of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect of omega-3 fatty acids (n-3 FAs) on this narrow subset. All relevant articles were searched on MEDLINE, EMBASE, SpringerLink, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from 1990 to 2014. Meta-analyses were used to evaluate risk ratios and mean differences with 95% confidence intervals between the n-3 PUFA group and the control group. Subgroup analyses were conducted in terms of the route of fish oil. Nine randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 783 adult patients were included in this study. Compared with control groups, n-3 FA provision can significantly reduce the incidence of mortality (RR: 0.77 [0.60, 0.97]; P = 0.03; I2 = 0%). Secondary outcomes showed no significant differences between groups except for shorter length of hospital stay (weighted mean difference: −10.56 [−19.76, −1.36], p < 0.00001, I2 = 99%). Overall, this meta-analysis from RCTs indicates that provision of n-3 PUFAs has a therapeutic effect on survival rate in patients with SIRS.