L-cysteine/Finding
One finding, on its own
A single claim from the graph, with the evidence strength computed from its study, the sentence it was drawn from, and the paper. This address does not change.
No detected effect on necrotising enterocolitis incidence
ModerateEvidence strength: moderate. Human evidence with one recorded weakness, or capped at moderate by its design or by unread numbers.FindingNull result“No difference was found in the CYS and ISO groups with regards to the percent of subjects diagnosed with necrotizing enterocolitis (29% vs. 24%, p=1), intraventricular hemorrhage grade III and IV (19% vs. 24%, p=1), and need for laser treatment for retinopathy of prematurity (24% vs. 24%, p=1).”
Quoted verbatim from Effect of High-Dose Cysteine Supplementation on Erythrocyte Glutathione: A Double-Blinded, Randomized Placebo-Controlled Pilot Study in Critically Ill Neonates.. - Study
- RCT
- Dose
- cysteine-HCl 121 mg/kg/day in parenteral nutrition with sodium acetate 2 mEq/kg/day
- Population
- Critically ill neonates on mechanical ventilation and parenteral nutrition (SNAP > 10); comparator is isonitrogenous additional parenteral amino acids without cysteine
Effect of High-Dose Cysteine Supplementation on Erythrocyte Glutathione: A Double-Blinded, Randomized Placebo-Controlled Pilot Study in Critically Ill Neonates.2016PMID:25139979Permalink
Keep reading
- Everything the graph holds on L-cysteine
- Every compound studied against Necrotising enterocolitis incidence
- How to read the evidence strength and the marks
To cite this finding: https://catalystproject.ai/e/01M4PEGBNZS2B809WMSZERETKJ