← Issue №4/ week of Jul 26, 2026/ the whole section, in full

Nutrition, in full.

All 3 Nutrition papers in this issue, as full cards, ranked by clinical utility. The issue page carries the strongest few; this is the section, whole.

Sections this issue
Filter

All 3, in full

most clinically useful first
Nutrition retrospective · n=739 · Jul 26, 2026 · JPEN · IF 3.2

Prevalence, risk factors, and outcomes of refeeding-like syndrome in very low birth weight infants: A descriptive study.

New evidencepediatricrefeeding syndromeparenteral nutrition
Clinical takeawayMonitor serum phosphate closely in VLBW infants (<1500 g), especially those <27 weeks gestation or small for gestational age, during the first week of parenteral nutrition to detect and manage RLS early. Consider preventive strategies (e.g., slower nutrient advancement) in high-risk infants.
What it found36.6% of very low birth weight (VLBW) infants developed refeeding-like syndrome (RLS, serum phosphate <4 mg/dL), and 6.6% had severe RLS (<2.5 mg/dL); SGA infants had 4.6x higher odds of RLS (95% CI: 3.2, 6.6), and RLS was associated with severe intraventricular hemorrhage and retinopathy of prematurity.
ContextConfirms and quantifies RLS risk in VLBW infants, previously understudied, and identifies high-risk subgroups (SGA, <27 weeks) with actionable associations to morbidity.
Reinforcessuggested applicable standard· ESPEN (European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism), "ESPEN guideline on chronic intestinal failure in adults, Update 2023," Clinical Nutrition, 2023

Decision at stakemonitor for refeeding syndrome in patients receiving parenteral nutrition

Manage short bowel syndrome / intestinal failure with a multidisciplinary IF team using a three-phase nutrition strategy: initiate TPN with IV hydration and electrolyte replacement in the acute hypersecretory phase, progressively advance enteral feeds and wean PN during the 1-2 year adaptation phase, then maintain an oral diet with selective PN as needed.

From our summary of this standard, unedited — the part the paper bears on. marks omitted text. Our wording, not the guideline's; read the source for its own text.

Our full summary of this standard

Manage short bowel syndrome / intestinal failure with a multidisciplinary IF team using a three-phase nutrition strategy: initiate TPN with IV hydration and electrolyte replacement in the acute hypersecretory phase, progressively advance enteral feeds and wean PN during the 1-2 year adaptation phase, then maintain an oral diet with selective PN as needed. In carefully selected PN-dependent patients, and only when prescribed by clinicians experienced in SBS/IF management (generally once the adaptation phase is complete), consider the GLP-2 analog teduglutide (0.05 mg/kg/day subcutaneously) to promote intestinal adaptation and reduce PN volume, but only after baseline screening to exclude neoplasia and contraindications (colonoscopy with removal of any polyps when colon and/or rectum is present, and assessment for active or recent [within 5 years] gastrointestinal, hepatobiliary, or pancreatic malignancy, which contraindicate its use) and with mandatory ongoing safety monitoring (surveillance colonoscopy after 1-2 years then every 5 years, plus vigilance for colorectal/GI polyps and neoplasia, intestinal obstruction, biliary/gallbladder and pancreatic disease, and fluid overload); add antimotility agents (loperamide, then codeine/opium tincture) for high-output stoma, and provide lifelong nutrient surveillance/supplementation (notably B12) plus monitoring for CRBSI, IFALD, oxalate stones, and refeeding syndrome.

ESPEN (European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism), "ESPEN guideline on chronic intestinal failure in adults, Update 2023," Clinical Nutrition, 2023 · reviewed 2026-07-23 ↗
Fialkowski A … Belfort MB · JPEN. Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition · IF 3.2 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Nutrition meta analysis · n=168 · Jul 24, 2026 · Dig Liver Dis · IF 4.2

Evaluation and interpretation of Hawthorne and other trial-related effects in Celiac Disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

New evidencesystematic reviewmeta-analysisdiet therapy
Clinical takeawayConsider that structured monitoring alone may improve mucosal histology in CeD trials, independent of active intervention. No clinical action yet: this is a meta-analysis of trial effects.
What it foundPlacebo or control groups in CeD trials showed a median increase in Vh/Cd ratio of +0.25 (95% CI 0.11-0.39; p < 0.001).
ContextChallenges the assumption that histological improvements in CeD trials are solely due to active interventions, highlighting the role of structured monitoring.
Reinforcessuggested applicable standard· Salerno Experts' Group (Catassi C, Elli L, Bonaz B, et al.), "Diagnosis of Non-Celiac Gluten Sensitivity (NCGS): The Salerno Experts' Criteria," Nutrients, 2015

Decision at stakethe need for a blinded gluten challenge to confirm NCGS

Step 2 - confirm responders with a double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover gluten challenge: after >=4 weeks of strict (celiac-level) gluten-free diet, give 8 g gluten/day for 1 week in a vehicle that is FODMAP-free, contains amylase-trypsin inhibitors, and is indistinguishable from placebo, then a 1-week strict-GFD washout, then crossover to the other arm for 1 week; the test is positive only for gluten-directed worsening - the symptom score must be >=30% HIGHER (worse) during the gluten week than during the placebo week; a >=30% difference in the opposite direction (symptoms worse on placebo) is a negative result and does not support the diagnosis.

From our summary of this standard, unedited — the part the paper bears on. marks omitted text. Our wording, not the guideline's; read the source for its own text.

Our full summary of this standard

Per the Salerno Experts' Criteria, non-celiac gluten sensitivity is confirmed only after celiac disease and wheat allergy have been excluded while the patient is still on a gluten-containing diet (negative tTG-IgA with adequate total IgA/EMA and negative or near-normal duodenal histology, i.e. Marsh 0-1, on gluten; negative wheat-specific IgE / skin-prick testing), using a standardized two-step protocol. Step 1 - assess symptom response to a gluten-free diet over AT LEAST 6 weeks, scored with a validated instrument (a modified Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale rating up to three main symptoms on a 1-10 numerical rating scale); a responder shows a >=30% reduction from baseline in at least 3 of the 6 weekly assessments (>=50% of the observation period). Step 2 - confirm responders with a double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover gluten challenge: after >=4 weeks of strict (celiac-level) gluten-free diet, give 8 g gluten/day for 1 week in a vehicle that is FODMAP-free, contains amylase-trypsin inhibitors, and is indistinguishable from placebo, then a 1-week strict-GFD washout, then crossover to the other arm for 1 week; the test is positive only for gluten-directed worsening - the symptom score must be >=30% HIGHER (worse) during the gluten week than during the placebo week; a >=30% difference in the opposite direction (symptoms worse on placebo) is a negative result and does not support the diagnosis. Patients who do not respond to the gluten-free diet should be investigated for other causes (e.g., FODMAP intolerance, small-intestinal bacterial overgrowth). The document stresses that, absent any validated biomarker, this blinded challenge is the reference standard precisely because self-reported gluten sensitivity is frequently not reproduced under blinding.

Salerno Experts' Group (Catassi C, Elli L, Bonaz B, et al.), "Diagnosis of Non-Celiac Gluten Sensitivity (NCGS): The Salerno Experts' Criteria," Nutrients, 2015 · reviewed 2026-07-23 ↗
Pjetraj D … Catassi C · Digestive and Liver Disease : Official Journal of the Italian Society of Gastroenterology and the Italian Association for the Study of the Liver · IF 4.2 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Nutrition review · Jul 28, 2026 · Aliment Pharm Ther · IF 6.7

Review Article: Accelerating Coeliac Disease Clinical Trials-Beyond Celiac Meeting With Industry, Academics, Patients and the FDA.

Guideline / reviewdiet therapyguidelinehealth services
Clinical takeawayNo clinical action yet: this is a review of considerations for coeliac disease drug development, not a study of a new therapy in humans.
What it foundGluten-free diet (GFD) is partially and inconsistently effective, with high burden on patients and families, highlighting the need for adjunctive pharmacological therapies.
ContextConfirms the limitations of GFD and underscores the unmet need for pharmacological therapies in coeliac disease, aligning with current clinical challenges.
Emergingsuggested applicable standard· Salerno Experts' Group (Catassi C, Elli L, Bonaz B, et al.), "Diagnosis of Non-Celiac Gluten Sensitivity (NCGS): The Salerno Experts' Criteria," Nutrients, 2015

Decision at stakethe need for adjunctive pharmacological therapies in celiac disease beyond gluten-free diet

Step 1 - assess symptom response to a gluten-free diet over AT LEAST 6 weeks, scored with a validated instrument (a modified Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale rating up to three main symptoms on a 1-10 numerical rating scale); a responder shows a >=30% reduction from baseline in at least 3 of the 6 weekly assessments (>=50% of the observation period).

From our summary of this standard, unedited — the part the paper bears on. marks omitted text. Our wording, not the guideline's; read the source for its own text.

Our full summary of this standard

Per the Salerno Experts' Criteria, non-celiac gluten sensitivity is confirmed only after celiac disease and wheat allergy have been excluded while the patient is still on a gluten-containing diet (negative tTG-IgA with adequate total IgA/EMA and negative or near-normal duodenal histology, i.e. Marsh 0-1, on gluten; negative wheat-specific IgE / skin-prick testing), using a standardized two-step protocol. Step 1 - assess symptom response to a gluten-free diet over AT LEAST 6 weeks, scored with a validated instrument (a modified Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale rating up to three main symptoms on a 1-10 numerical rating scale); a responder shows a >=30% reduction from baseline in at least 3 of the 6 weekly assessments (>=50% of the observation period). Step 2 - confirm responders with a double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover gluten challenge: after >=4 weeks of strict (celiac-level) gluten-free diet, give 8 g gluten/day for 1 week in a vehicle that is FODMAP-free, contains amylase-trypsin inhibitors, and is indistinguishable from placebo, then a 1-week strict-GFD washout, then crossover to the other arm for 1 week; the test is positive only for gluten-directed worsening - the symptom score must be >=30% HIGHER (worse) during the gluten week than during the placebo week; a >=30% difference in the opposite direction (symptoms worse on placebo) is a negative result and does not support the diagnosis. Patients who do not respond to the gluten-free diet should be investigated for other causes (e.g., FODMAP intolerance, small-intestinal bacterial overgrowth). The document stresses that, absent any validated biomarker, this blinded challenge is the reference standard precisely because self-reported gluten sensitivity is frequently not reproduced under blinding.

Salerno Experts' Group (Catassi C, Elli L, Bonaz B, et al.), "Diagnosis of Non-Celiac Gluten Sensitivity (NCGS): The Salerno Experts' Criteria," Nutrients, 2015 · reviewed 2026-07-23 ↗
Fahey LM … Beyond Celiac Coalition · Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics · IF 6.7 · PubMed ↗Permalink
← Back to issue №4 Every section of this issue is one click away, at the top of this page. Follow Nutrition by RSS