Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23152265›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2012

Pre-operative nutrition support in patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery.

Sorrel Burden, Chris Todd, James Hill, Simon Lal

3 registry-linked trialsAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 108 papers, 12 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
108citing papers in PubMed, 12 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03315195 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2017, after this paper: background citation

A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Postoperative Complication Between Preoperative Oral Nutritional Supplement With Dietary Advice and Conventional Dietary Advice Alone in Patients Undergoing Elective Major Gastrointestinal Surgery

TypeinterventionalSponsorMahidol UniversityRan2017 to 2022Enrolled268ConditionsSurgery--Complications, Nutrition Aspect of CancerArmsOral nutritional supplement (ONS)
NCT03692507 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Effects of Nutritional Preconditioning on the Nutritional Status of Patients Undergoing Major General Surgeries and Subsequent Operative Outcomes

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of California, San FranciscoRan2021 to 2022Enrolled20ConditionsMajor Abdominal/GI SurgeryArmsHMB, Protein and HMB, ERAS
NCT04789694 phase3recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Prehabilitation in Patients With Gynaecological Cancer Planned for Postponed Surgical Management: A Prospective Randomised Trial.

TypeinterventionalSponsorCharles University, Czech RepublicRan2021 to 2026Enrolled64ConditionsOvarian Cancer, Ovarian Cancer Stage III, Ovarian Cancer Stage IV, Endometrial CancerArmsPhysiological intervention, Psychological intervention, Nutritional intervention
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

108 citing papers in PubMed, 12 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Oral nutrition interventions in patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery for cancer: A systematic literature review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2020
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Guideline
  7. Nutrition support in hospitalised adults at nutritional risk.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Improving the quality of liver resection: a systematic review and critical analysis of the available prognostic models.HPB : the official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association · 2015
    Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. [Perioperative nutritional therapy].Zeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie · 2014
    Pooled it
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Exploring reasons behind patient compliance with nutrition supplements before pelvic exenteration surgery.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2019
    Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Preoperative nutritional support in cancer patients with no clinical signs of malnutrition--prospective randomized controlled trial.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2015
    Trial
  20. Early oral feeding vs. traditional feeding in patients undergoing elective open bowel surgery-a randomized controlled trial.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2014
    Trial

48 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Sorrel BurdenSchool of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. Sorrel.burden@manchester.ac.uk
Chris Todd
James Hill
Simon Lal

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPost-operative management in gastrointestinal (GI) surgery is becoming well established with 'Enhanced Recovery After Surgery' protocols starting 24 hours prior to surgery with carbohydrate loading and early oral or enteral feeding given to patients the first day following surgery. However, whether or not nutritional intervention should be initiated earlier in the preoperative period remains unclear. Poor pre-operative nutritional status has been linked consistently to an increase in post-operative complications and poorer surgical outcome.

objectivesTo review the literature on preoperative nutritional support in patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery (GI). SEARCH

methodsThe searches were initially run in March 2011 and subsequently updated in February 2012. Databases including all EBM Reviews (Cochrane DSR, ACP Journal Club, DARE, CCTR, CMR, HTA and NHSEED) MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, British Nursing Index Archive using OvidSP were included and a search was run on each database separately after which duplicates were excluded. SELECTION CRITERIA: The inclusion criteria were randomised controlled trials that evaluated pre-operative nutritional support in GI surgical participants using a nutritional formula delivered by a parenteral, enteral or oral route. The primary outcomes included post-operative complications and length of hospital stay. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two observers screened the abstracts for inclusion in the review and performed data extraction. Bias was assessed for each of the included studies using the bias assessment tables in the Cochrane Software Review Manager (version 5.1, Cochrane Collaboration). The trials were analysed using risk ratios with Mantel-Haenszel in fixed effects methods displayed with heterogeneity. Meta-analyses were undertaken on trials evaluating immune enhancing (IE) nutrition, standard oral supplements, enteral and parenteral nutrition (PN) which were administered pre-operatively.Study characteristics were summarised in tables. Dichotomous and ratio data were entered into meta-analyses for the primary outcomes. These were then summarised in tables with assumed and corresponding risk with relative effect giving 95% confidence intervals. MAIN

resultsThe searches identified 9900 titles and, after excluding duplicates, 6433 titles were initially screened. After the initial title screen, 6266 were excluded. Abstracts were screened for 167 studies and 33 articles were identified as meeting the inclusion criteria, of which 13 were included in the review after an assessment of the complete manuscripts.Seven trials evaluating IE nutrition were included in the review, of which 6 were combined in a meta-analysis. These studies showed a low to moderate level of heterogeneity and significantly reduced total post-operative complications (risk ratio (RR) 0.67 CI 0.53 to 0.84). Three trials evaluating PN were included in a meta-analysis and a significant reduction in post-operative complications was demonstrated (RR 0.64 95% CI 0.46 to 0.87) with low heterogeneity, in predominantly malnourished participants. Two trials evaluating enteral nutrition (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.10) and 3 trials evaluating standard oral supplements (RR 1.01 95% CI 0.56 to 1.10) were included, neither of which showed any difference in the primary outcomes. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThere have been significant benefits demonstrated with pre-operative administration of IE nutrition in some high quality trials. However, bias was identified which may limit the generalizability of these results to all GI surgical candidates and the data needs to be placed in context with other recent innovations in surgical management (eg-ERAS). Some unwanted effects have also been reported with components of IE nutrition in critical care patients and it is unknown whether there would be detrimental effects by administering IE nutrition to patients who could require critical care support after their surgery. The studies evaluating PN demonstrated that the provision of PN to predominantly malnourished surgical candidates reduced post-operative complications; however, these data may not be applicable to current clinical practice, not least because they have involved a high degree of 'hyperalimentation'. Trials evaluating enteral or oral nutrition were inconclusive and further studies are required to select GI surgical patients for these nutritional interventions.

Indexed as

Digestive System Surgical ProceduresEnteral NutritionHumansLength of StayMalnutritionParenteral NutritionPostoperative ComplicationsPreoperative CareRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.