Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25216721›Full record

Observational studyTechniques in coloproctology2014

The influence of preoperative nutritional status on the outcomes of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programme for colorectal cancer surgery.

V Lohsiriwat

Registry-linked trialAbstract readObservational Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Techniques in coloproctology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03562897 (Efficacy of the Oncoxin-Viusid® Nutritional Supplement on the Quality of Life of Patients With Advanced or Metastatic Ovarian Epithelial Cancer. Clinical Trial Phase II.), which is not on this map. Cited by 37 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 5 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.

NCT03562897 phase2completednot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

Efficacy of the Oncoxin-Viusid® Nutritional Supplement on the Quality of Life of Patients With Advanced or Metastatic Ovarian Epithelial Cancer. Clinical Trial Phase II.

TypeinterventionalSponsorCatalysis SLRan2018 to 2022Enrolled40ConditionsCarcinoma, Ovarian Neoplasm, Endocrine Gland Neoplasm, Urogenital NeoplasmsArmsOcoxin-Viusid
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. General Principles of Risk Mitigation before Colorectal Surgery.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2026
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

V LohsiriwatColorectal Surgery Unit, Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, 2 Wang Lung Road, Bangkok Noi, Bangkok, 10700, Thailand, bolloon@hotmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe aim of the present study was to evaluate the effects of preoperative nutritional status on the short-term outcomes of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programme for colorectal cancer surgery.

methodsThis prospective observational study included 149 patients who underwent elective resection of colorectal cancer with ERAS from January 2011 to January 2014 in a university hospital. Subjective global assessment (SGA) was used to determine preoperative nutritional status. Primary outcomes included the length of postoperative stay, postoperative morbidity, gastrointestinal recovery, and 30-day readmission.

resultsThe patients were divided into 3 groups according to the SGA classification. There were 96 patients (64.4 %) in SGA-A (well-nourished), 48 (32.2 %) in SGA-B (mild to moderately malnourished), and 5 (3.4 %) in SGA-C (severely malnourished). Patients in SGA-A had the median length of postoperative stay of 4 days (range 2-23), which was significantly shorter compared to SGA-B (5 days; range 2-16; p < 0.01) and SGA-C (7 days; range 4-17; p < 0.01). The overall complication rates of SGA-A, SGA-B, and SGA-C patients were 11, 31 % (adjusted OR 3.76; 95 % CI 1.36-10.36; p < 0.01) and 40 % (adjusted OR 2.15; 95 % CI 0.07-63.64; p = 0.66). Mean time to resumption of normal diet and time to first defecation were 1.6 ± 1.3 and 2.2 ± 0.9 days in SGA-A, 2.6 ± 1.7 and 3.1 ± 1.6 days in SGA-B (p < 0.01 compared to SGA-A) and 3.2 ± 2.4 days and 2.6 ± 1.5 days in SGA-C (p = 0.07 and p = 0.1 compared to SGA-A, respectively). No 30-day mortality occurred in any group. One patient in SGA-A (1 %), and 3 patients in SGA-B (6 %) had unplanned 30-day re-admission; p = 0.11.

conclusionsWithin an ERAS programme for colorectal cancer surgery, malnourished patients were at risk for increased postoperative morbidity, delayed recovery of gastrointestinal function, and prolonged length of hospital stay.

Indexed as

Nutrition AssessmentRecovery of FunctionAdenocarcinomaAgedColorectal NeoplasmsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansIncidenceMaleMalnutritionMiddle AgedNutritional StatusPostoperative ComplicationsPostoperative PeriodPreoperative Period

Identifiers

PMID25216721

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.