Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28656968›Full record

Trial reportEuropean journal of clinical nutrition2017

Nutrient intake and contribution of home enteral nutrition to meeting nutritional requirements after oesophagectomy and total gastrectomy.

M L Baker, V Halliday, P Robinson, K Smith, D J Bowrey

Open access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in European journal of clinical nutrition, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Nutrition update in gastric cancer surgery.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2020
    Review
  9. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

M L BakerDepartment of Surgery, University of Leicester Hospitals NHS Trust, Leicester, UK.
V HallidaySchool of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
P RobinsonHome Enteral Nutrition Service, Leicestershire Partnership Trust, Leicester, UK.
K SmithDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8362-6751
D J BowreyDepartment of Surgery, University of Leicester Hospitals NHS Trust, Leicester, UK.
University of Leicester · GBLeicestershire Partnership NHS Trust · GBUniversity of Sheffield · GB

Funding

Department of Health PB-PG-0610-22480
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

objectivesThis study evaluated nutrition after oesophago-gastric resection and the influence of home jejunostomy feeding in the six months after surgery. SUBJECTS/

methodsData on nutritional intake and physiologic measures were collected as part of a randomised trial with measurements taken before and up to six months after surgery.

resultsA total of 41 participants (32 oesophagectomy, 9 total gastrectomy) received home jejunostomy feeding (n=18) or usual care without feeding (n=23). At hospital discharge, oral intakes were adequate for energy and protein in 9% and 6%, respectively. By three and six months, these values had increased to 61% and 55%, 94% and 77% respectively. Six participants (26%) who received usual care required rescue feeding. Six weeks after hospital discharge, energy intakes were met in those who received jejunal feeding because of the contribution of enteral nutrition. Jejunal feeding did not affect oral intake, being similar in both groups (fed: 77% estimated need, usual care: 79%). At three months, inadequate micronutrient intakes were seen in over one third. Compared to baseline values, six weeks after surgery, weight loss exceeding 5% was seen in 5/18 (28%) who received feeding, 14/17 (82%) who received usual care and 5/6 (83%) of those who required rescue feeding, P=0.002. Weight loss averaged 4.1% (fed), 10.4% (usual care) and 9.2% (rescue fed), P=0.004. These trends persisted out to six months.

conclusionsSupplementary jejunostomy feeding made an important contribution to meeting nutrition after oesophago-gastric resection. Importantly, oral nutritional intake was not compromised dispelling the assertion that jejunal feeding deincentivises patients from eating.

Indexed as

Energy IntakeEnteral NutritionEsophagectomyFemaleGastrectomyHumansIrelandJejunostomyMaleMiddle AgedNational Health ProgramsNutritional StatusPostoperative PeriodProspective StudiesTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID28656968
PMCPMC5590712
OpenAlexW2611967992

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.