Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32815021›Full record

SynthesisSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2020

Oral nutrition interventions in patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery for cancer: A systematic literature review.

Lauren Reece, Sophie Hogan, Margaret Allman-Farinelli, Sharon Carey

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Recommending ultra-processed oral nutrition supplements for unintentional weight loss: Are there risks?Nutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition · 2023
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lauren ReeceDepartment of Nutrition and Dietetics, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia. Lauren.Reece@health.nsw.gov.au.
Sophie HoganDepartment of Nutrition and Dietetics, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Margaret Allman-FarinelliCharles Perkins Centre, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Sharon CareyDepartment of Nutrition and Dietetics, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Royal Prince Alfred Hospital · AUUniversity of Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWeight loss and poor food intake have been shown to affect several outcomes in patients undergoing surgery for gastrointestinal cancer. This review aims to examine the effect of pre-, post- or perioperative nutrition interventions focused on increasing oral energy or protein intake in patients undergoing surgery for gastrointestinal cancer. Interventions using standard oral nutrition supplements and/or dietary counselling were included. The primary outcome was weight change, and secondary outcomes were energy and protein intake. A secondary aim was to examine this effect in malnourished patients.

methodsEmbase, Medline, CINAHL and CENTRAL were searched from inception to September 2019 for relevant randomised controlled trials. Study quality was assessed using the revised Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool for randomised trials. The quality of evidence for each outcome was assessed using GRADE.

resultsFourteen articles met the inclusion criteria. Studies assessed patients undergoing surgery for gastric, colorectal, oesophageal and pancreatic cancers. The interventions studied included oral nutrition supplements and/or dietary counselling. Five studies reported preoperative interventions; five studies reported post-operative interventions; six studies reported post-discharge interventions; and two studies reported perioperative interventions. Overall, low or very low quality evidence was found to support the use of oral nutrition supplements to positively influence weight and increase energy and protein intake in the preoperative period and immediate post-operative period. Very low quality evidence was found to support the use of oral nutrition interventions to influence weight, energy or protein intake in the post-discharge period. Very limited evidence with high risk of bias was found to support positive effects of nutrition intervention in malnourished patients.

conclusionsThis review demonstrates limited evidence for the use of oral nutrition supplements to increase intake and positively influence weight in patients undergoing surgery for gastrointestinal cancer. Overall, results were heterogeneous leading to inconsistent results. Further research into optimal nutrition support interventions and timing of interventions is required.

Indexed as

Digestive System Surgical ProceduresGastrointestinal NeoplasmsHumansNutritional StatusPreoperative CareRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicGastrointestinal cancerMalnutritionNutrition interventionNutrition statusOral nutrition support

Identifiers

PMID32815021
OpenAlexW3062187986

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.