ReviewCancer cell international2022
Early versus delay oral feeding for patients after upper gastrointestinal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Review in Cancer cell international, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Early nutrition is safe and does not increase complications after upper gastrointestinal bleeding-a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Scientific reports · 2024Pooled it
- Trial
- Enhanced Patient Comfort and Satisfaction with Early Oral Feeding after Thoracoscopic Lung Cancer Resection.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2023Trial
- Effect of enhanced recovery after surgery nursing on gastrointestinal recovery function and life quality in patients laparoscopic cholecystectomy.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- North American Expert Consensus on the Post-procedural Care of Patients After Per-oral Endoscopic Myotomy Using a Delphi Process.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2025Article
- Article
- Review
- Article
- Construction and validation of risk prediction model for gastrointestinal bleeding in patients after coronary artery bypass grafting.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Early Oral Feeding in Patients Undergoing Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery: A Propensity Score-matching Study.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of early oral feeding (EOF) in patients after upper gastrointestinal surgery through meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
methodsWe analyzed the endpoints of patients including the length of stay (LOS), time of first exhaust, anastomotic leakage and pneumonia from included studies. And we retrieved RCTs from medical literature databases. Weighted mean difference (WMD), risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated to compare the endpoints.
resultsIn total, we retrieved 12 articles (13 trial comparisons) which contained 1771 patients. 887 patients (50.1%) were randomized to EOF group whereas 884 patients (49.9%) were randomized to delay oral feeding group. The result showed that compared with the delay oral feeding group, EOF after upper gastrointestinal surgery significantly shorten the LOS [WMD = - 1.30, 95% CI - 1.79 to - 0.80, I
conclusionsOverall, compared with the traditional oral feeding, EOF could shorten the LOS and time of first exhaust without increasing complications after upper gastrointestinal surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.