Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39617150›Full record

ReviewAdvances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.)2025

Nutritional Optimization of the Surgical Patient: A Narrative Review.

Olivia Heutlinger, Nischal Acharya, Amanda Tedesco, Ashish Ramesh, Brian Smith, Ninh T Nguyen, Paul E Wischmeyer

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
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

7 authors.

Olivia HeutlingerSchool of Medicine, University of California-Irvine, Irvine, California, United States. Electronic address: oliviah@gwu.edu.
Nischal AcharyaSchool of Medicine, University of California-Irvine, Irvine, California, United States.
Amanda TedescoSchool of Medicine, University of California-Irvine, Irvine, California, United States.
Ashish RameshSchool of Medicine, University of California-Irvine, Irvine, California, United States.
Brian SmithDepartment of Surgery, University of California-Irvine, Irvine, California, United States.
Ninh T NguyenDepartment of Surgery, University of California-Irvine, Irvine, California, United States.
Paul E WischmeyerDepartment of Anesthesiology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, United States; Department of Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An increasing body of literature supports the clinical benefit of nutritional assessment and optimization in surgical patients; however, this data has yet to be consolidated in a practical fashion for use by surgeons. In this narrative review, we concisely aggregate emerging data to highlight the role of nutritional optimization as a promising, practical perioperative intervention to reduce complications and improve outcomes in surgical patients. This review of the surgical nutrition literature was conducted via large database review. There were no distinct inclusion/exclusion criteria for this review; however, we focused on adult populations using up-to-date literature from high-quality systematic reviews or randomized controlled trials when available. Current perioperative management focuses on the mitigation of intraoperative and immediate postoperative complications. Well-defined risk calculators attempt to stratify patient surgical risk preoperatively to reduce adverse events directly related to surgical procedures, such as hemorrhage, cardiopulmonary compromise, or infection. However, there is a lack of standardization of prognostic tools, nutritional protocols, and guidelines governing the assessment, composition, and administration of nutritional supplementation. Substantial data exist demonstrating the clinical benefit in the operative setting. In this work, we provide a fundamental primer for surgeons to understand the clinical importance of nutritional optimization along with practical prognostic tools and recommendations for use in their practice. While the extent to which nutritional optimization improves patient outcomes is debatable, the evidence clearly demonstrates a clinically meaningful benefit. Evaluating nutritional status differs based on disease severity and etiology of presentation, thus surgeons must select the appropriate prognostic tools to assess their patients during the perioperative period. This information will catalyze subsequent work with a multidisciplinary team to provide personalized dietary plans for patients and spark research to establish protocols for specific presentations.

Indexed as

Nutritional StatusNutritional SupportNutrition AssessmentPerioperative CarePostoperative ComplicationsSurgical Procedures, OperativeDietary SupplementsHumansnutritional optimizationnutritional screening toolsperioperative nutrition guidelinesperioperative nutrition screeningsurgical nutrition

Identifiers

PMID39617150
PMCPMC11784791

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.