Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39759553›Full record

ReviewReports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology2024

Prehabilitation approaches for gastrointestinal cancer surgery: a narrative review.

Sergii Girnyi, Luigi Marano, Jaroslaw Skokowski, Piotr Mocarski, Witold Kycler, Gaetano Gallo, Agnieszka Dyzmann-Sroka, Karolina Kazmierczak-Siedlecka, Leszek Kalinowski, Tomasz Banasiewicz and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

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

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

11 authors.

Sergii GirnyiDepartment of General Surgery and Surgical Oncology, "Saint Wojciech" Hospital, "Nicolaus Copernicus" Health Center, Gdansk, Poland.
Luigi MaranoDepartment of General Surgery and Surgical Oncology, "Saint Wojciech" Hospital, "Nicolaus Copernicus" Health Center, Gdansk, Poland.
Jaroslaw SkokowskiDepartment of General Surgery and Surgical Oncology, "Saint Wojciech" Hospital, "Nicolaus Copernicus" Health Center, Gdansk, Poland.
Piotr MocarskiDepartment of General Surgery and Surgical Oncology, "Saint Wojciech" Hospital, "Nicolaus Copernicus" Health Center, Gdansk, Poland.
Witold KyclerDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgical Oncology, Greater Poland Cancer Centre, Poznan, Poland.
Gaetano GalloDepartment of Surgery, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Agnieszka Dyzmann-SrokaCancer Registry, Greater Poland Cancer Centre, Poznan, Poland.
Karolina Kazmierczak-SiedleckaDepartment of Medical Laboratory Diagnostics - Fahrenheit Biobank BBMRI.pl, Medical University of Gdansk, Gdansk, Poland.
Leszek KalinowskiDepartment of Medical Laboratory Diagnostics - Fahrenheit Biobank BBMRI.pl, Medical University of Gdansk, Gdansk, Poland.
Tomasz BanasiewiczDepartment of General, Endocrinological Surgery and Gastroenterological Oncology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poznan, Poland.
Karol PolomDepartment of Medicine, Academy of Applied Medical and Social Sciences (AMiSNS), Elblag, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gastrointestinal (GI) cancer patients undergoing surgery are particularly vulnerable to malnutrition, which can significantly impact surgical outcomes. Prehabilitation interventions encompassing nutritional, physical, and psychosocial support have gained attention for their potential to mitigate these risks. However, the efficacy of multidisciplinary prehabilitation programs in this context remains underexplored. This narrative review synthesizes existing literature to evaluate the effectiveness of prehabilitation interventions in improving outcomes for GI cancer patients undergoing surgery. Drawing on a comprehensive analysis of available evidence, the review examines the integration of nutritional, physical, and psychosocial interventions and explores the implications for clinical practice and future research. The review highlights the importance of standardized protocols and interdisciplinary collaboration in optimizing prehabilitation programs for GI cancer patients. It identifies gaps in current research, particularly regarding the synergistic effects of integrating various intervention modalities and the role of innovative strategies such as immunonutrition. Moreover, the review underscores the need for larger studies to assess the effectiveness of multimodal prehabilitation approaches and establish standardized outcome measures. In conclusion, despite advancements in understanding the importance of prehabilitation, significant gaps persist in the literature, warranting further research to refine prehabilitation protocols and improve perioperative outcomes for GI cancer patients. By addressing these research gaps and fostering interdisciplinary partnerships, future studies have the potential to enhance the effectiveness of prehabilitation interventions and optimize perioperative care in this population.

Indexed as

frailtygastrointestinal cancermultimodal carenutritional interventionprehabilitationsurgery

Identifiers

PMID39759553
PMCPMC11698552

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.