SynthesisBMC surgery2026
Comparison of timing for early postoperative intake in patients with upper gastrointestinal cancer: a network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSurgeons have traditionally believed that early postoperative oral intake in patients undergoing surgery for upper gastrointestinal cancer increases the risk of complications, particularly anastomotic leakage. In recent years, advances in surgical technology (e.g., surgical staplers) have provided opportunities for earlier oral nutritional intake. Nevertheless, comparative data in the literature on the optimal specific timing of early postoperative oral intake remain scarce.
methodsA comprehensive literature search was conducted using databases including PubMed, Embase, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) to identify clinical trials, mainly randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving patients who underwent surgery for esophageal cancer. Data were extracted regarding the following outcomes: anastomotic leakage, pneumonia, postoperative length of stay (chosen over total length of hospital stay due to the latter’s susceptibility to multiple confounding factors), postoperative complications, postoperative oral intake intolerance, and time to first postoperative flatus. These data were collected to assess the impact of early oral intake timing on postoperative recovery and complication rates, thereby providing information for predicting the optimal time to begin oral intake. A random-effects model was employed for the subsequent network meta-analysis.
resultsFifteen RCTs involving 1,986 patients was analyzed. Initiating oral intake after gastrointestinal function recovery (GFR) can lower the risk of oral feeding intolerance (SUCRA:0.079, RR:0.13, 95% CrI:0.013 ~ 0.72). For all other outcomes—including anastomotic leakage, postoperative complications, pneumonia, postoperative length of stay, and time to first flatus—no comparison reached statistical significance. However, point estimates and SUCRA rankings suggested potential trends that GFR was ranked best for reducing anastomotic leakage, POD1 for shortening hospitalization and time to flatus, and POD4/5 for lowering total complications and pneumonia rates.
conclusionsPostoperative feeding timing is a trade-off: earlier for recovery versus later for safety. Initiation at POD4/5 may be a balanced option, albeit with effects not reaching statistical significance.
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.