SynthesisBMC cancer2026
Effect of immunonutrition on surgery outcomes in cancer patients: evidence from an umbrella review on interventional and observational meta-analyses.
Synthesis in BMC cancer, 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
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMalnutrition is highly prevalent in cancer patients, leading to increased post-surgical complications. This umbrella review of meta-analyses aims to investigate the effect of immunonutrition on surgery outcomes in Cancer patients.
methodsMEDLINE/PubMed, SCOPUS, and WOS databases were investigated from their inception until Sep 2025. Meta-analysis investigating the impact of immunonutrition (or its components) on overall complications, infectious complications, non-infectious complications, mortality, surgical-site infections, anastomotic leak, and length of hospital stay in patients with cancer. Pooled effect sizes and CIs were calculated using a random-effects model.
resultsFifty-four studies were included in the umbrella review. The pooled results showed RR = 0.79; 95%CI: 0.70-0.88; I2 = 39.5% for postoperative overall complications, RR = 0.61; 95%CI: 0.58-0.65; I2 = 47.3% for infectious complications, RR = 0.88; 95%CI: 0.82-0.94; I2 = 0% for non-infectious complications, HR = 0.86; 95%CI: 0.74-0.99; I2 = 0% for mortality, RR = 0.66; 95%CI: 0.59-0.74; I2 = 6.5% for surgical-site infection, RR = 0.69; 95%CI: 0.62-0.77; I2 = 0% for anastomotic leak, and WMD=-1.75 days; 95%CI: -2.09,-1.41; I2 = 90.3% for length of hospital stay in immunonutrition intervention compared to control groups. Subgroup analysis by time of intervention showed that postoperative intervention is more effective in reducing overall complications (RR = 0.69; 95%CI:0.54-0.89) and the length of hospital stay (2.26 days, P = 0.001) compared to preoperative or perioperative intervention.
conclusionCancer patients undergoing surgery may benefit from immunonutrition. Postoperative intervention is more effective than pre-or perioperative intervention.
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.