Randomized clinical trial of the effects of preoperative and postoperative oral nutritional supplements on clinical course and cost of care

Effect of early enteral nutrition on laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with enhanced recovery after surgery protocols

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Protocols for enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) provide comprehensive and evidence-based guidelines to improve perioperative care. It remains elusive whether early enteral nutrition (EEN) will play an active role in the ERAS protocols. Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is a safe and efficient method to treat patients with bile duct stones. This study aims to assess the safety, tolerability, and outcomes of EEN after LCBDE.

SUBJECTS /METHODS

From January 2014 to April 2017, a total of 100 patients with postoperative LCBDE were chosen and randomly divided into control group and EEN group. Patients in the control group were treated with traditional management with regular diet when tolerated, while patients in the EEN group were fed with EEN 3 h after LCBDE. The patients' characteristics, time to first flatus, complications, hospitalization stay, and hospitalization expenses were assessed and compared between patients in these two groups.

RESULTS

EEN accelerated the recovery of gastrointestinal function, being indicated by reduced time to first flatus when compared with control group (P = 0.00). In accordance, the quick recovery of gastrointestinal function resulted in shorter hospitalization stay for the EEN group (P = 0.00); however, no significant difference was shown when comparing the hospitalization expenses. On another hand, early oral feeding increased the occurrence of abdominal distension and diarrhea complications (P = 0.00 and P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

EEN effectively improves gastrointestinal function, but raises complications such as abdominal distension and diarrhea after LCBDE. It is recommended to implement the EEN as early as possible if the patients are reasonably expected to have high compliance.

Guidelines for Perioperative Care in Elective Colorectal Surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society Recommendations: 2018

BACKGROUND

This is the fourth updated Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society guideline presenting a consensus for optimal perioperative care in colorectal surgery and providing graded recommendations for each ERAS item within the ERAS® protocol.

METHODS

A wide database search on English literature publications was performed. Studies on each item within the protocol were selected with particular attention paid to meta-analyses, randomised controlled trials and large prospective cohorts and examined, reviewed and graded according to Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system.

RESULTS

All recommendations on ERAS® protocol items are based on best available evidence; good-quality trials; meta-analyses of good-quality trials; or large cohort studies. The level of evidence for the use of each item is presented accordingly.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence base and recommendation for items within the multimodal perioperative care pathway are presented by the ERAS® Society in this comprehensive consensus review.

Early enteral nutrition within 24 hours of lower gastrointestinal surgery versus later commencement for length of hospital stay and postoperative complications

BACKGROUND

This is an update of the review last published in 2011. It focuses on early postoperative enteral nutrition after lower gastrointestinal surgery. Traditional management consisted of 'nil by mouth', where patients receive fluids followed by solids after bowel function has returned. Although several trials have reported lower incidence of infectious complications and faster wound healing upon early feeding, other trials have shown no effect. The immediate advantage of energy intake (carbohydrates, protein or fat) could enhance recovery with fewer complications, and this warrants a systematic evaluation.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate whether early commencement of postoperative enteral nutrition (within 24 hours), oral intake and any kind of tube feeding (gastric, duodenal or jejunal), compared with traditional management (delayed nutritional supply) is associated with a shorter length of hospital stay (LoS), fewer complications, mortality and adverse events in patients undergoing lower gastrointestinal surgery (distal to the ligament of Treitz).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, the Cochrane Library 2017, issue 10), Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to 15 November 2017), Ovid Embase (1974 to 15 November 2017). We also searched for ongoing trials in ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (15 November 2017). We handsearched reference lists of identified studies and previous systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing early commencement of enteral nutrition (within 24 hours) with no feeding in adult participants undergoing lower gastrointestinal surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study quality using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool tailored to this review and extracted data. Data analyses were conducted according to the Cochrane recommendations.We rated the quality of evidence according to GRADE.Primary outcomes were LoS and postoperative complications (wound infections, intraabdominal abscesses, anastomotic dehiscence, pneumonia).Secondary outcomes were: mortality, adverse events (nausea, vomiting), and quality of life (QoL).LoS was estimated using mean difference (MD (presented as mean +/- SD). For other outcomes we estimated the common risk ratio (RR) and calculated the associated 95% confidence intervals. For analysis, we used an inverse-variance random-effects model for the primary outcome (LoS) and Mantel-Haenszel random-effects models for the secondary outcomes. We also performed Trial Sequential Analyses (TSA).

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 17 RCTs with 1437 participants undergoing lower gastrointestinal surgery. Most studies were at high or unclear risk of bias in two or more domains. Six studies were judged as having low risk of selection bias for random sequence generation and insufficient details were provided for judgement on allocation concealment in all 17 studies. With regards to performance and deception bias; 14 studies reported no attempt to blind participants and blinding of personnel was not discussed either. Only one study was judged as low risk of bias for blinding of outcome assessor. With regards to incomplete outcome data, three studies were judged to be at high risk because they had more than 10% difference in missing data between groups. For selective reporting, nine studies were judged as unclear as protocols were not provided and eight studies had issues with either missing data or incomplete reporting of results.LOS was reported in 16 studies (1346 participants). The mean LoS ranged from four days to 16 days in the early feeding groups and from 6.6 days to 23.5 days in the control groups. Mean difference (MD) in LoS was 1.95 (95% CI, -2.99 to -0.91, P < 0.001) days shorter in the early feeding group. However, there was substantial heterogeneity between included studies (I² = 81, %, Chi² = 78.98, P < 0.00001), thus the overall quality of evidence for LoS is low. These results were confirmed by the TSA showing that the cumulative Z-curve crossed the trial sequential monitoring boundary for benefit.We found no differences in the incidence of postoperative complications: wound infection (12 studies, 1181 participants, RR 0.99, 95%CI 0.64 to 1.52, very low-quality evidence), intraabdominal abscesses (6 studies, 554 participants, RR 1.00, 95%CI 0.26 to 3.80, low-quality evidence), anastomotic leakage/dehiscence (13 studies, 1232 participants, RR 0.78, 95%CI 0.38 to 1.61, low-quality evidence; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) = 100), and pneumonia (10 studies, 954 participants, RR 0.88, 95%CI 0.32 to 2.42, low-quality evidence; NNTB = 333).Mortality was reported in 12 studies (1179 participants), and showed no between-group differences (RR = 0.56, 95%CI, 0.21 to 1.52, P = 0.26, I² = 0%, Chi² = 3.08, P = 0.96, low-quality evidence). The most commonly reported cause of death was anastomotic leakage, sepsis and acute myocardial infarction.Seven studies (613 participants) reported vomiting (RR 1.23, 95%CI, 0.96 to 1.58, P = 0.10, I² = 0%, Chi² = 4.98, P = 0.55, low-quality evidence; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) = 19), and two studies (118 participants) reported nausea (RR 0.95, 0.71 to 1.26, low-quality evidence). Four studies reported combined nausea and vomiting (RR 0.94, 95%CI 0.51 to 1.74, very low-quality evidence). One study reported QoL assessment; the scores did not differ between groups at 30 days after discharge on either QoL scale EORTC QLQ-C30 or EORTC QlQ-OV28 (very low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review suggests that early enteral feeding may lead to a reduced postoperative LoS, however cautious interpretation must be taken due to substantial heterogeneity and low-quality evidence. For all other outcomes (postoperative complications, mortality, adverse events, and QoL) the findings are inconclusive, and further trials are justified to enhance the understanding of early feeding for these. In this updated review, only a few additional studies have been included, and these were small and of poor quality.To improve the evidence, future trials should address quality issues and focus on clearly defining and measuring postoperative complications to allow for better comparison between studies. However due to the introduction of fast track protocols which already include an early feeding component, future trials may be challenging. A more feasible trial may be to investigate the effect of differing postoperative energy intake regimens on relevant outcomes.

[Fast-tract: Therapist's role]

The modern model of inpatient surgical care of private and optimized state/govermental medical institutions allows us to change the paradigm of nosological attachment of the hospital bed to one profile of specialists for an adaptive model, when the wards can be reassigned depending on the needs of the hospital. In such multidisciplinary medical centers with mixed hospital beds without a nominal distinction in the nosological departments, a new therapeutic service is being developed - hospitalists, which provide a consistent curation of hospitalized patients, compensation of chronic therapeutic illnesses with patient's preparation for surgical interventions. Our work describes the experience of Fast Track recovery program with the active participation of a hospitalist in a surgical team, which is a new experience in the practice of Russian colorectal surgery.

Effects of Nutritional Prehabilitation, With and Without Exercise, on Outcomes of Patients Who Undergo Colorectal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Although there have been meta-analyses of the effects of exercise-only prehabilitation on patients undergoing colorectal surgery, little is known about the effects of nutrition-only (oral nutritional supplements with and without counseling) and multimodal (oral nutritional supplements with and without counseling and with exercise) prehabilitation on clinical outcomes and patient function after surgery. We performed a systemic review and meta-analysis to determine the individual and combined effects of nutrition-only and multimodal prehabilitation compared with no prehabilitation (control) on outcomes of patients undergoing colorectal resection.

METHODS

We searched Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and ProQuest for cohort and randomized controlled studies of adults awaiting colorectal surgery who received at least 7 days of nutrition prehabilitation with or without exercise. We performed a random-effects meta-analysis to estimate the pooled risk ratio for categorical data and the weighted mean difference for continuous variables. The primary outcome was length of hospital stay; the secondary outcome was recovery of functional capacity based on results of a 6-minute walk test.

RESULTS

We identified 9 studies (5 randomized controlled studies and 4 cohort studies) composed of 914 patients undergoing colorectal surgery (438 received prehabilitation and 476 served as controls). Receipt of any prehabilitation significantly decreased days spent in the hospital compared with controls (weighted mean difference of length of hospital stay = -2.2 days; 95% confidence interval = -3.5 to -0.9). Only 3 studies reported on functional outcomes but could not be pooled owing to methodologic heterogeneity. In the individual studies, multimodal prehabilitation significantly improved results of the 6-minute walk test at 4 and 8 weeks after surgery compared with standard Enhanced Recovery Pathway care and at 8 weeks compared with standard Enhanced Recovery Pathway care with added rehabilitation. The 4 observational studies had a high risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

In a systematic review and meta-analysis, we found that nutritional prehabilitation alone or combined with an exercise program significantly decreased length of hospital stay by 2 days in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. There is some evidence that multimodal prehabilitation accelerated the return to presurgical functional capacity.

Effect of perioperative oral nutritional supplementation in malnourished patients who undergo gastrectomy: A prospective randomized trial

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to examine the effect of a perioperative oral nutritional supplement in malnourished patients who undergo gastrectomy.

METHODS

Patients who were determined as being moderately or severely malnourished according to a patient-generated subjective global assessment or who had a body mass index <18.5, were enrolled. The oral nutritional supplement group received 500 mL/d of standard oral nutritional supplement for 2 weeks before gastrectomy and for 4 weeks postoperatively. The primary endpoint was postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo classification ≥II). The secondary endpoints included body weight changes, biochemical parameters, and quality of life survey results.

RESULTS

A total of 127 patients (65 in the oral nutritional supplement group and 62 in the control group) were enrolled. The complication rates were not significantly different (29.2% versus 37.1%, P = .346). However, the incidences of overall complications, complications persisting until postoperative week 3 or 5, and severe complications (grade ≥IIIa) were significantly lower in the oral nutritional supplement group for patients with patient-generated subjective global assessment grade C. Total lymphocyte counts were significantly higher in the oral nutritional supplement group at postoperative weeks 3 and 5. For most patients, oral nutritional supplement was well tolerated preoperatively. However, only 26.2% and 50.8% of the patients in the oral nutritional supplement group could consume >250 mL/d of oral nutritional supplement postoperatively during the 2nd and 4th weeks, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The routine application of perioperative oral nutritional supplement is not recommended for malnourished patients receiving gastrectomy. However, perioperative standard oral nutritional supplement administration may reduce the incidence, severity, and duration of complications after gastrectomy in severely malnourished patients (patient-generated subjective global assessment grade C).

Comparison of Anthropometric Parameters after Ultralow Anterior Resection and Abdominoperineal Resection in Very Low-Lying Rectal Cancers

Background and Aim

Ultralow anterior resection (uLAR) is a sphincter-saving procedure for very low-lying rectal cancers. This procedure, however, has complications related to defecation which can aggravate the patient's quality of life postoperatively. In this study, we compared the anthropometric and nutritional parameters after uLAR and abdominoperineal resection (APR).

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the data of patients who underwent either uLAR or APR in 2012 for rectal cancers within 3 cm from the anal verge. Data including body weight, body mass index (BMI), levels of total protein, albumin, and hemoglobin and lymphocyte count were analyzed. We compared the changes of these parameters before operations to 3 years after discharge between uLAR and APR groups by ANOVA for repeated measures and Bonferroni comparison method.

Results

After 3 years of discharge, the body weight and BMI of the APR group were fully recovered to the preoperative levels; however, those of the uLAR group did not. The hemoglobin level in the APR group was recovered to the preoperative level within 3 months of discharge; however, that in the uLAR group was recovered after 1 year of discharge.

Conclusions

Recovery of anthropometric and nutritional status of patients was more stable after APR than after uLAR. These findings might indirectly reflect the low anterior syndrome effect of uLAR and help colorectal surgeons in selecting better surgical methods and in better counseling patients with very low-lying rectal cancer.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) in thoracic surgical oncology

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS®) is a strategy that seeks to reduce patients’ perioperative stress response, thereby reducing potential complications, decreasing hospital length of stay and enabling patients to return more quickly to their baseline functional status. The concept was introduced in the late 1990s and was first adopted for use with patients undergoing open colorectal surgery. Since that time, the concept of ERAS has spread to multiple surgical specialties. This article explores the key elements for patient care using an ERAS protocol applied to minimally invasive thoracic surgery.

Prehabilitation and Nutritional Support to Improve Perioperative Outcomes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the role of physical exercise and nutrition interventions in adult patients before elective major surgery.

RECENT FINDINGS

Exercise training before elective adult major surgery is feasible, safe, and efficacious, but the clinical effectiveness remains uncertain. Early data suggests a reduction in morbidity, length of stay, and quality of life, but the results of larger definitive studies are awaited. Nutritional interventions are less well evaluated and when they are, it is often in combination with exercise interventions as part of a prehabilitation package.

SUMMARY

Studies evaluating exercise and nutrition interventions before elective major surgery in adults are producing encouraging early results, but definitive clinical evidence is currently very limited. Future research should focus on refining interventions, exploring mechanism, and evaluating the interactions between therapies and large-scale clinical effectiveness studies.

Oral Nutrition as a Form of Pre-Operative Enhancement in Patients Undergoing Surgery for Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Nutritional status has major impacts on the outcome of surgery, in particular in patients with cancer. The aim of this review was to assess the merit of oral pre-operative nutritional support as a part of prehabilitation in patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer.

METHODS

A systematic literature search and meta-analysis was performed according to the Preferred Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations in order to review all trials investigating the effect of oral pre-operative nutritional support in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. The primary outcome was overall complication rate. Secondary outcomes were incision infection rate, anastomotic leakage rate, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Five randomized controlled trials and one controlled trial were included. The studies contained a total of 583 patients with an average age of 63 y (range 23-88 y), of whom 87% had colorectal cancer. Malnourishment rates ranged from 8%-68%. All investigators provided an oral protein supplement. Overall patient compliance rates ranged from 72%-100%. There was no significant reduction in the overall complication rate in the interventional groups (odds ratio 0.82; 95% confidence interval 0.52 - 1.25).

CONCLUSION

Current studies are too heterogeneous to conclude that pre-operative oral nutritional support could enhance the condition of patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Patients at risk have a relatively lean body mass deficit (sarcopenia) rather than an absolute malnourished status. Compliance is an important element of prehabilitation. Targeting patients at risk, combining protein supplements with strength training, and defining standardized patient-related outcomes will be essential to obtain satisfactory results.

Surgeons' approach toward clinical nutrition: A survey-based study

OBJECTIVE

Although many surgical patients face postoperative problems due to a poor nutritional status, there is evidence that many cases of malnutrition still go unnoticed and untreated in surgical wards. This study aims to define the current attitudes of surgeons toward nutritional screening and support.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A questionnaire with 13 questions was e-mailed to 1500 surgeons. Cross-queries were made over the responses.

RESULTS

The response rate was 20.9%. Most of the respondents (89.5%) implemented nutritional screening. However, only 24.6% of these surgeons screened every patient for malnutrition. The time to initiate nutritional support varied among respondents, and only 25.5% started nutritional support early enough prior to surgery. Only 9.9% of respondents implemented evidence based practices for preoperative fasting, and 21.2% preferred immunonutrition products for patients undergoing major abdominal surgery for cancer. The responses of surgeons, who participated in at least one scientific meeting on nutrition per year, were more coherent with the nutrition guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study reveal that the awareness and knowledge of clinical nutrition need improving amongst surgeons. To increase this awareness and knowledge, continuous learning throughout their career seems essential.

Pre-operative oral nutritional supplementation with dietary advice versus dietary advice alone in weight-losing patients with colorectal cancer: single-blind randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Pre-operative weight loss has been consistently associated with increased post-operative morbidity. The study aims to determine if pre-operative oral nutritional supplements (ONSs) with dietary advice reduce post-operative complications.

METHODS

Single-blinded randomized controlled trial. People with colorectal cancer scheduled for surgery with pre-operative weight loss >1 kg/3-6 months were randomized by using stratified blocks (1:1 ratio) in six hospitals (1 November 2013-28 February 2015). Intervention group was given 250 mL/day ONS (10.1 KJ and 0.096 g protein per mL) and dietary advice. Control group received dietary advice alone. Oral nutritional supplements were administered from diagnosis to the day preceding surgery. Research team was masked to group allocation. Primary outcome was patients with one or more surgical site infection (SSI) or chest infection; secondary outcomes included percentage weight loss, total complications, and body composition measurements. Intention-to-treat analysis was performed with both unadjusted and adjusted analyses. A sample size of 88 was required.

RESULTS

Of 101 participants, (55 ONS, 46 controls) 97 had surgery. In intention-to-treat analysis, there were 21/45 (47%) patients with an infection-either an SSI or chest infection in the control group vs. 17/55 (30%) in the ONS group. The odds ratio of a patient incurring either an SSI or chest infection was 0.532 (P = 0.135 confidence interval 0.232 to 1.218) in the unadjusted analysis and when adjusted for random differences at baseline (age, gender, percentage weight loss, and cancer staging) was 0.341 (P = 0.031, confidence interval 0.128 to 0.909). Pre-operative percentage weight loss at the first time point after randomization was 4.1% [interquartile range (IQR) 1.7-7.0] in ONS group vs. 6.7% (IQR 2.6-10.8) in controls (Mann-Whitney U P = 0.021) and post-operatively was 7.4% (IQR 4.3-10.0) in ONS group vs. 10.2% (IQR 5.1-18.5) in controls (P = 0.016).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with dietary advice alone, ONS resulted in patients having fewer infections and less weight loss following surgery for colorectal cancer. We have demonstrated that pre-operative oral nutritional supplementation can improve clinical outcome in weight losing patients with colorectal cancer.

Nutrition support in hospitalised adults at nutritional risk

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of disease-related malnutrition in Western European hospitals is estimated to be about 30%. There is no consensus whether poor nutritional status causes poorer clinical outcome or if it is merely associated with it. The intention with all forms of nutrition support is to increase uptake of essential nutrients and improve clinical outcome. Previous reviews have shown conflicting results with regard to the effects of nutrition support.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of nutrition support versus no intervention, treatment as usual, or placebo in hospitalised adults at nutritional risk.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (Ovid SP), Embase (Ovid SP), LILACS (BIREME), and Science Citation Index Expanded (Web of Science). We also searched the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (www.who.int/ictrp); ClinicalTrials.gov; Turning Research Into Practice (TRIP); Google Scholar; and BIOSIS, as well as relevant bibliographies of review articles and personal files. All searches are current to February 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We include randomised clinical trials, irrespective of publication type, publication date, and language, comparing nutrition support versus control in hospitalised adults at nutritional risk. We exclude trials assessing non-standard nutrition support.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane and the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group. We used trial domains to assess the risks of systematic error (bias). We conducted Trial Sequential Analyses to control for the risks of random errors. We considered a P value of 0.025 or less as statistically significant. We used GRADE methodology. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, and health-related quality of life.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 244 randomised clinical trials with 28,619 participants that met our inclusion criteria. We considered all trials to be at high risk of bias. Two trials accounted for one-third of all included participants. The included participants were heterogenous with regard to disease (20 different medical specialties). The experimental interventions were parenteral nutrition (86 trials); enteral nutrition (tube-feeding) (80 trials); oral nutrition support (55 trials); mixed experimental intervention (12 trials); general nutrition support (9 trials); and fortified food (2 trials). The control interventions were treatment as usual (122 trials); no intervention (107 trials); and placebo (15 trials). In 204/244 trials, the intervention lasted three days or more.We found no evidence of a difference between nutrition support and control for short-term mortality (end of intervention). The absolute risk was 8.3% across the control groups compared with 7.8% (7.1% to 8.5%) in the intervention groups, based on the risk ratio (RR) of 0.94 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.86 to 1.03, P = 0.16, 21,758 participants, 114 trials, low quality of evidence). We found no evidence of a difference between nutrition support and control for long-term mortality (maximum follow-up). The absolute risk was 13.2% in the control group compared with 12.2% (11.6% to 13%) following nutritional interventions based on a RR of 0.93 (95% CI 0.88 to 0.99, P = 0.03, 23,170 participants, 127 trials, low quality of evidence). Trial Sequential Analysis showed we only had enough information to assess a risk ratio reduction of approximately 10% or more. A risk ratio reduction of 10% or more could be rejected.We found no evidence of a difference between nutrition support and control for short-term serious adverse events. The absolute risk was 9.9% in the control groups versus 9.2% (8.5% to 10%), with nutrition based on the RR of 0.93 (95% CI 0.86 to 1.01, P = 0.07, 22,087 participants, 123 trials, low quality of evidence). At long-term follow-up, the reduction in the risk of serious adverse events was 1.5%, from 15.2% in control groups to 13.8% (12.9% to 14.7%) following nutritional support (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.85 to 0.97, P = 0.004, 23,413 participants, 137 trials, low quality of evidence). However, the Trial Sequential Analysis showed we only had enough information to assess a risk ratio reduction of approximately 10% or more. A risk ratio reduction of 10% or more could be rejected.Trial Sequential Analysis of enteral nutrition alone showed that enteral nutrition might reduce serious adverse events at maximum follow-up in people with different diseases. We could find no beneficial effect of oral nutrition support or parenteral nutrition support on all-cause mortality and serious adverse events in any subgroup.Only 16 trials assessed health-related quality of life. We performed a meta-analysis of two trials reporting EuroQoL utility score at long-term follow-up and found very low quality of evidence for effects of nutritional support on quality of life (mean difference (MD) -0.01, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.01; 3961 participants, two trials). Trial Sequential Analyses showed that we did not have enough information to confirm or reject clinically relevant intervention effects on quality of life.Nutrition support may increase weight at short-term follow-up (MD 1.32 kg, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.00, 5445 participants, 68 trials, very low quality of evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is low-quality evidence for the effects of nutrition support on mortality and serious adverse events. Based on the results of our review, it does not appear to lead to a risk ratio reduction of approximately 10% or more in either all-cause mortality or serious adverse events at short-term and long-term follow-up.There is very low-quality evidence for an increase in weight with nutrition support at the end of treatment in hospitalised adults determined to be at nutritional risk. The effects of nutrition support on all remaining outcomes are unclear.Despite the clinically heterogenous population and the high risk of bias of all included trials, our analyses showed limited signs of statistical heterogeneity. Further trials may be warranted, assessing enteral nutrition (tube-feeding) for different patient groups. Future trials ought to be conducted with low risks of systematic errors and low risks of random errors, and they also ought to assess health-related quality of life.

ESPEN guideline: Clinical nutrition in inflammatory bowel disease

INTRODUCTION

The ESPEN guideline presents a multidisciplinary focus on clinical nutrition in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

METHODOLOGY

The guideline is based on extensive systematic review of the literature, but relies on expert opinion when objective data were lacking or inconclusive. The conclusions and 64 recommendations have been subject to full peer review and a Delphi process in which uniformly positive responses (agree or strongly agree) were required.

RESULTS

IBD is increasingly common and potential dietary factors in its aetiology are briefly reviewed. Malnutrition is highly prevalent in IBD - especially in Crohn's disease. Increased energy and protein requirements are observed in some patients. The management of malnutrition in IBD is considered within the general context of support for malnourished patients. Treatment of iron deficiency (parenterally if necessary) is strongly recommended. Routine provision of a special diet in IBD is not however supported. Parenteral nutrition is indicated only when enteral nutrition has failed or is impossible. The recommended perioperative management of patients with IBD undergoing surgery accords with general ESPEN guidance for patients having abdominal surgery. Probiotics may be helpful in UC but not Crohn's disease. Primary therapy using nutrition to treat IBD is not supported in ulcerative colitis, but is moderately well supported in Crohn's disease, especially in children where the adverse consequences of steroid therapy are proportionally greater. However, exclusion diets are generally not recommended and there is little evidence to support any particular formula feed when nutritional regimens are constructed.

CONCLUSIONS

Available objective data to guide nutritional support and primary nutritional therapy in IBD are presented as 64 recommendations, of which 9 are very strong recommendations (grade A), 22 are strong recommendations (grade B) and 12 are based only on sparse evidence (grade 0); 21 recommendations are good practice points (GPP).

Supportive interventions for enhancing dietary intake in malnourished or nutritionally at-risk adults

BACKGROUND

Supportive interventions such as serving meals in a dining room environment or the use of assistants to feed patients are frequently recommended for the management of nutritionally vulnerable groups. Such interventions are included in many policy and guideline documents and have implications for staff time but may incur additional costs, yet there appears to be a lack of evidence for their efficacy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of supportive interventions for enhancing dietary intake in malnourished or nutritionally at-risk adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified publications from comprehensive searches of the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, AMED, British Nursing Index, CINAHL, SCOPUS, ISI Web of Science databases, scrutiny of the reference lists of included trials and related systematic reviews and handsearching the abstracts of relevant meetings. The date of the last search for all databases was 31 March 2013. Additional searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP were undertaken to September 2016. The date of the last search for these databases was 14 September 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of supportive interventions given with the aim of enhancing dietary intake in nutritionally vulnerable adults compared with usual care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors and for the final search, the editor, selected trials from titles and abstracts and independently assessed eligibility of selected trials. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias, as well as evaluating overall quality of the evidence utilising the GRADE instrument, and then agreed as they entered data into the review. The likelihood of clinical heterogeneity amongst trials was judged to be high as trials were in populations with widely different clinical backgrounds, conducted in different healthcare settings and despite some grouping of similar interventions, involved interventions that varied considerably. We were only able, therefore, to conduct meta-analyses for the outcome measures, 'all-cause mortality', 'hospitalisation' and 'nutritional status (weight change)'.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-one trials (10,681 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Trials were grouped according to similar interventions (changes to organisation of nutritional care (N = 13; 3456 participants), changes to the feeding environment (N = 5; 351 participants), modification of meal profile or pattern (N = 12; 649 participants), additional supplementation of meals (N = 10; 6022 participants) and home meal delivery systems (N = 1; 203 participants). Follow-up ranged from 'duration of hospital stay' to 12 months.The overall quality of evidence was moderate to very low, with the majority of trials judged to be at an unclear risk of bias in several risk of bias domains. The risk ratio (RR) for all-cause mortality was 0.78 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66 to 0.92); P = 0.004; 12 trials; 6683 participants; moderate-quality evidence. This translates into 26 (95% CI 9 to 41) fewer cases of death per 1000 participants in favour of supportive interventions. The RR for number of participants with any medical complication ranged from 1.42 in favour of control compared with 0.59 in favour of supportive interventions (very low-quality evidence). Only five trials (4451 participants) investigated health-related quality of life showing no substantial differences between intervention and comparator groups. Information on patient satisfaction was unreliable. The effects of supportive interventions versus comparators on hospitalisation showed a mean difference (MD) of -0.5 days (95% CI -2.6 to 1.6); P = 0.65; 5 trials; 667 participants; very low-quality evidence. Only three of 41 included trials (4108 participants; very low-quality evidence) reported on adverse events, describing intolerance to the supplement (diarrhoea, vomiting; 5/34 participants) and discontinuation of oral nutritional supplements because of refusal or dislike of taste (567/2017 participants). Meta-analysis across 17 trials with adequate data on weight change revealed an overall improvement in weight in favour of supportive interventions versus control: MD 0.6 kg (95% CI 0.21 to 1.02); 2024 participants; moderate-quality evidence. A total of 27 trials investigated nutritional intake with a majority of trials not finding marked differences in energy intake between intervention and comparator groups. Only three trials (1152 participants) reported some data on economic costs but did not use accepted health economic methods (very low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence of moderate to very low quality to suggest that supportive interventions to improve nutritional care results in minimal weight gain. Most of the evidence for the lower risk of all-cause mortality for supportive interventions comes from hospital-based trials and more research is needed to confirm this effect. There is very low-quality evidence regarding adverse effects; therefore whilst some of these interventions are advocated at a national level clinicians should recognise the lack of clear evidence to support their role. This review highlights the importance of assessing patient-important outcomes in future research.

Hospital costs of complications after esophagectomy for cancer

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to estimate the economic burden of postoperative complications after esophagectomy for cancer, in order to optimally allocate resources for quality improvement initiatives in the future.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected clinical and financial outcomes after esophageal cancer surgery in a tertiary referral center in the Netherlands was performed. Data was extracted from consecutive patients registered in the Dutch Upper GI Cancer Audit between 2011 and 2014 (n = 201). Costs were measured up to 90-days after hospital discharge and based on Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing. The additional costs were estimated using multiple linear regression models.

RESULTS

The average total cost for one patient after esophagectomy was €37,581 (±31,372). The estimated costs of an esophagectomy without complications were €23,476 (±6496). Mean costs after minor (47%) and severe complications (29%) were €31,529 (±23,359) and €59,167 (±42,615) (p < 0.001), respectively. The 5% most expensive patients were responsible for 20.3% of the total hospital costs assessed in this study. Patient characteristics associated with additional costs in multivariable analysis included, age >70 (+€2,922, p = 0.036), female gender (+€4,357, p = 0.005), COPD (+€5,415, p = 0.002), and a history of thromboembolic events (+€6,213, p = 0.028). Complications associated with a significant increase in costs in multivariable analysis included anastomotic leakage (+€4,123, p = 0.008), cardiac complications (+€5,711, p = 0.003), chyle leakage (+€6,188, p < 0.001) and postoperative bleeding (+€31,567, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Complications and severity of complications after esophageal surgery are associated with a substantial increase in costs. Although not all postoperative complications can be prevented, implementation of preventive measures to reduce complications could result in a considerable cost reduction and quality improvement.

Randomized controlled clinical trial assessing the effects of oral nutritional supplements in postoperative gastric cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Postoperative weight loss and malnutrition are major issues in gastric cancer patients. The concept of oral nutritional supplements (ONS) is gaining widespread acceptance. We investigated the effects of ONS administration on postoperative body weight loss in patients with gastric cancer who had undergone total gastrectomy or distal gastrectomy.

METHODS

Patients were randomized to either the treatment or the control group. In both groups, standard surgery for gastric cancer was performed. In the treatment group, intervention with ONS was performed until 12 weeks after discharge. In the control group, patients were fed the usual postoperative diet. Weight, body composition, quality of life, hematological parameters, and blood chemistry were evaluated.

RESULTS

We analyzed 113 cases (73 distal gastrectomy, 40 total gastrectomy). Weight loss in the ONS group after total gastrectomy was significantly less than that in the control group. Weight loss and skeletal muscle mass loss after distal gastrectomy did not differ significantly between the ONS and control groups.

CONCLUSION

This study showed ONS after total gastrectomy to significantly diminish postoperative weight loss.

Best practice for perioperative management of patients with cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC

Due to the significantly improved outcome and quality of life of patients with different tumor entities after cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and HIPEC, there is an increasing number of centers performing CRS and HIPEC procedures. As this procedure is technically challenging with potential high morbidity and mortality, respectively, institutional experience also in the anesthetic and intensive care departments is essential for optimal treatment and prevention of adverse events. Clinical pathways have to be developed to achieve also good results in more comorbid patients with border line indications and extensive surgical procedures. The anesthesiologist has deal with relevant fluid, blood and protein losses, increased intraabdominal pressure, systemic hypo-/hyperthermia, and increased metabolic rate in patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery with HIPEC. It is of utmost importance to maintain or restore an adequate volume by aggressive substitution of intravenous fluids, which counteracts the increased fluid loss and venous capacitance during this procedure. Supplementary thoracic epidural analgesia, non-invasive ventilation, and physiotherapy are recommended to guarantee adequate pain therapy and postoperative extubation as well as fast-track concepts. Advanced hemodynamic monitoring is essential to help the anesthesiologist picking up information about the real-time fluid status of the patient. Preoperative preconditioning is mandatory in patients scheduled for HIPEC surgery and will result in improved outcome. Postoperatively, volume status optimization, early nutritional support, sufficient anticoagulation, and point of care coagulation management are essential. This is an extensive update on all relevant topics for anesthetists and intensivists dealing with CRS and HIPEC.

Benefits of post-operative oral protein supplementation in gastrointestinal surgery patients: A systematic review of clinical trials

AIM: To evaluate published trials examining oral post-operative protein supplementation in patients having undergone gastrointestinal surgery and assessment of reported results.

METHODS: Database searches (MEDLINE, BIOSIS, EMBASE, Cochrane Trials, Cinahl, and CAB), searches of reference lists of relevant papers, and expert referral were used to identify prospective randomized controlled clinical trials. The following terms were used to locate articles: “oral’’ or “enteral’’ and “postoperative care’’ or “post-surgical’’ and “proteins’’ or “milk proteins’’ or “dietary proteins’’ or “dietary supplements’’ or “nutritional supplements’’. In databases that allowed added limitations, results were limited to clinical trials that studied humans, and publications between 1990 and 2014. Quality of collated studies was evaluated using a qualitative assessment tool and the collective results interpreted.

RESULTS: Searches identified 629 papers of which, following review, 7 were deemed eligible for qualitative evaluation. Protein supplementation does not appear to affect mortality but does reduce weight loss, and improve nutritional status. Reduction in grip strength deterioration was observed in a majority of studies, and approximately half of the studies described reduced complication rates. No changes in duration of hospital stay or plasma protein levels were reported. There is evidence to suggest that protein supplementation should be routinely provided post-operatively to this population. However, despite comprehensive searches, clinical trials that varied only the amount of protein provided via oral nutritional supplements (discrete from other nutritional components) were not found. At present, there is some evidence to support routinely prescribed oral nutritional supplements that contain protein for gastrointestinal surgery patients in the immediate post-operative stage.

CONCLUSION: The optimal level of protein supplementation required to maximise recovery in gastrointestinal surgery patients is effectively unknown, and may warrant further study.

Recommended European Society of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition protein and energy intakes and weight loss in patients with head and neck cancer

BACKGROUND

Information regarding attenuation of weight loss in patients with head and neck cancer consuming energy and protein intakes at levels recommended by the European Society of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ESPEN) is limited.

METHODS

Newly diagnosed patients with head and neck cancer (n = 38) consuming food orally had weight and 3-day diet records prospectively collected at baseline, the end of treatment, and at the 2.5-month follow-up. Weight loss of patients consuming the ESPEN recommendations of ≥30 kcal/kg/d energy and 1.2 g/kg/d protein versus those consuming less were compared. Weight loss of oral nutrition supplement consumers versus oral nutrition supplement nonconsumers was also compared.

RESULTS

Despite ≥30 kcal/kg/d intakes at posttreatment and follow-up, mean weight loss was 10.3% from baseline to posttreatment, and 4.0% from posttreatment to follow-up. At posttreatment, oral nutrition supplement consumers with intakes ≥30 kcal/kg/d lost twice as much weight as nonconsumers with intakes of ≥30 kcal/kg/d (p = .001).

CONCLUSION

Current ESPEN recommendations may not attenuate weight loss in patients with head and neck cancer, especially those consuming oral nutrition supplements. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck 38:1248-1257, 2016.

Effects of the Oral Nutritional Supplement Containing Arginine, Glutamine, and Hydroxymethylbutyrate (Abound®) on Healing of Colonic Anastomoses in Rats

We evaluated the effects of the oral nutritional supplement containing arginine, glutamine, and hydroxymethylbutyrate (Abound®) on healing of colonic anastomoses in experimental rat model. Seventy Wistar-Albino male rats were divided into seven groups. Colon transection and anastomosis were performed in all groups except for the sham group. In groups 2 and 5, rats were fed with standard rat chow after the operation. Oral nutritional supplement was added to standard nutrition for 3 days postoperatively in group 3 and 7 days in group 6 and preoperative 7 days plus postoperative 3 days in group 4 and preoperative 7 days plus postoperative 7 days in group 7. Bursting pressures were measured, adhesions were evaluated, and tissue samples were taken for measurement of tissue hydroxyproline levels and for histopathological examination. The usage of oral nutritional supplement had positive effects on bursting pressures, tissue hydroxyproline levels, and histopathological findings of anastomoses, but feeding with oral nutritional supplement both preoperatively and postoperatively had no additive effect on these parameters when compared with the groups that were fed only postoperatively. The mixture of arginine, glutamine, and hydroxymethylbutyrate may be safely used for achieving better healing results after colonic anastomoses.

The Effect of Preoperative Oral Immunonutrition on Complications and Length of Hospital Stay After Elective Surgery for Pancreatic Cancer--A Randomized Controlled Trial

Major gastrointestinal surgery is associated with immune suppression and a high risk of postoperative complications. The aim of this open, randomized controlled trial was to examine the effect of supplementary per oral immunonutrition (IN) seven days before surgery for pancreatic cancer (PC) on postoperative complications and length of hospital stay (LOS). Secondary outcomes were the changes in functional capability and body weight (BW). Consecutive patients referred for surgery for diagnosed or plausible PC were included. The patients in the intervention group received supplementary IN (Oral Impact®, Nestlé) to reach a goal of 1.5 g protein/kg BW. The control group continued their habitual diet. Complications and LOS were independently assessed by the surgical staff. Secondary outcomes were measured 10, 20, and 30 days postoperatively. Thirty-five patients were included, of whom 19 (54%) were allocated to the intervention group. The doses of IN ranged from 250 to 1000 ml per day and the median compliance was 100 (0-100%). Based on the principle of intention-to-treat, no significant differences were found between the groups. We conclude that the lack of effect could be due to the limited dosage of IN, and/or because only 40% of the patients were at nutritional risk.

A comparison of postoperative early enteral nutrition with delayed enteral nutrition in patients with esophageal cancer

We examined esophageal cancer patients who received enteral nutrition (EN) to evaluate the validity of early EN compared to delayed EN, and to determine the appropriate time to start EN. A total of 208 esophagectomy patients who received EN postoperatively were divided into three groups (Group 1, 2 and 3) based on whether they received EN within 48 h, 48 h-72 h or more than 72 h, respectively. The postoperative complications, length of hospital stay (LOH), days for first fecal passage, cost of hospitalization, and the difference in serum albumin values between pre-operation and post-operation were all recorded. The statistical analyses were performed using the t-test, the Mann-Whitney U test and the chi square test. Statistical significance was defined as p < 0.05. Group 1 had the lowest thoracic drainage volume, the earliest first fecal passage, and the lowest LOH and hospitalization expenses of the three groups. The incidence of pneumonia was by far the highest in Group 3 (p = 0.019). Finally, all the postoperative outcomes of nutritional conditions were the worst by a significant margin in Group 3. It is therefore safe and valid to start early enteral nutrition within 48 h for postoperative esophageal cancer patients.

Association between nutritional risk and routine clinical laboratory measurements and adverse outcomes: a prospective study in hospitalized patients of Wuhan Tongji Hospital

Background/Objectives:

Nutritional risk screening (NRS-2002) and routine clinical laboratory measurements (RCLMs) had been shown to have a predictive value in adverse outcomes in some studies, respectively. This study analyzed the association between NRS-2002 and RCLMs and estimated their prospective value in predicting adverse outcomes.

Subjects/Methods:

A total of 916 hospitalized patients were screened on admission with NRS-2002 and Subjective Global Assessment; RCLMs, which include blood test, kidney and liver function and electrolytes, were recorded. Diagnosis, nutritional support, surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, complications, mortality and hospital stay during hospitalization were collected. The X²-test, odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals, kappa (k) statistic and regression analyses were conducted.

Results:

An overall 48.1% of the 916 patients were at nutritional risk on admission. Comparing ‘at risk' with ‘no risk', a significantly higher incidence of abnormality was found not only in nutritional markers but also in other parameters of RCLMs (OR ranged from 1.5 to 3.5). Regression analyses showed that ‘at risk' determined at admission was not a significant predictor of adverse outcomes after adjusting for other confounding factors, although it was a strong predictor in univariate analysis, whereas hypoalbuminemia, low total lymphocyte count, abnormality of hepatic and renal function were predictors after adjusting for confounders.

Conclusions:

The findings suggest that NRS-2002 might be a global index of ‘sickness' rather than be only a nutritional screening tool. It being rated once at admission is insufficient and should be repeated for using it as a predictor, whereas RCLMs routinely measured at admission may be able to be used to predict adverse outcomes.

Improving outcomes and cost-effectiveness of colorectal surgery

In order to truly make an impact on improving the cost effectiveness, and most importantly, the outcomes of patients undergoing colorectal surgery, all aspects of care need to be scrutinized, re-evaluated, and refined. To accomplish this, everything from the way we train surgeons to the adoption of a minimally invasive approach for colorectal disease, along with the use of adjunct intraoperative measures to decrease morbidity and mortality, may all need to be incorporated within an ERAS program. Only then will this approach lead the provider to a patient-centric care plan which can successfully reduce metrics such as morbidity, mortality, and length of stay (even with the obligatory readmission rate) and provide it all at a lower cost of care.

[Guidelines for enhanced recovery after elective colorectal surgery]

Early recovery after surgery provides patients with all means to counteract or minimize the deleterious effects of surgery. This concept is suitable for a surgical procedure (e.g., colorectal surgery) and comes in the form of a clinical pathway that covers three periods (pre-, intra- and postoperative). The purpose of this Expert panel guideline is firstly to assess the impact of each parameter usually included in the rehabilitation programs on 6 foreseeable consequences of colorectal surgery: surgical stress, postoperative ileus, water and energy imbalance, postoperative immobility, sleep alterations and postoperative complications; secondly, to validate the usefulness of each as criteria of efficiency criteria for success of rehabilitation programs. Two main criteria were selected to evaluate the impact of each parameter: the length of stay and frequency of postoperative complications. Lack of information in the literature forced experts to assess some parameters with criteria (duration of postoperative ileus or quality of analgesia) that mainly surrogate a positive impact for the implementation of an early recovery program. After literature analysis, 19 parameters were identified as potentially interfering with at least one of the foreseeable consequences of colorectal surgery. GRADE® methodology was applied to determine a level of evidence and strength of recommendation. After synthesis of the work of experts using GRADE® method on 19 parameters, 35 recommendations were produced by the organizing committee. The recommendations were submitted and amended by a group of reviewers. After three rounds of Delphi quotes, strong agreement was obtained for 28 recommendations (80%) and weak agreement for seven recommendations. A consensus was reached among anesthesiologists and surgeons on a number of approaches that are likely not sufficiently applied for rehabilitation programs in colorectal surgery such as: preoperative intake of carbohydrates; intraoperative hemodynamic optimization; oral feeding resume before ha24; gum chewing after surgery; patient out of bed and walking at D1. The panel also clarified the value and place of such approaches such as: patient information; preoperative immunonutrition; laparoscopic surgery; antibiotic prophylaxis; prevention of hypothermia; systematic prevention of nausea and vomiting; morphine-sparing analgesic techniques; indications and techniques for bladder catheterization. The panel also confirmed the futility of approaches such as: bowel preparation for colon surgery; maintain of the nasogastric tube; surgical drainage for colonic surgery.

Health economics evidence for medical nutrition: are these interventions value for money in integrated care?

BACKGROUND

Health care decision-makers have begun to realize that medical nutrition plays an important role in the delivery of care, and it needs to be seen as a sole category within the overall health care reimbursement system to establish the value for money. Indeed, improving health through improving patients' nutrition may contribute to the cost-effectiveness and financial sustainability of health care systems. Medical nutrition is regulated by a specific bill either in Europe or in the United States, which offers specific legislations and guidelines (as provided to patients with special nutritional needs) and indications for nutritional support. Given that the efficacy of medical nutrition has been proven, one can wonder whether the heterogeneous nature of its coverage/reimbursement across countries might be due to the lack of health-related economic evidence or value-for-money of nutritional interventions. This paper aims to address this knowledge gap by performing a systematic literature review on health economics evidence regarding medical nutrition, and by summarizing the results of these publications related to the value for money of medical nutrition interventions.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was initiated and executed based on a predefined search protocol following the population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) criteria. Following the systematic literature search of recently published literature on health economics evidence regarding medical nutrition, this study aims to summarize the results of those publications that are related to the value for money of medical nutrition interventions. The evaluations were conducted by analyzing different medical nutrition according to their indications, the economic methodology or perspective adopted, the cost source and utility measures, selected efficiency measures, as well as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

RESULTS

A total of 225 abstracts were identified for the detailed review, and the data were entered into a data extraction sheet. For the abstracts that finally met the predefined inclusion criteria (n=53), full-text publications were obtained via PubMed, subito, or directly via each journal's Webpage for further assessment. After a detailed review of the full text articles, 34 publications have been qualified for a thorough data extraction procedure. When differentiating the resulting articles in terms of their settings, 20 studies covered inpatients, whereas 14 articles covered outpatients, including patients in community centers. When reviewing the value-for-money evaluations, the indications showed that the different results were mostly impacted by the different perspectives adopted and the comparisons that were made. In order to draw comprehensive conclusions, the results were split according to the main indications and diseases.

DISCUSSION

The systematic literature search has shown that there is not only an interest in health economics and its application in medical nutrition, but that there is a lot of ongoing research in this area. Based on the underlying systematic analysis, it has been shown that medical nutrition interventions offer value for money in the different health care settings, particularly for the specific disease areas that have been pointed out.

CONCLUSION

Based on the systematic literature search that was performed, it was shown that medical nutrition interventions offer value for money in the different health care settings. Although medical nutrition has been the topic of some health economic analyses, the usual willingness to pay threshold used in health care rarely was applied. Often, these products are either directly part of a lump sum in the financing system (for example, diagnosis-related groups), or they are covered as out-of-pocket payments by patients directly. More research would be necessary to better understand how medical nutrition interventions can be optimally funded by the health care system, given the clinical value they bring to patients in their recovery process.

Driving perioperative nutrition quality improvement processes forward!

Evidence supporting the important role of nutrition therapy in surgical patients has evolved, with several randomized trials and meta-analyses of randomized trials clearly demonstrating benefits. Despite this evidence, surgeons and anesthesiologists have been slow to adopt recommended practices, and the traditional dogma of delaying the initiation of and restricting the amount of nutrition during the postoperative period persists. Consequently, the nutrition therapy received by surgical patients remains suboptimal; thus, patients suffer worse clinical outcomes. Knowledge translation (KT) describes the process of moving evidence learned from clinical research, and summarized in clinical practice guidelines, to its incorporation into clinical and policy decision making. In this paper, we apply Graham et al's knowledge-to-action model to illuminate our understanding of the issues pertinent to KT in surgical nutrition. We illustrate various components of this model using empirically derived research, commentaries, and published studies from both critical care and surgical nutrition. Barriers to improving surgical nutrition practice may be related to (1) the nature of the underlying evidence and clinical practice guidelines; (2) guideline implementation factors; (3) characteristics of the health system, hospital, and surgical team; (4) provider attitudes and beliefs; and (5) patient factors (eg, type of surgery, underlying disease, and nutrition status). Interventions tailored to overcoming these barriers must be developed, evaluated, and implemented. A system of audit and feedback must guide this process and evaluate improvements over time so that every patient undergoing major surgery will have the opportunity to be optimally assessed and managed according to best nutrition practices.

Health economic analyses in medical nutrition: a systematic literature review

Background

Medical nutrition is a specific nutrition category either covering specific dietary needs and/or nutrient deficiency in patients or feeding patients unable to eat normally. Medical nutrition is regulated by a specific bill in Europe and in the US, with specific legislation and guidelines, and is provided to patients with special nutritional needs and indications for nutrition support. Therefore, medical nutrition products are delivered by medical prescription and supervised by health care professionals. Although these products have existed for more than 2 decades, health economic evidence of medical nutrition interventions is scarce. This research assesses the current published health economic evidence for medical nutrition by performing a systematic literature review related to health economic analysis of medical nutrition.

Methods

A systematic literature search was done using standard literature databases, including PubMed, the Health Technology Assessment Database, and the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database. Additionally, a free web-based search was conducted using the same search terms utilized in the systematic database search. The clinical background and basis of the analysis, health economic design, and results were extracted from the papers finally selected. The Drummond checklist was used to validate the quality of health economic modeling studies and the AMSTAR (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews) checklist was used for published systematic reviews.

Results

Fifty-three papers were identified and obtained via PubMed, or directly via journal webpages for further assessment. Thirty-two papers were finally included in a thorough data extraction procedure, including those identified by a “gray literature search” utilizing the Google search engine and cross-reference searches. Results regarding content of the studies showed that malnutrition was the underlying clinical condition in most cases (32%). In addition, gastrointestinal disorders (eg, surgery, cancer) were often analyzed. In terms of settings, 56% of papers covered inpatients, whereas 14 papers (44%) captured outpatients, including patients in community centers. Interestingly, in comparison with the papers identified overall, very few health economic models were found. Most of the articles were modeling analyses and economic trials in different design settings. Overall, only eight health economic models were published and were validated applying the Drummond checklist. In summary, most of the models included were carried out to quite a high standard, although some areas were identified for further improvement. Of the two systematic health economic reviews identified, one achieved the highest quality score when applying the AMSTAR checklist.

Conclusion

The reasons for finding only a few modeling studies but quite a large number of clinical trials with health economic endpoints, might be different. Until recently, health economics has not been required for reimbursement or coverage decisions concerning medical nutrition interventions. Further, there might be specifics of medical nutrition which might not allow easy modeling and consequently explain the limited uptake so far. The health economic data on medical nutrition generated and published is quite ample. However, it has been primarily based on database analysis and clinical studies. Only a few modeling analyses have been carried out, indicating a need for further research to understand the specifics of medical nutrition and their applicability for health economic modeling.

Nutrition optimization prior to surgery

Optimization of metabolic state prior to major surgery leads to improved surgical outcomes. Nutrition screening protocols should be implemented in the preoperative evaluation, possibly as part of a bundle. Strategies to minimize hyperglycemia and insulin resistance by aggressive preoperative nutrition and carbohydrate loading may promote maintenance of a perioperative anabolic state, improving healing, reducing complications, and shortening the time to recovery of bowel function and hospital discharge. Short courses of preoperative immune-modulating formulas, using combinations of arginine, ω-3 fatty acids, and other nutrients, have been associated with improved surgical outcomes. These immune-modulating nutrients are key elements of metabolic pathways that promote attenuation of the metabolic response to stress and improve both wound healing and immune function. Patients with severe malnutrition and gastrointestinal dysfunction may benefit from preoperative parenteral nutrition. Continuation of feeding through the intraoperative period for severely stressed hypermetabolic patients undergoing nongastrointestinal surgery is another strategy to optimize metabolic state and reduce prolonged nutrition deficits. In this paper, we review the importance of preoperative nutrition and strategies for effective preoperative nutrition optimization.

Is early enteral nutrition initiated within 24 hours better for the postoperative course in esophageal cancer surgery?

BACKGROUND

Early enteral nutrition within 24 h after surgery has become a recommended procedure. In the present study, we retrospectively examined whether initiating EN within 24 h after esophagectomy improves the postoperative course.

METHODS

Among 103 patients who underwent thoracic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer, we enrolled the cases in which EN was initiated within 72 h after surgery. The patients were divided into two groups: EN started within 24 h (Group D1) and EN started at 24 - 72 h (Group D2-3). Clinical factors including days for first fecal passage, dose of postoperative albumin infusion, difference in serum albumin between pre- and postoperation, incidence of postoperative infection, and use of total parenteral nutrition were compared. Statistical analyses were performed by the Mann-Whitney U test and Chi square test, with significance defined as P < 0.05.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between the groups in clinical factors. While pneumonia was significantly more frequent in Group D1 than in Group D2-3 (P = 0.0308), the frequency of infectious complications was comparable between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Initiating EN within 24 h showed no advantage for the postoperative course in esophageal cancer, and thus EN should be scheduled within 24 - 72 h, based on the patient condition.

Patients requiring perioperative nutritional support

One of the most important factors affecting outcome and recovery from surgical trauma is preoperative nutritional status. Research in perioperative nutritional support has suffered from a lack of consensus as to the definition of malnutrition, no recognition of which nutrients are important to surgical healing, and a paucity of well-designed studies. In the past decade, there has been some activity to address this situation, recognizing the importance of nutrition as a therapy before surgery, after surgery, and possibly even during surgery.

Economic evaluation for protein and energy supplementation in adults: opportunities to strengthen the evidence

Malnutrition is a costly problem for health care systems internationally. Malnourished individuals require longer hospital stays and more intensive nursing care than adequately nourished individuals and have been estimated to cost an additional £7.3 billion in health care expenditures in the United Kingdom alone. However, treatments for malnutrition have rarely been considered from an economic perspective. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the cost effectiveness of using protein and energy supplementation as a widely used intervention to treat adults with and at risk of malnutrition. Papers were identified that included economic evaluations of protein or energy supplementation for the treatment or prevention of malnutrition in adults. While the variety of outcome measures reported for cost-effectiveness studies made synthesis of results challenging, cost-benefit studies indicated that the savings for the health system could be substantial due to reduced lengths of hospital stay and less intensive use of health services after discharge. In summary, the available economic evidence indicates that protein and energy supplementation in treatment or prevention of malnutrition provides an opportunity to improve patient wellbeing and lower health system costs.

Is early enteral nutrition better for postoperative course in esophageal cancer patients?

We retrospectively examined esophageal cancer patients who received enteral nutrition (EN) to clarify the validity of early EN compared with delayed EN. A total of 103 patients who underwent transthoracic esophagectomy with three-field lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer were entered. Patients were divided into two groups; Group E received EN within postoperative day 3, and Group L received EN after postoperative day 3. The clinical factors such as days for first fecal passage, the dose of postoperative albumin infusion, differences of serum albumin value between pre- and postoperation, duration of systematic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), incidence of postoperative infectious complication, and use of total parenteral nutrition (TPN) were compared between the groups. The statistical analyses were performed using Mann-Whitney U test and Chi square test. The statistical significance was defined as p < 0.05. Group E showed fewer days for the first fecal passage (p < 0.01), lesser dose of postoperative albumin infusion (p < 0.01), less use of TPN (p < 0.01), and shorter duration of SIRS (p < 0.01). However, there was no significant difference in postoperative complications between the two groups. Early EN started within 3 days after esophagectomy. It is safe and valid for reduction of albumin infusion and TPN, for promoting early recovery of intestinal movement, and for early recovery from systemic inflammation.

A randomized controlled trial comparing a standard postoperative diet with low-volume high-calorie oral supplements following colorectal surgery

AIM

Postoperative oral nutritional supplementation is becoming a part of most patient care pathways. This study examined the effects of low-volume high-calorie prescribed supplemental nutrition on patient outcome following elective colorectal surgery.

METHOD

Patients undergoing elective colorectal resections were randomized to a prescribed nutritional supplementation group (SG) [standard diet + 6 × 60 ml/day of Pro-Cal (60 ml = 200 kcal + 4 g protein)] or conventional postoperative diet group (CG) (standard diet alone). Preoperative and daily postoperative hand-grip strengths were measured using a grip dynamometer after randomization. Daily food intake, return of bowel activity, nausea score for the first 3 days and postoperative length of hospital stay (LOS) were prospectively recorded. Micro-diet standardized software was used to analyse food diaries. Nonparametric tests were used to analyse the data.

RESULTS

Fifty-five patients were analysed (SG 28, CG 27). There was no difference in median preoperative and postoperative handgrip strengths at discharge within each group (SG 31.7 vs 31.7 kPa, P = 0.932; CG 28 vs 28.1 kPa, P = 0.374). The total median daily calorie intake was higher in SG than CG (SG 818.5 kcal vs CG 528 kcal; P = 0.002). There was no difference in median number of days to first bowel movement (SG 3 days vs CG 4 days, P = 0.096). The median LOS was significantly shorter in SG than CG (6.5 vs 9 days; P = 0.037).

CONCLUSION

Prescribed postoperative high-calorie, low-volume oral supplements in addition to the normal dietary intake are associated with significantly better total daily oral calorie intake and may contribute to a reduced postoperative hospital stay.

Preoperative immunonutrition and its effect on postoperative outcomes in well-nourished and malnourished gastrointestinal surgery patients: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Invasive procedures such as surgery cause immunosuppression, leading to increased risk of complications, infections and extended hospital stay. Emerging research around immune-enhancing nutrition supplements and their ability to reduce postoperative complications and reduce treatment costs is promising. This randomised controlled trial aims to examine the effect of preoperative immunonutrition supplementation on length of hospital stay (LOS), complications and treatment costs in both well-nourished and malnourished gastrointestinal surgery patients.

SUBJECTS/METHODS

Ninety-five patients undergoing elective upper and lower gastrointestinal surgery were recruited. The treatment group (n=46) received a commercial immuno-enhancing supplement 5 days preoperatively. The control group (n=49) received no supplements. The primary outcome measure was LOS, and secondary outcome measures included complications and cost.

RESULTS

A nonsignificant trend towards a shorter LOS within the treatment group was observed (7.1 ± 4.1 compared with 8.8 ± 6.5 days; P=0.11). For malnourished patients, this trend was greater with hospital stay reduced by 4 days (8.3 ± 3.5 vs 12.3 ± 9.5 days; P=0.21). Complications and unplanned intensive care admission rates were very low in both the groups. The average admission cost was reduced by AUD1576 in the treatment group compared with the control group (P=0.37).

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative immunonutrition therapy in gastrointestinal surgery has the potential to reduce the LOS and cost, with greater treatment benefit seen in malnourished patients; however, there is a need for additional research with greater patient numbers.