The Effect of Preoperative Oral Versus Parenteral Dextrose Supplementation on Pain, Nausea, and Quality of Recovery After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Effects of Preoperative Oral Carbohydrates on Recovery After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

PURPOSE

The objective of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of administering preoperative oral carbohydrates (CHO) compared to a control treatment in improving postoperative recovery outcomes for patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

DESIGN

A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

Through systematic searches in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, randomized controlled trials focusing on preoperative oral carbohydrates for patients undergoing LC were collected. Data analysis was conducted using the Revman 5.3 software.

FINDINGS

The meta-analysis incorporated 19 randomized studies, with a total of 1,568 participants. Meta-analysis results indicated that patients receiving CHO reported notably lower postoperative pain compared to those fasting (P = .006) or on placebo (P = .003). Furthermore, a significant reduction in preoperative hunger was observed in the CHO group compared to the controls (P = .002). A notable difference was also identified in the postoperative Homeostasis Model Assessment-IR changes between the CHO and control groups (P = .02). No significant variations were observed in thirst, postoperative nausea and vomiting, insulin level alterations, glucose level changes, duration of hospital stay, or recovery quality.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative oral carbohydrates may alleviate hunger and pain, and attenuate postoperative insulin resistance more effectively than either overnight fasting or placebo in patients undergoing LC.

Trends in preoperative carbohydrate load practice: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The preoperative carbohydrate load (PCL) is intended to improve surgical outcomes by reducing the catabolic state induced by overnight fasting. However, there is disagreement on the optimal PCL prescription, leaving local institutions without a standardized PCL recommendation. Results from studies that do not prescribe PCL in identical ways cannot be pooled to draw larger conclusions on outcomes affected by the PCL. The aim of this systematic review is to catalog prescribed PCL characteristics, including timing of ingestion, percentage of carbohydrate contribution, and volume, to ultimately standardize PCL practice.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Randomized controlled trials were included if they studied at least one group of patients who were prescribed a PCL and the PCL was described with respect to timing of ingestion, carbohydrate contribution, and total volume.

RESULTS

A total of 67 studies with 6551 patients were included in this systematic review. Of the studies, 49.3% were prescribed PCL on the night before surgery and morning of surgery, whereas 47.8% were prescribed PCL on the morning of surgery alone. The mean prescribed carbohydrate concentration was 13.5% (±3.4). The total volume prescribed was 648.2 ml (±377).

CONCLUSION

Variation in PCL practices prevent meaningful data pooling and outcome analysis, highlighting the need for standardized PCL prescription. Efforts dedicated to the establishment of a gold standard PCL prescription are necessary so that studies can be pooled and analyzed with respect to meaningful clinical end points that impact surgical outcomes and patient satisfaction.

A Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting Update: Current information on New Drugs, Old Drugs, Rescue/Treatment, Combination Therapies and Nontraditional Modalities

This article's objective is to present the latest evidence and information on the management of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). PONV continues to affect 30% of the surgical population causing patient dissatisfaction, extending length of stay, and increasing overall costs. This review includes the introduction of 2 new intravenous formulations of antiemetics (amisulpride, aprepitant), updates on nontraditional therapies, suggestions for combination prophylaxis, emerging data on rescue treatment, and considerations for special populations and settings. Both of the new antiemetics provide promising options for pharmacologic interventions for PONV with favorable safety profiles.

Effects of preoperative carbohydrate loading on recovery after elective surgery: A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Preoperative carbohydrate loading is an important element of the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) paradigm in adult patients undergoing elective surgery. However, preoperative carbohydrate loading remains controversial in terms of improvement in postoperative outcomes and safety. We conducted a Bayesian network meta-analysis to evaluate the effects and safety of different doses of preoperative carbohydrates administrated in adult patients after elective surgery.

Methods

MEDLINE (PubMed), Web of Science, EMBASE, EBSCO, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) were searched to identify eligible trials until 16 September 2022. Outcomes included postoperative insulin resistance, residual gastric volume (RGV) during the surgery, insulin sensitivity, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), fasting serum insulin (Fin) level, the serum levels of C-reactive protein (CRP), postoperative scores of pain, patients' satisfaction, thirst, hunger, anxiety, nausea and vomit, fatigue, and weakness within the first 24 h after surgery and the occurrences of postoperative infection. The effect sizes were estimated using posterior mean difference (continuous variables) or odds ratios (dichotomous variables) and 95 credible intervals (CrIs) with the change from baseline in a Bayesian network meta-analysis with random effect.

Results

Fifty-eight articles (N = 4936 patients) fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Both preoperative oral low-dose carbohydrate loading (MD: -3.25, 95% CrI: -5.27 to -1.24) and oral high-dose carbohydrate loading (MD: -2.57, 95% CrI: -4.33 to -0.78) were associated with postoperative insulin resistance compared to placebo/water. When trials at high risk of bias were excluded, association with insulin resistance was found for oral low-dose carbohydrate loading compared with placebo/water (MD: -1.29, 95%CrI: -2.26 to -0.27) and overnight fasting (MD: -1.17, 95%CrI: -1.88 to -0.43). So, there was large uncertainty for all estimates vs. control groups. In terms of safety, oral low-dose carbohydrate administration was associated with the occurrences of postoperative infection compared with fasting by 0.42 (95%Crl: 0.20-0.81). In the other outcomes, there was no significant difference between the carbohydrate and control groups.

Conclusion

Although preoperative carbohydrate loading was associated with postoperative insulin resistance and the occurrences of postoperative infection, there is no evidence that preoperative carbohydrate administration alleviates patients' discomfort.

Systematic review registration

[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/], identifier [CRD42022312944].

Postoperative recovery: how and when is it assessed: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus about the type of instrument with which to assess postoperative recovery or the time points when assessments are most appropriate. It is also unclear whether instruments measure the four dimensions of postoperative recovery, that is physical, psychological, social, and habitual recovery. This scoping review had three objectives: (1) to identify and describe instruments used in clinical trials to assess postoperative recovery; (2) to determine how, when, and the number of times postoperative recovery was measured; and (3) to explore whether the four dimensions of postoperative recovery are represented in the identified instruments.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted in CINAHL, MEDLINE, and Web of Science. The search terms were related to three search strands: postoperative recovery, instrument, and clinical trials. The limits were English language and publication January 2010 to November 2021. In total, 5015 studies were identified.

RESULTS

A total of 198 studies were included in the results. We identified 20 instruments measuring postoperative recovery. Different versions of Quality of Recovery represented 81.8% of the included instruments. Postoperative recovery was often assessed at one time point (47.2%) and most often on postoperative day 1 (81.5%). Thirteen instruments had items covering all four dimensions of postoperative recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

Assessing recovery is important to evaluate and improve perioperative care. We emphasise the importance of choosing the right instrument for the concept studied and, if postoperative recovery is of interest, of assessing more than once. Ideally, instruments should include all four dimensions to cover the whole recovery process.