Artificial nutrition after major abdominal surgery: impact of route of administration and composition of the diet

Postoperative nutritional support after pancreaticoduodenectomy in adults

BACKGROUND

Resection of the head of the pancreas is most commonly done by a pancreaticoduodenectomy, known as a Whipple procedure. The most common indication for pancreaticoduodenectomy is malignancy, but can include benign tumours and chronic pancreatitis. Complete surgical resection, with negative margins, provides the best prospect of long-term survival. Pancreaticoduodenectomy involves specific and unique alterations to the digestive system and maintaining nutritional status (optimising outcomes and achieving resumption of a normal diet) in patients with cancer after major surgery is a challenge. Malnutrition is a risk factor following pancreaticoduodenectomy, due to the magnitude of the operation and the frequency of complications. Postoperatively, patients are fed either orally, enterally or parenterally. Oral intake may start with fluids and then progress to solid food, or may be ad libitum. Enteral feeding may be via a nasojejunal tube or feeding tube jejunostomy. Parenteral nutrition can be delivered via a central or peripheral intravenous line, and may provide full nutrition (TPN) or partial nutrition (supplemental PN).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of postoperative nutritional support strategies on complications and recovery in adults after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS and CINAHL (from inception to October 2022), ongoing trials registers and other internet databases. We searched previous systematic reviews, relevant publications on the same topic and the references of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of postoperative nutritional interventions in an inpatient setting for patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy. We specifically looked for studies comparing route or timing rather than nutritional content.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, judged the risk of bias and extracted data. Studies requiring translation were assessed for inclusion, risk of bias and data extraction by an external translator and another author. We used GRADE to evaluate the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 17 studies (1897 participants). Of these, eight studies could be included in a meta-analysis. The route, timing and target of nutritional support varied widely between studies. Enteral feeding (jejunostomy, nasojejunal or gastrojejunostomy) was used in at least 13 studies (one study did not specify the method of enteral route), parenteral nutrition (PN) was used in at least 10 studies (two studies had a control of 'surgeon's preference' and no further details were given) and oral intake was used in seven studies. Overall, the evidence presented in this review is of low to very low certainty. Four studies compared jejunostomy feeding with total parenteral nutrition. When we pooled these four studies, the evidence demonstrated that jejunostomy likely results in a reduced length of hospital stay (mean difference (MD) -1.61 days, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.31 to -0.92; 3 studies, 316 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence suggested that there may be no difference in postoperative pancreatic fistula (risk ratio (RR) 0.77, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.47; 4 studies, 346 participants; low-certainty evidence) and that there may be no difference in delayed gastric emptying (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.50; 2 studies, 270 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or post pancreatectomy haemorrhage (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.06 to 2.29; 2 studies, 270 participants; very low-certainty evidence), but the evidence is uncertain. There were no data for major and minor complications defined by the Clavien-Dindo classification. Two studies compared nasojejunal feeding with total parenteral nutrition. When the two studies were pooled, the evidence suggested that there may be little to no difference between nasojejunal feeding and TPN in the length of hospital stay (MD 1.07 days, 95% CI -2.64 to 4.79; 2 studies, 242 participants; low-certainty evidence), delayed gastric emptying (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.91; 2 studies, 242 participants; low-certainty evidence) or post pancreatectomy haemorrhage (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.62; 2 studies, 242 participants; low-certainty evidence). TPN may slightly improve rates of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (RR 2.13, 95% CI 1.21 to 3.74; 2 studies, 242 participants; low-certainty evidence). One study reported on major complications (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.94; very low-certainty evidence) and minor complications (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.50; 204 participants; very low-certainty evidence) defined by the Clavien-Dindo classification and there may be little to no difference in effect, but the evidence is uncertain. Two studies compared jejunostomy feeding with oral intake. Of note, one of the studies used a modified surgical technique as part of the intervention. We pooled these studies and found that there may be little to no difference in the length of hospital stay (MD -1.99 days, 95% CI -4.90 to 0.91; 2 studies, 301 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or delayed gastric emptying (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.33 to 2.88; 2 studies, 307 participants; very low-certainty evidence). One study reported on major complications (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.34; 247 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and minor complications (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.15; 247 participants; very low-certainty evidence) defined by the Clavien-Dindo classification, postoperative pancreatic fistula (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.30 to 2.50; 247 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and post pancreatectomy haemorrhage (RR 2.02, 95% CI 0.52 to 7.88; 247 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and there may be little to no difference in effect on these outcomes, but the evidence is uncertain. No difference in mortality was detected in any of the analyses (Clavien-Dindo Grade V) (very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

When compared with parenteral nutrition, enteral nutrition by jejunostomy likely results in a decreased length of hospital stay and may lead to no difference in the incidence of postoperative complications. When compared with parenteral nutrition, enteral feeding by nasojejunal tube may result in no difference in the incidence of postoperative complications or length of hospital stay. When compared with oral nutrition, enteral nutrition by jejunostomy feeding may result in no difference in the incidence of postoperative complications or length of hospital stay, but the evidence is very uncertain. Further high-quality research is required and there are several ongoing studies. Given the number of different nutritional interventions available in the postoperative setting, a network meta-analysis would be more appropriate in future.

Nutritional support via feeding jejunostomy in esophago-gastric cancers: proposal of a common working strategy based on the available evidence

Malnutrition is common in patients affected by esophago-gastric cancers and has a negative impact on both clinical and economic outcomes. Yet not all patients at risk of malnutrition are routinely assessed and receive appropriate support. Further, available research does not provide a mean for standardization of timing, route, and dosage for nutritional support, and this is particularly true for enteral nutrition via feeding jejunostomy. Herein, we provide an overview of the current evidence and use the gathered knowledge as a starting point for a consensus proposal. As a result, we aim to facilitate the development of appropriate and uniformed interventions, thus fulfilling the need for a multimodal therapeutic approach in these set of cancer patients.

Prehabilitation approaches for gastrointestinal cancer surgery: a narrative review

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

Single-Center Randomized Trial Comparing Feeding Jejunostomy with Nasojejunal Tube Placement in Patients Undergoing Transhiatal Esophagectomy Post-Neoadjuvant Therapy for Esophageal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Enteral nutrition is the preferred mode of nutrition following esophagectomy. However, the preferred mode of enteral nutrition (feeding jejunostomy (FJ) vs. nasojejunal (NJ) tube) remains contentious. In this randomized controlled trial (RCT), we compared FJ with NJ tube feeding in terms of safety, feasibility, efficacy, and quality-of-life (QOL) parameters in Indian patients undergoing trans-hiatal esophagectomy (THE) for carcinoma esophagus.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This single-center, two-armed (FJ and NJ tube), non-inferiority RCT was conducted from March 2020 to January 2024. Forty-eight patients underwent THE with posterior-mediastinal-gastric pull-up and were randomized to NJ and FJ arms (24 in each group). The postoperative complications, catheter efficacy, and QOL parameters were compared between the two groups till the 6-week follow-up.

RESULTS

In this RCT, we found no significant difference in the occurrence of catheter-related complications, postoperative complication rate, catheter efficacy, and visual analog pain scores between patients with NJ tube and FJ, following THE for esophageal cancer. There was a significantly better self-reported physical domain QOL score noted in the NJ group, both at the time of discharge (44.7 ± 6.2 vs 39.8 + 5.6; p value, 0.005) and at the 6-week follow-up (55.4 ± 5.2 vs 48.6 ± 4.5; p value, < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Based on the findings of our RCT, we conclude that both enteral access methods (NJ vs. FJ) exhibit comparable incidences of catheter-related complications. The use of NJ tube is a viable alternative to a surgical FJ, has the benefit of early removal, and saves the distress associated with a tube per abdomen.

Improving geriatric outcomes through nutritional and immunonutritional strategies: Focus on surgical setting by a comprehensive evidence review

The aging population worldwide has led to an increased request for surgical interventions in older, geriatric, and frail patients. However, all the physiological changes related to aging are associated with many challenges in the perioperative period, strongly impacting surgical outcomes. Nutritional status plays a pivotal role in determining the resilience of older adults to surgical stress and their ability to recover postoperatively. It is well known that malnutrition, a prevalent concern in geriatrics, is linked to increased adverse outcomes, including morbidity and mortality. Recognizing the significance of preoperative nutritional screening, assessment, diagnosis, intervention, and monitoring is essential for optimizing surgical outcomes. In this context, immunonutrition, which involves the supplementation of specific nutrients to modulate immune responses, emerges as a promising strategy to mitigate the increased inflammatory response observed in geriatric surgical patients. This study reviews current literature on the impact of nutrition and immunonutrition on surgical outcomes in geriatrics, highlighting the potential benefits in terms of reduced complications, enhanced wound healing, and shortened hospital stays. Recognizing and addressing the specific nutritional needs of older persons undergoing surgery is essential for promoting successful surgical outcomes and improving overall quality of life in this vulnerable population.

Development of a nutritional index to evaluate the effectiveness of total parenteral nutrition during the early postoperative period after pancreaticoduodenectomy

Background

Malnutrition leads to adverse effects on the short- and long-term prognosis in patients with periampullary diseases who underwent surgery. Nutritional risk indicators based on albumin and body weight have been developed to evaluate nutritional status and nutritional therapy efficacy, but no standard objective measurement has been devised to evaluate nutritional status during the early period after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). Therefore, this study aimed to assess the efficacy of total parenteral nutrition (TPN) during the early postoperative period after PD.

Methods

We analyzed 28 patients with a periampullary disease-common bile duct cancer, ampulla of Vater cancer, pancreatic head cancer, neuroendocrine tumor, chronic pancreatitis-who have undergone PD from Jan. 1, 2012 to Dec. 31, 2016. For all the patients, TPN was administered from postoperative day (POD) 1 at 25 Kcal/kg ideal body weight. Various nutritional indicators were measured such as Body mass index, nutritional risk index, protein, albumin, prealbumin, C-reactive protein. The volume of skeletal muscle area, muscle density, visceral and subcutaneous fat areas were assessed two times, preoperatively and on POD 7 by CT scan at the 3rd lumbar spine (L3) level.

Results

Average age of the 28 study subjects (18 males and 10 females) was 63.5±9.7 years. Although there is no difference in BMI between preoperative result and POD 7, protein, albumin, and prealbumin levels were significantly lower POD 7 the preoperative (P<0.001), but CRP was higher (P<0.001), and prealbumin and CRP levels were negatively correlated (R=-0.682, P<0.01). Muscle mass increased postoperatively (P=0.02), but the amount of visceral fat decreased (P=0.00). Based on CRP, and muscle density results, muscle, visceral and subcutaneous fat masses did not change after PD.

Conclusions

In order to evaluate the nutritional status accurately after the hepato-biliary radical surgery, we suggest the muscle and fat mass measurement that can adjust the degree of inflammation during the early postoperative period.

Feasibility, tolerance and effectiveness of enteral feeding in critically ill patients in prone position

Aim

To assess the feasibility, tolerance and effectiveness of enteral nutrition in critically ill patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation in the prone position for severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS).

Methods

Prospective observational study conducted in a multidisciplinary critical care unit of a tertiary care hospital from January 2013 until July 2015. All patients with ARDS who received invasive mechanical ventilation in prone position during the study period were included. Patients' demographics, severity of illness (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II) score), baseline markers of nutritional status (subjective global assessment (SGA) and body mass index), details of nutrition delivery during prone and supine hours and outcomes (Length of stay and discharge status) were recorded.

Results

Fifty-one patients met inclusion criteria out of whom four patients were excluded from analysis since they did not receive any enteral nutrition due to severe hemodynamic instability. The mean age of patients was 46.4 ± 12.9 years, with male:female ratio of 7:3. On admission, SGA revealed moderate malnutrition in 51% of patients and the mean APACHE II score was 26.8 ± 9.2. The average duration of prone ventilation per patient was 60.2 ± 30.7 h. All patients received continuous nasogastric/orogastric feeds. The mean calories (kcal/kg/day) and protein (g/kg/day) prescribed in the supine position were 24.5 ± 3.8 and 1.1 ± 0.2 while the mean calories and protein prescribed in prone position were 23.5 ± 3.6 and 1.1 ± 0.2, respectively. Percentage of prescribed calories received by patients in supine position was similar to that in prone position (83.2% vs. 79.6%; P = 0.12). Patients received a higher percentage of prescribed protein in supine compared to prone position (80.8% vs. 75%, P = 0.02). The proportion of patients who received at least 75% of the caloric and protein goals was 37 (78.7%) and 37 (78.7%) in supine and 32 (68.1%) and 21 (44.6%) in prone position.

Conclusion

In critically ill patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation in the prone position, enteral nutrition with nasogastric/orogastric feeding is feasible and well tolerated. Nutritional delivery of calories and proteins in prone position is comparable to that in supine position.

Immunonutrition vs Standard Nutrition for Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (Part 1)

The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of immunonutrition vs standard nutrition in cancer patients treated with surgery. Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, MEDLINE, EBSCOhost, and Web of Science were searched. Sixty-one randomized controlled trials were included. Immunonutrition was associated with a significantly reduced risk of postoperative infectious complications (risk ratio [RR] 0.71 [95% CI, 0.64-0.79]), including a reduced risk of wound infection (RR 0.72 [95% CI, 0.60-0.87]), respiratory tract infection (RR 0.70 [95% CI, 0.59-0.84]), and urinary tract infection (RR 0.69 [95% CI, 0.51-0.94]) as well as a decreased risk of anastomotic leakage (RR 0.70 [95% CI, 0.53-0.91]) and a reduced hospital stay (MD -2.12 days [95% CI -2.72 to -1.52]). No differences were found between the 2 groups with regard to sepsis or all-cause mortality. Subgroup analyses revealed that receiving arginine + nucleotides + ω-3 fatty acids and receiving enteral immunonutrition reduced the rates of wound infection and respiratory tract infection. The application of immunonutrition at 25-30 kcal/kg/d for 5-7 days reduced the rate of respiratory tract infection. Perioperative immunonutrition reduced the rate of wound infection. For malnourished patients, immunonutrition shortened the hospitalization time. Therefore, immunonutrition reduces postoperative infection complications and shortens hospital stays but does not reduce all-cause mortality. Patients who are malnourished before surgery who receive arginine + nucleotides + ω-3 fatty acids (25-30 kcal/kg/d) via the gastrointestinal tract during the perioperative period (5-7 days) may show better clinical efficacy.

Effect of Perioperative Nutritional Supplementation on Postoperative Complications-Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Perioperative carbohydrate loading, increased protein intake, and immunonutrition may decrease postoperative complications. Studies on the topic have led to controversial results.

METHODS

We searched Medline, EMBASE, and CENTRAL up to August 2018 for randomized trials comparing the effect of perioperative nutritional supplements (intervention) versus control on postoperative complications in patients undergoing gastrointestinal cancer surgery. Secondary outcomes included infectious complications and length of hospital stay (LOS). Random effects model was used to estimate the pooled risk ratio (RR) of treatment effects. Pooled mean difference (MD) was used to compare LOS. Heterogeneity was assessed using I². Sources of heterogeneity were explored through subgroup analysis by nutritional supplementation protocol, type of surgery, and type of nutritional supplement. Risk of bias and quality of the evidence were assessed.

RESULTS

Of 3951 articles, we identified 56 trials (n = 6370). Perioperative nutrition was associated with a lower risk of postoperative complications (RR 0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69-0.80); postoperative infections (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.64-0.79, n = 4582); and postoperative non-infectious complications (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.71-0.87, n = 4883). There were no significant heterogeneity outcomes analyzed (I² = 14%, 1%, and 7%, respectively). LOS was shorter for the intervention group, MD - 1.58 days; 95% CI - 1.83 to - 1.32; I² = 89%). Subgroup analysis did not identify sources of heterogeneity. The quality of evidence for postoperative complications was high and for LOS was moderate.

CONCLUSION

Perioperative nutritional optimization decreases the risk of postoperative infectious and non-infectious complications. It also decreases LOS in patients undergoing gastrointestinal cancer surgery, but these findings should be taken with caution given the high heterogeneity.

Enteral versus parenteral nutrition following pancreaticoduodenectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The need for nutritional support following pancreaticoduodenectomy is well recognised due to the high prevalence of malnutrition, but the optimal delivery route is still debated. This meta-analysis evaluated postoperative outcomes in patients receiving enteral or parenteral nutrition.

METHODS

EMBASE, MEDLINE and Cochrane databases were searched to identify randomised controlled trials comparing enteral and parenteral nutrition in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy. The primary outcome measure was delayed gastric emptying (DGE). Secondary outcome measures included length of hospital stay (LOS); postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF); post-pancreaticoduodenectomy haemorrhage (PPH); and infective complications (IC).

RESULTS

Five randomised controlled trials met inclusion criteria and reported on 690 patients (enteral nutrition n = 383; and parenteral nutrition n = 307). Median age was 61.5 years (interquartile range 60.1-63.6). The pooled relative risk (RR) of the primary outcome, DGE, was 0.97 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52-1.81, p = 0.93). There were no statistically significant difference in the secondary outcome measures of POPF (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.42-2.76, p = 0.88); PPH (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.31-1.48, p = 0.33) and infectious complications (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.50-1.17, p = 0.22). However, LOS favoured enteral nutrition, weighted mean difference -1.63 days (95% CI -2.80, -0.46, p = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

EN is associated with a significantly shorter LOS compared to PN in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Complications After Esophagectomy

Esophagectomy is the mainstay for treating esophageal cancers and other pathology. Even with refinements in surgical techniques and the introduction of minimally invasive approaches, the overall morbidity remains formidable. Complications, if not quickly recognized, can lead to significant long-term sequelae and even death. Vigilance with a high degree of suspicion remains the surgeon's greatest ally when caring for a patient who has recently undergone an esophagectomy. In this review, we highlight different approaches in dealing with anastomotic leaks, chyle leaks, cardiopulmonary complications, and later functional issues after esophagectomy.

Effect of Enteral Immunonutrition on Immune, Inflammatory Markers and Nutritional Status in Gastric Cancer Patients Undergoing Gastrectomy: A Randomized Double-Blinded Controlled Trial

Backgrounds: Enteral immunonutrition (EIN) has received increasing attention, however, evidence on its immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory function in gastric cancer patients undergoing gastrectomy is poorly investigated. Objectives of this study were to evaluate the effect of EIN on immune function, inflammation response and nutrition status when compared to standard enteral nutrition (SEN). Methods: Totally 124 gastric cancer patients after gastrectomy were randomized to receive early 5-days postoperative EIN (formula enriched with arginine, glutamine, omega-3 fatty acids and nucleotide), or SEN. The primary end-points were CD4⁺ T-cells, CD3⁺ T-cells as well as counts of CD4⁺/CD8⁺, IgG, IgM, and IgA levels. Second-points included white blood cell (WBC), C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin (PCT), tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels and nutritional index such as serum albumin, prealbumin, and transferrin concentration. Results: There existed significant difference in primary end-points between EIN group and SEN group. The proportion of CD4⁺ T-cells, CD3⁺ T-cells and the counts of CD4⁺/CD8⁺, IgG, IgM, and IgA were higher in EIN group eventually. Meanwhile, the level of WBC, CRP and TNF-α were significantly lower in EIN group finally. But there were no other significant differences in nutritional markers between two groups. Conclusion: Early postoperative EIN significantly improves immune function and inflammatory response in gastric cancer patients undergoing gastrectomy.

Enteral versus parenteral nutrition and enteral versus a combination of enteral and parenteral nutrition for adults in the intensive care unit

BACKGROUND

Critically ill people are at increased risk of malnutrition. Acute and chronic illness, trauma and inflammation induce stress-related catabolism, and drug-induced adverse effects may reduce appetite or increase nausea and vomiting. In addition, patient management in the intensive care unit (ICU) may also interrupt feeding routines. Methods to deliver nutritional requirements include provision of enteral nutrition (EN), or parenteral nutrition (PN), or a combination of both (EN and PN). However, each method is problematic. This review aimed to determine the route of delivery that optimizes uptake of nutrition.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of enteral versus parenteral methods of nutrition, and the effects of enteral versus a combination of enteral and parenteral methods of nutrition, among critically ill adults, in terms of mortality, number of ICU-free days up to day 28, and adverse events.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase on 3 October 2017. We searched clinical trials registries and grey literature, and handsearched reference lists of included studies and related reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled studies (RCTs) and quasi-randomized studies comparing EN given to adults in the ICU versus PN or versus EN and PN. We included participants that were trauma, emergency, and postsurgical patients in the ICU.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We assessed the certainty of evidence with GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 25 studies with 8816 participants; 23 studies were RCTs and two were quasi-randomized studies. All included participants were critically ill in the ICU with a wide range of diagnoses; mechanical ventilation status between study participants varied. We identified 11 studies awaiting classification for which we were unable to assess eligibility, and two ongoing studies.Seventeen studies compared EN versus PN, six compared EN versus EN and PN, two were multi-arm studies comparing EN versus PN versus EN and PN. Most studies reported randomization and allocation concealment inadequately. Most studies reported no methods to blind personnel or outcome assessors to nutrition groups; one study used adequate methods to reduce risk of performance bias.Enteral nutrition versus parenteral nutritionWe found that one feeding route rather than the other (EN or PN) may make little or no difference to mortality in hospital (risk ratio (RR) 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80 to 1.77; 361 participants; 6 studies; low-certainty evidence), or mortality within 30 days (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.13; 3148 participants; 11 studies; low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether one feeding route rather than the other reduces mortality within 90 days because the certainty of the evidence is very low (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.17; 2461 participants; 3 studies). One study reported mortality at one to four months and we did not combine this in the analysis; we reported this data as mortality within 180 days and it is uncertain whether EN or PN affects the number of deaths within 180 days because the certainty of the evidence is very low (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.97; 46 participants).No studies reported number of ICU-free days up to day 28, and one study reported number of ventilator-free days up to day 28 and it is uncertain whether one feeding route rather than the other reduces the number of ventilator-free days up to day 28 because the certainty of the evidence is very low (mean difference, inverse variance, 0.00, 95% CI -0.97 to 0.97; 2388 participants).We combined data for adverse events reported by more than one study. It is uncertain whether EN or PN affects aspiration because the certainty of the evidence is very low (RR 1.53, 95% CI 0.46 to 5.03; 2437 participants; 2 studies), and we found that one feeding route rather than the other may make little or no difference to pneumonia (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.48; 415 participants; 7 studies; low-certainty evidence). We found that EN may reduce sepsis (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.95; 361 participants; 7 studies; low-certainty evidence), and it is uncertain whether PN reduces vomiting because the certainty of the evidence is very low (RR 3.42, 95% CI 1.15 to 10.16; 2525 participants; 3 studies).Enteral nutrition versus enteral nutrition and parenteral nutritionWe found that one feeding regimen rather than another (EN or combined EN or PN) may make little or no difference to mortality in hospital (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.16; 5111 participants; 5 studies; low-certainty evidence), and at 90 days (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.18; 4760 participants; 2 studies; low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether combined EN and PN leads to fewer deaths at 30 days because the certainty of the evidence is very low (RR 1.64, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.54; 409 participants; 3 studies). It is uncertain whether one feeding regimen rather than another reduces mortality within 180 days because the certainty of the evidence is very low (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.55; 120 participants; 1 study).No studies reported number of ICU-free days or ventilator-free days up to day 28. It is uncertain whether either feeding method reduces pneumonia because the certainty of the evidence is very low (RR 1.40, 95% CI 0.91 to 2.15; 205 participants; 2 studies). No studies reported aspiration, sepsis, or vomiting.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found insufficient evidence to determine whether EN is better or worse than PN, or than combined EN and PN for mortality in hospital, at 90 days and at 180 days, and on the number of ventilator-free days and adverse events. We found fewer deaths at 30 days when studies gave combined EN and PN, and reduced sepsis for EN rather than PN. We found no studies that reported number of ICU-free days up to day 28. Certainty of the evidence for all outcomes is either low or very low. The 11 studies awaiting classification may alter the conclusions of the review once assessed.

Meta-analysis of immunonutrition in major abdominal surgery

Background

The objective of this study was to evaluate the potential benefits of immunonutrition in major abdominal surgery with special regard to subgroups and influence of bias.

Methods

A systematic literature search from January 1985 to July 2015 was performed in MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL. Only RCTs investigating immunonutrition in major abdominal surgery were included. Outcomes evaluated were mortality, overall complications, infectious complications and length of hospital stay. The influence of different domains of bias was evaluated in sensitivity analyses. Evidence was rated according to the GRADE Working Group grading of evidence.

Results

A total of 83 RCTs with 7116 patients were included. Mortality was not altered by immunonutrition. Taking all trials into account, immunonutrition reduced overall complications (odds ratio (OR) 0·79, 95 per cent c.i. 0·66 to 0·94; P = 0·01), infectious complications (OR 0·58, 0·51 to 0·66; P &lt; 0·001) and shortened hospital stay (mean difference –1·79 (95 per cent c.i. –2·39 to –1·19) days; P &lt; 0·001) compared with control groups. However, these effects vanished after excluding trials at high and unclear risk of bias. Publication bias seemed to be present for infectious complications (P = 0·002). Non-industry-funded trials reported no positive effects for overall complications (OR 1·13, 0·88 to 1·46; P = 0·34), whereas those funded by industry reported large effects (OR 0·66, 0·48 to 0·91; P = 0·01).

Conclusion

Immunonutrition after major abdominal surgery did not seem to alter mortality (GRADE: high quality of evidence). Immunonutrition reduced overall complications, infectious complications and shortened hospital stay (GRADE: low to moderate). The existence of bias lowers confidence in the evidence (GRADE approach).

Nutrition Support in Adult Trauma Patients

Nutrition supplementation is paramount to the care of severely injured patients. Despite its widespread use in trauma patients, many areas of clinical practice remain controversial. The purpose of this paper is to critically review the literature studying the use of enteral vs parenteral nutrition (PN) and to provide the rationale for early enteral nutrition. Additional controversies confronting clinicians are reviewed, including the use of immune-enhancing agents and the optimal site for enteral nutrition delivery (gastric vs small intestinal). Evidence-based recommendations for clinical practice are presented when available.

Impact of centralization of pancreaticoduodenectomy coupled with fast track recovery protocol: a comparative study from India

BACKGROUND

Fast track strategy in the management of patients undergoing intra-abdominal surgery of various types has emerged as a landmark approach to reduce surgical stress and accelerate recovery. This study was to evaluate the effect of fast track strategy on patients subjected to pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) from an individual unit during transit from low to a high volume center.

METHODS

A total of 142 PD patients who had been subjected to fast track strategy between June 2008 and September 2012 were compared with 46 patients who had received conventional surgery between January 2006 and May 2008. Comparative analysis was made of postoperative complications, postoperative recovery, length of hospital stay and patient readmission requirement.

RESULTS

The patients subjected to fast track strategy had a faster recovery and a shorter hospital stay than those who were treated conventionally (7.8 vs 12.1 days). The intraoperative events like operative blood loss (417.9+/-83.8 vs 997.4+/-151.8 mL, P<0.001), blood transfused (a median of 0 vs 1 unit, P<0.001) and operative time taken (125 vs 245 minutes, P<0.001) were significantly lower in the fast track group. The frequency of pancreatic fistula (4.9% vs 13.0%) and delayed gastric emptying (7.0% vs 17.4%) was also significantly reduced with fast track treatment. Nevertheless, the readmission rate (11.3% vs 6.5%) was found relatively higher within the fast track group. However, increased readmission rates in this study seem to be independent of fast track protocol.

CONCLUSIONS

This preliminary analysis suggests that the fast track approach might be beneficial to the well-being of the patients after PD, for it accelerates the immediate clinical recovery of patients and significantly shortens their length of hospital stay.

Enteral nutrition versus parenteral nutrition after major abdominal surgery in patients with gastrointestinal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

To clarify the benefits of enteral nutrition (EN) versus total parenteral nutrition (TPN) in patients with gastrointestinal cancer who underwent major abdominal surgery. Medline, Cochrane, EMBASE, and Google Scholar were searched for studies published until July 10, 2015, reporting outcomes between the two types of postoperative nutritional support. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. A χ2-based test of homogeneity was performed using Cochran's Q statistic and I2. A total of 2540 patients (1268 who received EN and 1272 who received TPN; average age range: 58.3–67.7 years) from 18 RCTs were included for assessment. Patients who received EN had shorter lengths of hospital stay (pooled difference in mean=−1.74, 95% CI −2.41 to −1.07, p<0.001, shorter time to flatus (pooled difference in mean=−1.27, 95% CI −1.69 to −0.85, p<0.001), and significantly greater increases in albumin levels (pooled difference in mean=−1.33, 95% CI −2.18 to −0.47, p=0.002) compared with those who received TPN after major abdominal surgery, based on a random-effects model of analysis. EN after major abdominal surgery provided better outcomes compared with TPN in patients with gastrointestinal cancer.

Immunonutrition Support for Patients Undergoing Surgery for Gastrointestinal Malignancy: Preoperative, Postoperative, or Perioperative? A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Enteral immunonutrition (EIN) has been established to be as a significantly important modality to prevent the postoperative infectious and noninfectious complications, enhance the immunity of host, and eventually improve the prognosis of gastrointestinal (GI) cancer patients undergoing surgery. However, different support routes, which are the optimum option, remain unclear. To evaluate the effects of different EIN support regimes for patients who underwent selective surgery for resectable GI malignancy, a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted. A search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) was electronically searched until the end of December 2014. Moreover, we manually checked reference lists of eligible trials and review and retrieval unpublished literature. RCTs which investigated the comparative effects of EIN versus standard enteral nutrition (EN) or different EIN regimes were included if the clinical outcomes information can be extracted from it. A total of 27 RCTs were incorporated into this study. Pair-wise meta-analyses suggested that preoperative (relative risk [RR], 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.43-0.78), postoperative (RR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.52-0.76), and perioperative EIN methods (RR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.34-0.62) reduced incidence of postoperative infectious complications compared with standard EN. Moreover, perioperative EIN (RR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.44-0.95) reduced the incidence of postoperative noninfectious complications, and the postoperative (mean difference [MD], -2.38; 95% CI, -3.4 to -1.31) and perioperative EIN (MD, -2.64; 95% CI, -3.28 to -1.99) also shortened the length of postoperative hospitalization compared with standard EN. NMA found that EIN support effectively improved the clinical outcomes of patients who underwent selective surgery for GI cancer compared with standard EN. Our results suggest EIN support is promising alternative for operation management in comparison with standard EN, and perioperative EIN regime is the optimum option for managing clinical status of patients who underwent selective surgery for GI cancer.

Effect of early enteral combined with parenteral nutrition in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy

AIM: To investigate the effect of early enteral nutrition (EEN) combined with parenteral nutritional support in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD).

METHODS: From January 2006, all patients were given EEN combined with parenteral nutrition (PN) (EEN/PN group, n = 107), while patients prior to this date were given total parenteral nutrition (TPN) (TPN group, n = 67). Venous blood samples were obtained for a nutrition-associated assessment and liver function tests on the day before surgery and 6 d after surgery. The assessment of clinical outcome was based on postoperative complications. Follow-up for infectious and noninfectious complications was carried out for 30 d after hospital discharge. Readmission within 30 d after discharge was also recorded.

RESULTS: Compared with the TPN group, a significant decrease in prealbumin (PAB) (P = 0.023) was seen in the EEN/PN group. Total bilirubin (TB), direct bilirubin (DB) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) were significantly decreased on day 6 in the EEN/PN group (P = 0.006, 0.004 and 0.032, respectively). The rate of grade I complications, grade II complications and the length of postoperative hospital stay in the EEN/PN group were significantly decreased (P = 0.036, 0.028 and 0.021, respectively), and no hospital mortality was observed in our study. Compared with the TPN group (58.2%), the rate of infectious complications in the EEN/PN group (39.3%) was significantly decreased (P = 0.042). Eleven cases of delayed gastric emptying were noted in the TPN group, and 6 cases in the EEN/PN group. The rate of delayed gastric emptying and hyperglycemia was significantly reduced in the EEN/PN group (P = 0.031 and P = 0.040, respectively).

CONCLUSION: Early enteral combined with PN can greatly improve liver function, reduce infectious complications and delayed gastric emptying, and shorten postoperative hospital stay in patients undergoing PD.

The role of the enteral route and the composition of feeds in the nutritional support of malnourished surgical patients

In surgical patients, malnutrition is an important risk factor for post-operative complications. In undernourished patients undergoing major gastrointestinal procedures, preoperative enteral nutrition (EN) should be preferred whenever feasible. It may be given either orally or by feeding tubes, depending on patient compliance. Early oral intake after surgery should be encouraged, but if an insufficient postoperative oral intake is anticipated, tube feeding should be initiated as soon as possible. The use of immunomodulating formulas offers significant advantages when compared to standard feeds and the positive results on postoperative complications seem independent from the baseline nutritional status. In malnourished patients, the optimal timing and dose of immunonutrition is unclear, but consistent data suggest that they should be treated peri-operatively for at least two weeks.

A meta-analysis of the effect of combinations of immune modulating nutrients on outcome in patients undergoing major open gastrointestinal surgery

BACKGROUND

Immune modulating nutrition (IMN) has been shown to reduce complications after major surgery, but strong evidence to recommend its routine use is still lacking.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the impact of IMN combinations on postoperative infectious and noninfectious complications, length of hospital stay, and mortality in patients undergoing major open gastrointestinal surgery.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials published between January 1980 and February 2011 comparing isocaloric and isonitrogenous enteral IMN combinations with standard diet in patients undergoing major open gastrointestinal surgery were included. The quality of evidence and strength of recommendation for each postoperative outcome were assessed using the GRADE approach and the outcome measures were analyzed with RevMan 5.1 software (Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark).

RESULTS

Twenty-six randomized controlled trials enrolling 2496 patients (1252 IMN and 1244 control) were included. The meta-analysis suggests strong evidence in support of decrease in the incidence of postoperative infectious [risk ratio (RR) (95% confidence interval [CI]): 0.64 (0.55, 0.74)] and length of hospital stay [mean difference (95% CI): -1.88 (-2.91, -0.84 days)] in those receiving IMN. Even though significant benefit was observed for noninfectious complications [RR (95% CI): 0.82 (0.71, 0.95)], the quality of evidence was low. There was no statistically significant benefit on mortality [RR (95% CI): 0.83 (0.49, 1.41)].

CONCLUSIONS

IMN is beneficial in reducing postoperative infectious and noninfectious complications and shortening hospital stay in patients undergoing major open gastrointestinal surgery.

Enteral vs total parenteral nutrition following major upper gastrointestinal surgery

A best evidence topic in surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was in patients undergoing elective major upper gastrointestinal surgery requiring post-operative nutritional support, does enteral feeding as compared to total parenteral feeding confer any clinical benefits. Thirty-two papers were identified by a search of the Medline and Embase databases, of which seven represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group, study group, relevant outcomes and results of these papers were tabulated. All seven of these papers were randomised controlled trials which demonstrated enteral nutrition to be associated with shorter hospital stay, lower incidence of severe or infectious complications, lower severity of complications and decreased cost as compared to parenteral nutrition. For patients undergoing elective major upper gastrointestinal surgery requiring post-operative nutritional support, enteral feeding should be considered as the most desirable form of post-operative feeding.

Perioperative immunonutrition for gastrointestinal cancer: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

To improve the clinical outcome, immunonutrition (IN) was usually used in the patients undergoing elective gastrointestinal caner surgery. However, its effectiveness remains uncertain.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between 1995 and 2011 were identified and extracted by two reviewers independently from electronic databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. The quality of included trials was assessed according to the handbook for Cochrane reviewer (V5.0.1). Statistical analysis was carried out with RevMan software.

RESULTS

Nineteen RCTs involving a total of 2331 patients were included in our meta-analysis. The results showed perioperative IN significantly reduced length of hospital stay (WMD, -2.62; 95% CI, -3.26 to -1.97; P < 0.01) and morbidity of postoperative infectious complication (RR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.60; P < 0.01) compared with standard diet. Moreover, perioperative IN also significantly decreased morbidity of postoperative non-infectious complication in comparison with standard diet (RR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.97; P = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Perioperative IN is effective and safe to reduce postoperative infection, non-infection complication and length of hospital stay.

Immunonutrition in high-risk surgical patients: a systematic review and analysis of the literature

BACKGROUND

Immunomodulating diets (IMDs) have been demonstrated to improve immune function and modulate inflammation. However, the clinical benefit of these diets in patients undergoing elective surgery is controversial. The goal of this meta-analysis was to determine the impact of IMDs on the clinical outcomes of high-risk patients undergoing elective surgery.

METHODS

The review included prospective, controlled, clinical trials that compared the clinical outcome of elective surgical patients who were randomized to receive an IMD or a control enteral diet. Studies were stratified according to the type of IMD and the timing of the initiation of the IMD. Data were abstracted on study design, study size, patient population, and IMD used. The outcomes of interest were the acquisition of new infections, wound complications, length of hospital stay (LOS), and mortality. Meta-analytic techniques were used to analyze the data.

RESULTS

Twenty-one relevant studies were identified, which included a total of 1918 patients. Immunonutrition significantly reduced the risk of acquired infections, wound complications, and LOS. The mortality rate was 1% in both groups. The treatment effect was similar regardless of the timing of the commencement of the IMD. The benefits of immunonutrition required both arginine and fish oil.

CONCLUSIONS

An immunomodulating enteral diet containing increased amounts of both arginine and fish oil should be considered in all high-risk patients undergoing major surgery. Although the optimal timing cannot be determined from this study, it is suggested that immunonutrition be initiated preoperatively when feasible.

Comparison of enteral nutrition with combined enteral and parenteral nutrition in post-pancreaticoduodenectomy patients: a pilot study

Background

Many clinical studies have demonstrated that early postoperative enteral nutrition (EN) improved the postroperative course. Post-pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), patients tend to suffer from postoperative nausea, abdominal distention, and diarrhoea, causing difficulty in the introduction of EN. In this pilot study, we investigated the appropriate nutritional mode post-pancreatic surgery.

Methods

Between October 2006 and March 2007 2 postoperative nutritional methods were implemented in 17 patients in a prospective single-centere study. Eight patients received only enteral nutrition (EN group) and 9 patients received enteral nutrition combined with parenteral nutrition (EN + PN group).

Results

There were no differences in the patient characteristics and postoperative morbidity between the 2 groups. The rate of discontinuance of enteral feeding was significantly high in the EN group, and the duration of enteral feeding was significantly longer in the EN + PN group. The central venous line was retained for a significantly longer period in the EN + PN group, but there was no difference in the frequency of catheter-related infection between the 2 groups.

Conclusion

EN combined with PN is more adequate for patients after pancreatic surgery.

Enteral nutrition and biliopancreatic diversion effectively minimize impacts of gastroparesis after pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

Since gastroparesis is unavoidable in a certain proportion of patients after pancreaticoduodenectomy, measures to avoid its occurrence or at least minimize its impact are needed. A prospective randomized trial was performed to test the effectiveness of biliopancreatic diversion with modified Roux-en-Y gastrojejunostomy reconstruction and of enteral feeding to minimize impacts of gastroparesis after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

METHODS

In total, 247 patients with periampullary tumors were randomized at the time of pancreaticoduodenectomy to have either (1) modified Roux-en-Y gastrojejunostomy reconstruction (by creating a side-to-side jejunojejunostomy between afferent and efferent loop and closing the afferent loop with a TA-30-3.5 stapler) and insertion of a jejunostomy feeding tube (modified group) or (2) conventional gastric bypass (control group). Outcomes including complications, duration of nasogastric tube placement, and length of hospital stay were followed prospectively.

RESULTS

Gastroparesis occurred in 20 patients (16.3%) in the modified group and 27 patients in the control group (21.7%, P = 0.27). However, the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery grades of gastroparesis were significantly lower in the modified group (10A, 5B, 5C) than in the control group (4A, 5B, 18C, P = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Modified procedure does not reduce the risk of gastroparesis but appears to reduce the severity when it occurs.

Feeding patients following pancreaticoduodenectomy: a UK national survey

INTRODUCTION

Providing nutrition for patients following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is vital but can be challenging. Due to the lack of UK national guidelines for the provision of nutrition and nutritional pre-operative assessment regarding PD, a national survey was conducted.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A questionnaire was sent to the Department of Nutrition and Dietetics at each of the 31 specialist pancreatic centres listed with the Pancreatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Questions were asked regarding the nutritional assessment and treatment of patients undergoing classical PD and pylorus-preserving PD (PPPD) resections.

RESULTS

Twenty-two centres responded to the questionnaire. With regard to PD and PPPD, 82% routinely feed patients following resection, 32% have a regimen for staring feeds, 18% carry out pre-operative nutritional assessment, five centres have funding for an hepatobiliary dietition, and only four centres have a specialist hepatobiliary dietition employed. There was no consensus regarding the type or route of feeding, and at least one centre reported using parenteral nutrition exclusively.

CONCLUSIONS

Very few centres in the UK have funding for a hepatobiliary dietition. Hence pre-operative nutritional assessment in patients undergoing PD and PPPD does not receive much input. Although the importance of postoperative feeding in these patients is appreciated in all major units, there is no consensus with regards to feeding regimens. The authors hope this observational study will address these issues with this important message and stimulate further study in this area.

Effects of parenteral glutamine supplementation on modulating the immune response in rats undergoing a total gastrectomy

The present study investigated the effect of parenteral glutamine (Gln) supplementation on cellular adhesion molecule expression and release of chemokines responsible for inflammatory cell recruitment in rats undergoing a total gastrectomy. Normal rats with internal jugular catheters were assigned to one control group and two experimental groups and received total parenteral nutrition (TPN). A total gastrectomy was performed in the experimental groups, whereas the control group received a sham operation (Sham). The TPN solutions were isonitrogenous and identical in nutrient composition except that the Sham group and one of the experimental group received conventional (Conv) TPN solution, whereas the other experimental group received 25% of the amino acid nitrogen as Gln. Half of the rats in each group were killed 1 or 3 d after surgery or the Sham to examine their immune response. The results showed that the surgery produced higher polymorphonuclear leucocyte CD11b/CD18 expressions, and Gln supplementation lowered CD11b/CD18 expressions compared with the Conv group post-operatively. The levels of monocyte chemotactic protein-1 and macrophage inflammatory protein-2 in peritoneal lavage fluid were higher in the Gln group than those in the Conv group 1 d post-operatively; these chemotactic proteins had returned to the levels comparable with those in the Sham group on post-operative day 3. These results suggest that Gln supplementation attenuated polymorphonuclear leucocyte integrin expression. In addition, Gln-enriched parenteral nutrition induced an earlier more intensive and rapid immune response to injury than the Conv parenteral nutrition after a total gastrectomy.

Effects of parenteral structured lipid emulsion on modulating the inflammatory response in rats undergoing a total gastrectomy

OBJECTIVES

Structured lipid emulsion improves the nitrogen balance and is rapidly cleared from the blood of moderately catabolic patients. However, the effects of structured lipids on inflammatory reactions during major surgery are not clear. This study investigated the effect of a parenteral structured triacylglycerol emulsion on leukocyte adhesion molecule expression and inflammatory mediator production in rats undergoing a total gastrectomy.

METHODS

Normal rats with internal jugular catheters were assigned to three experimental groups and received total parenteral nutrition. At the same time, a total gastrectomy was performed on the experimental groups. The total parenteral nutrition solutions were isonitrogenous and identical in nutrient compositions except for differences in the composition of the fat emulsion. Group 1 received a conventional fat emulsion with long-chain triacylglycerols (LCTs), group 2 received a physical mixture of medium-chain triacylglycerols (MCTs) and LCTs (MCT/LCT), and group 3 received structured lipids composed of MCTs and LCTs (STG). Half of the rats in each respective group were sacrificed 1 d and the other half 3 d after surgery to examine the analytical parameters.

RESULTS

Plasma cholesterol and free fatty acid levels in the STG group were lower than those in the other groups after surgery. The STG group had lower leukocyte CD11a/CD18 expressions than the MCT/LCT group 3 d after surgery, and CD11b/CD18 expressions in the STG group were lower than those in the LCT group on postoperative days. The STG group had higher monocyte chemotactic protein-1 and macrophage inflammatory protein-2 levels in peritoneal lavage fluid than did the other two groups.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that, compared with the LCT and MCT/LCT groups, rats administered STG had lower plasma lipid concentrations and leukocyte integrin expressions. In addition, STG administration may cause increased recruiting of neutrophils and monocytes at the site of injury and enhance antipathogenicity in rats undergoing a total gastrectomy.

Enteral versus parenteral nutrition after gastrointestinal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials in the English literature

BACKGROUND

Although previous studies recommend the use of enteral nutrition (EN), the benefit of EN after elective gastrointestinal surgery has not been comprehensively demonstrated as through a meta-analysis. Our aim is to determine whether enteral nutrition is more beneficial than parenteral nutrition.

METHODS

A search was conducted on Medline, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library electronic databases, and bibliographic reviews. The trials were based on randomization, gastrointestinal surgery, and the reporting of at least one of the following end points: any complication, any infectious complication, mortality, wound infection and dehiscence, anastomotic leak, intraabdominal abscess, pneumonia, respiratory failure, urinary tract infection, renal failure, any adverse effect, and duration of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine trials, which included 2,552 patients, met the criteria. EN was beneficial in the reduction of any complication (relative risk (RR), 0.85; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.74-0.99; P = 0.04), any infectious complication (RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.56-0.86; P = 0.001), anastomotic leak (RR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.47-0.95; P = 0.03), intraabdominal abscess (RR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.41-0.95; P = 0.03), and duration of hospital stay (weighted mean difference, -0.81; 95% CI, -1.25-0.38; P = 0.02). There were no clear benefits in any of the other complications.

CONCLUSION

The present findings would lead us to recommend the use of EN rather than PN when possible and indicated.

L-arginine reduces cell proliferation and ornithine decarboxylase activity in patients with colorectal adenoma and adenocarcinoma

PURPOSE

Evidence suggests that the majority of colorectal carcinomas arise from adenomas, and L-arginine suppresses colorectal tumorigenesis. We suppose that L-arginine may inhibit the process of carcinogenesis from colorectal adenoma to adenocarcinoma. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of L-arginine on the formation and development of colorectal tumors.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

We selected 60 patients with colorectal cancer and 60 patients with colorectal adenoma (CRA) and divided them into four groups of 30 patients each. We gave 30 g (120 mL) of L-arginine everyday for 3 days to the test groups, whereas L-arginine was substituted by 5% glucose in the control groups. The expression of the proliferating cell nuclear antigen, survivin, and nitric oxide synthase was examined immunohistochemically, and ornithine decarboxylase (ODC) activity was examined spectrophotometrically. Serum nitric oxide (NO) was detected by the Griess assay.

RESULTS

In patients with CRA, the proliferating cell nuclear antigen and survivin labeling indexes and ODC activity of the tumor and paratumor mucosa in the L-arginine-treated group after L-arginine treatment were significantly lower as compared with the corresponding pretreatment values (P < 0.01). Moreover, inducible nitric oxide synthase expression in the tumor markedly increased after L-arginine treatment (P < 0.05). Serum NO levels in the patients with colorectal cancer were markedly higher than those in the patients with CRA, and L-arginine treatment was responsible for this increase (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that L-arginine can restrain crypt cell hyperproliferation and the expression of survivin, an inhibitor of apoptosis protein. This suggests that L-arginine can block the formation and development of colorectal tumors, and this effect might be related to the increased serum NO concentration and decreased ODC activity.