Immunonutrition in the esophagectomy patient: food for thought

Perioperative immunonutrition intervention on postoperative outcomes among gynecological cancer patients under enhanced recovery after surgery setting: A study protocol of explanatory mixed method study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) has shown significant improvements in postoperative outcomes and a reduction in complications, while immunonutrition (IMN) has been shown to modulate the immune system and inflammatory response. However, many studies have overlooked the crucial aspects of nutrition status and patient perception within the intervention approach. This study aims to investigate the efficacy and explore patients' acceptance of the IMN intervention in postoperative outcomes among gynecological cancer (GC) patients under the ERAS framework.

METHODS

This two-phase explanatory sequential mixed-method study design comprises an open-labeled randomized control trial and a qualitative study. The GC participants will be randomly allocated into intervention and control groups. Malaysian adults scheduled for elective surgery will be recruited, with the intervention group receiving IMN for five days before and seven days after elective surgery, while the control group undergoes routine nutritional care before the operation. Both groups will adhere to the ERAS protocol. An explanatory qualitative study will be conducted among GC patients to elucidate their expectations following the trial. Study outcomes include hospitalization duration, change in nutrition status, biochemical profile, functional status, and quality of life. Additionally, the secondary outcome focuses on evaluating the perception of the intervention approach. Quantitative and qualitative data will be analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis and through inductive thematic analysis, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Implementing perioperative IMN intervention within the ERAS framework may contribute to the preservation of better nutrition status and the provision of sufficient dietary intake to support postoperative recovery, and promote better surgical outcomes. Patients' perceptions play a pivotal role in enhancing understanding of disease management and adherence to the intervention approach.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT06039306.

Effect of perioperative immunonutrition intervention among gynecological cancer patients: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Gynecologic cancer (GC) patients often experience systemic inflammation, malnutrition, and compromised postoperative outcomes. This systematic review aims to comprehensively synthesize existing data regarding the impact of perioperative immunonutrition (IMN) intervention on GC patients.

METHODS

The databases of CENTRAL, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were used to conduct a literature search, supplemented by internet search engines and manual searches. Publications released between January 2009 and October 2023 was identified, reviewed, and data extracted.

RESULTS

The review encompasses six studies involving 712 patients, comprising two randomized controlled trials (RCTs), two prospective studies, and two retrospective cohort studies. Three studies prescribed IMN perioperatively; two pre-operatively and one post-operatively. Four out of six studies reported less post-operative infection and complications. Two studies reported shorter hospitalization using the IMN formula. One study reported a longer hospitalization with IMN supplementation. Overall survival showed no significant difference in the two studies. Four studies reported positive modulation of inflammatory markers and lymphocytes as outcomes, with IMN formulas.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Perioperative IMN emerge as a promising intervention, demonstrating notable benefits included shortened hospitalization as well and positive modulation of inflammatory markers.

Network meta-analysis of the optimal time of applying enteral immunonutrition in esophageal cancer patients receiving esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Enteral immunonutrition (EIN) has been extensively applied in cancer patients; however, its role in esophageal cancer (EC) patients receiving esophagectomy remains unclear. We performed this network meta-analysis to investigate the impact of EIN on patients undergoing surgery for EC and further determine the optimal time of applying EIN.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, and China National Knowledgement Infrastructure (CNKI) to identify eligible studies. Categorical data was expressed as the odds ratio with 95% confidence interval (CI), and continuous data was expressed as mean difference (MD) with 95% CI. Meta-analysis with head-to-head approach and network meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of EIN on clinical outcomes using RevMan 5.3 and ADDIS V.1.16.8 software. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was calculated to rank all nutritional regimes.

RESULTS

Total 14 studies involving 1071 patients were included. Meta-analysis with head-to-head approach indicated no difference between EIN regardless of the application time and standard EN (SEN); however, subgroup analyses found that postoperative EIN was associated with decreased incidence of total infectious complications (OR = 0.47; 95%CI = 0.26 to 0.84; p = 0.01) and pneumonia (OR = 0.47; 95%CI = 0.25 to 0.90; p = 0.02) and shortened the length of hospitalization (LOH) (MD =  - 1.01; 95%CI =  - 1.44 to - 0.57; p < 0.001) compared to SEN, which were all supported by network meta-analyses. Ranking probability analysis further indicated that postoperative EIN has the highest probability of being the optimal option in terms of these three outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative EIN should be preferentially utilized in EC patients undergoing esophagectomy because it has optimal potential of decreasing the risk of total infectious complications and pneumonia and shortening LOH.

OSF REGISTRATION NUMBER

10.17605/OSF.IO/KJ9UY.

Could Immunonutrition Help in the Fight against COVID-19 in Cancer Patient?

The rapid and widespread global pandemic of 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has had unprecedented negative health and economic impacts. Immune responses play a key role in the development of COVID-19, including the disruption of immune balance and cytokine storms caused by excessive inflammatory responses. Due to the effects of cancer itself and treatment, patients often accompanied by immunosuppression appear to be a susceptible population for COVID-19. Worryingly, COVID-19 with cancer is associated with a poor prognosis. Cancer patients are a vulnerable group, threatened by COVID-19, finding a way to combat COVID-19 for them is urgent. Immunonutrition is closely related to balance and strong immune function. Supplementary immunonutrition can improve the immune function and inflammatory response of cancer patients after surgery, which provides evidence for the role of immunonutrition in combating COVID-19. We reviewed possible mechanisms of immunonutrition against COVID-19, including enhancing immune cell function, increasing immune cell count, ameliorating excessive inflammatory response, and regulating gut microbiota. Immunonutrition supplementation in cancer patients may be beneficial to enhance immune function in the early stage of COVID-19 infection and control excessive inflammatory response in the late stage. Therefore, immunonutrition is a potential strategy for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 in cancer.

Enteral immunonutrition versus enteral nutrition for patients undergoing oesophagectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

According to retrospective studies, oesophageal carcinoma is the second deadliest gastrointestinal cancer after gastric cancer. Enteral immunonutrition (EIN) has been increasingly used to enhance host immunity and relieve the inflammatory response of patients undergoing oesophagectomy; however, conclusions across studies remain unclear. We aimed to evaluate the effect of EIN on the clinical and immunological outcomes of patients undergoing oesophagectomy.

METHODS

Four electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library) were used to search articles in peer-reviewed, English-language journals. The mean difference, relative risk or standard mean difference with 95% confidence interval were calculated. Heterogeneity was assessed by the Cochran's Q test and I2 statistic combined with the corresponding P-value. The analysis was carried out with RevMan 5.3.

RESULTS

Six articles were finally included, with a total of 320 patients with oesophageal cancer. The meta-analysis results showed that EIN did not improve clinical outcomes (such as infectious complications, pneumonia, surgical site infection, anastomotic leak and postoperative hospital stay) or immune indices [referring to C-reactive protein, interleukin (IL)-6, IL-8, tumour necrosis factor-α]. Descriptive analysis suggested that EIN also increased the serum concentrations of IgG and the percentage of the B-cell fraction. Thus, its impact on IL-8 and IL-6 remains inconsistent.

CONCLUSIONS

The early-stage impact of EIN on immunological status in patients undergoing oesophagectomy is still unclear. According to the results of this meta-analysis, whether EIN could improve the clinical outcomes or biological status after oesophagectomy compared to standard enteral nutrition is uncertain. Since the impact of EIN is unclear, current guidelines that strongly advise the use of EIN should be changed, as the utility of EIN is very uncertain. More appropriately powered clinical studies are warranted to confirm its effectiveness.