Peri-operative nutritional management

Impact of Artificial Nutrition on Postoperative Complications

Malnutrition is common in surgical cancer patients and it is widely accepted that it can adversely affect their postoperative outcome. Assessing the nutritional status of every patient, in particular care of elderly and cancer patients, is a crucial feature of the therapeutic pathway in order to optimize every strategy. Evidence exists that the advantages of perioperative nutrition are more significant in malnourished patients submitted to major surgery. For patients recognized as malnourished, preoperative nutrition therapies are indicated; the choice between parenteral and enteral nutrition is still controversial in perioperative malnourished surgical cancer patients, although enteral nutrition seems to have the best risk–benefit ratio. Early oral nutrition after surgery is advisable, when feasible, and should be administered in all the patients undergoing elective major surgery, if compliant. In patients with high risk for postoperative infections, perioperative immunonutrition has been proved in some ways to be effective, even if operations including those for cancer have to be delayed.

Effect of combined parenteral and enteral nutrition versus enteral nutrition alone for critically ill patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The increased mortality rate and other poor prognosis make malnutrition a serious issue for adult critically ill patients in intensive care unit care. This study was to compare outcomes between combined parenteral and enteral nutrition and enteral nutrition alone for adult critically ill patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The PubMed (June 30, 2018), EMBASE (June 30, 2018), and Cochrane library databases (June 30, 2018) were searched systematically. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of comparing combined PN and EN with EN alone were eligible. Relative risks (RRs), mean differences (MDs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for dichotomous and continuous outcomes.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs involving 5360 patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared with combined PN and EN, fewer respiratory infections (RR, 1.13 [95% CI 1.01-1.25]) and shorter length of days at hospital (MD, 1.83 [95% CI 1.05-2.62]) were observed in EN alone group. And no significant differences were found on hospital mortality (RR, 0.91 [95% CI 0.74-1.12]), length of days in ICU (MD, -0.23 [95% CI -1.79 to 1.32]), duration of ventilatory support (MD, -1.10 [95% CI -3.15 to 0.94]), albumin (MD, -0.04 [95% CI, -0.12 to 0.21]), or prealbumin (MD, -0.77 [95% CI -0.22 to 1.75]) between theses 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

Receiving EN alone decreased the respiratory infections and length of days at hospital for critically ill patients. Combined PN and EN did not add up the potential risk from PN and EN on hospital mortality, length of days in ICU, duration of ventilatory support, albumin, and prealbumin.

Contemporary enteral and parenteral nutrition before surgery for gastrointestinal cancers: a literature review

Background

Gastrointestinal cancers are among the most recognised oncological diseases in well-developed countries. Tumours located in the digestive tract may cause the fast occurrence of malnutrition.

Main text

The perioperative period is a special time for systemic metabolism. Thanks to published guidelines, early universal control nutritional status before treatment, patients may have a chance to get suitable nutritional intervention. Although the first line of the intervention—nutritional consultation as well as the fortification of a diet and oral nutritional support (ONS)—is not debatable, in a case of inability of undergoing an oral feeding, the choice of the way of administration in patients before a surgery may represent a serious clinical obstacle.

Conclusions

Although there is broad agreement in the staging, classification, and role of surgery and nutritional status for outcomes of treatment of gastrointestinal cancers, there the way of nutritional intervention in patients with gastrointestinal cancer are still discussed.

Perioperative nutritional support of patients undergoing pancreatic surgery in the age of ERAS

OBJECTIVE

The results achieved through the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) approach in gastrointestinal surgery have led to its enthusiastic acceptance in pancreatic surgery. However, the ERAS program also involves an early oral feeding that is not always feasible after pancreatoduodenectomy. The aim of this review was to investigate in the literature whether the difficulty with early oral feeding in these patients was adequately balanced by perioperative enteral or parenteral nutritional support as recommended by the European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) guidelines or whether these recommendations have lost value in the "bundle" of the ERAS.

METHODS

We reanalyzed both ESPEN guidelines and literature regarding the ERAS program in surgical pancreatic patients.

RESULTS

There was a high prevalence of malnutrition (and consequently of postoperative complications) in patients with pancreatic cancer, and there is evidence that many of these patients should be candidates for perioperative nutritional support according to ESPEN guidelines. The start of oral fluid and solid feeding was quite variable in literature reporting the use of ERAS in pancreatic cancer surgery, with a consistent gap between the recommended and the effective start of both the feedings. The use of nasogastric/jejunal tube or of a needle-catheter jejunostomy was discouraged by the ERAS guidelines but their use could prove beneficial in patients who are recognized at high risk for postoperative complications according to the scores available in the literature.

CONCLUSION

The current practice of the ERAS program in these patients appears to neglect some ESPEN recommendations. On the other hand, both ESPEN and ERAS recommendations could be combined for a supplemental benefit for the patient.

Enteral and parenteral nutrition in the perioperative period: state of the art

Nutritional support of surgical and critically ill patients has undergone significant advances since 1936 when Studley demonstrated a direct relationship between pre-operative weight loss and operative mortality. The advent of total parenteral nutrition followed by the extraordinary progress in parenteral and enteral feedings, in addition to the increased knowledge of cellular biology and biochemistry, have allowed clinicians to treat malnutrition and improve surgical patient’s outcomes. We reviewed the literature for the current status of perioperative nutrition comparing parenteral nutrition with enteral nutrition. In a surgical patient with established malnutrition, nutritional support should begin at least 7–10 days prior to surgery. Those patients in whom eating is not anticipated beyond the first five days following surgery should receive the benefits of early enteral or parenteral feeding depending on whether the gut can be used. Compared to parenteral nutrition, enteral nutrition is associated with fewer complications, a decrease in the length of hospital stay, and a favorable cost-benefit analysis. In addition, many patients may benefit from newer enteral formulations such as Immunonutrition as well as disease-specific formulations.

Novel nutritional substrates in surgery

Pharmaco-nutrients have beneficial effects on protective and immunological mechanisms in patients undergoing surgery, which are important for recovery after injury and in combating infectious agents. The aim of this review article was to outline the potential of the administration of nutritional substrates to surgical patients and the underlying mechanisms that make them particularly important in peri-operative care. Surgery causes a stress response, which has catabolic effects on the body's substrate stores. The amino acid glutamine is a stimulating agent for immune cells. It activates protective mechanisms through its role as a precursor for antioxidants and it improves the barrier function of the gut. Arginine also enhances the function of the immune system, since it is the substrate for T-lymphocytes. Furthermore, n-3 PUFA stabilise surgery-induced hyper-inflammation. Taurine is another substrate that may counteract the negative effects of surgical injury on acid–base balance and osmotic balance. These pharmaco-nutrients rapidly become deficient under the influence of surgical stress. Supplementation of these nutrients in surgical patients may restore their protective and immune-enhancing actions and improve clinical outcome. Moreover, pre-operative fasting is still common practice in the Western world, although fasting has a negative effect on the patient's condition and the recovery after surgery. This may be counteracted by a simple intervention such as administering a carbohydrate-rich supplement just before surgery. In conclusion, there are various nutritional substrates that may be of great value in improving the condition of the surgical patient, which may be beneficial for post-operative recovery.