Dataset Information

Is early oral feeding after gastric cancer surgery feasible? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

ABSTRACT:

Aim

To assess the feasibility and safety of early oral feeding (EOF) after gastrectomy for gastric cancer through a systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials.

Methods

A literature search in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane library databases was performed for eligible studies published between January 1995 and March 2014. Systematic review was carried out to identify randomized controlled trials comparing EOF and traditional postoperative oral feeding after gastric cancer surgery. Meta-analyses were performed by either a fixed effects model or a random effects model according to the heterogeneity using RevMan 5.2 software.

Results

Six studies remained for final analysis. Included studies were published between 2005 and 2013 reporting on a total of 454 patients. No significant differences were observed for postoperative complication (RR?=?0.95; 95%CI, 0.70 to 1.29; P?=?0.75), the tolerability of oral feeding (RR?=?0.98; 95%CI, 0.91 to 1.06; P?=?0.61), readmission rate (RR?=?1; 95%CI, 0.30 to 3.31; P?=?1.00) and incidence of anastomotic leakage (RR?=?0.31; 95%CI, 0.01 to 7.30; P?=?0.47) between two groups. EOF after gastrectomy for gastric cancer was associated with significant shorter duration of the hospital stay (WMD?=?-2.36; 95%CI, -3.37 to -1.34; P<0.0001) and time to first flatus (WMD?=?-19.94; 95%CI, -32.03 to -7.84; P?=?0.001). There were no significant differences in postoperative complication, tolerability of oral feeding, readmission rates, duration of hospital stay and time to first flatus among subgroups stratified by the time to start EOF or by partial and total gastrectomy or by laparoscopic and open surgery.

Conclusions

The result of this meta-analysis showed that EOF after gastric cancer surgery seems feasible and safe, even started at the day of surgery irrespective of the extent of the gastric resection and the type of surgery. However, more prospective, well-designed multicenter RCTs with more clinical outcomes are needed for further validation.

SUBMITTER: Liu X

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4232373 | biostudies-literature | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Is early oral feeding after gastric cancer surgery feasible? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Liu Xiaoping X Wang Da D Zheng Liansheng L Mou Tingyu T Liu Hao H Li Guoxin G

PloS one 20141114 11

<h4>Aim</h4>To assess the feasibility and safety of early oral feeding (EOF) after gastrectomy for gastric cancer through a systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials.<h4>Methods</h4>A literature search in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane library databases was performed for eligible studies published between January 1995 and March 2014. Systematic review was carried out to identify randomized controlled trials comparing EOF and traditional postoperative ...[more]

PMID: 25397686

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) on Gastric carcinoma (GC) has been extensively studied, while its survival and surgical benefits remain controversial. This study aims to perform a meta-analysis of high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs), comparing efficacy, safety and other outcomes of NAC followed by surgery with surgery alone (SA) for GC.MethodsWe systematically searched databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and Springer for RCTs comparing NAC with SA when treating GC. Reference lists of relevant articles and reviews, conference proceedings and ongoing trial databases were also searched. Primary outcomes were 3-year and 5-year survival rates, survival time, and total and perioperative mortalities. Secondary outcomes included down-staging effects, R0 resection rate, and postoperative complications. Meta-analysis was conducted where possible comparing items using relative risks (RRs) and weighted mean differences (WMDs) according to type of data. NAC-related objective response, safety and toxicity were also specifically analyzed.ResultsA total of 9 RCTs comparing NAC (n = 511) with SA (n = 545) published from 1995 to 2010 were identified. SA tended to be accompanied with higher overall mortality rate than NAC (46.03% vs 40.61%, RR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.65-1.06, P = 0.14). Significantly, higher incidence of cases without regional lymph node metastasis observed upon resection were achieved among patients receiving NAC than those undergoing SA (25.68% vs 16.95%, RR: 1.92, 95% CI: 1.20-3.06, P = 0.006). All other parameters were comparable. Of the evaluable patients, 43.0% demonstrated either complete or partial response. The comprehensive NAC-related side-effect rate was 18.2% among patients available for safety assessment.ConclusionsNAC contributes to lowering nodal stages, and potentially reduces overall mortality. Response rate may be an important influential factor impacting advantages, with chemotherapy-related adverse effects as a drawback. This level 1a evidence doesn't support NAC to outweigh SA in terms of survival and surgical benefits when dealing with GC.

Project description:BackgroundGastric cancer is the third most common cause of cancer-related deaths and has the fifth highest incidence worldwide, especially in eastern Asia, central and Eastern Europe, and South America. Currently, surgery is the only curative treatment for gastric cancer; however, there is an increasing trend toward laparoscopic radical gastrectomy. Early oral feeding (EOF) has been shown to benefit clinical outcomes compared with open gastrectomy under conditions of enhanced recovery after surgery. There are a lack of guidelines and evidence for the safety and feasibility of EOF in patients undergoing laparoscopic radical gastrectomy. Thus, a prospective randomized trial is warranted.Methods/designThe EOF after total laparoscopic radical gastrectomy (SOFTLY) study is a single-center, parallel-arm, non-inferiority randomized controlled trial which will enroll 200 patients who are pathologically diagnosed with gastric cancer and undergo laparoscopic radical gastrectomy. The primary endpoint, incidence of anastomotic leakage, is based on 1.9% in the control group in the CLASS-01 study. The patients will be randomized (1:1) into two groups: the EOF group will receive a clear liquid diet on post-operative day 1 (POD1) and the delayed oral feeding (DOF) group will receive a clear liquid diet on post-operative day 4 (POD4). The demographic and pathologic characteristics will be recorded. Total and oral nutritional intake, general data, total serum protein, serum albumin, blood glucose, and temperature will be recorded before surgery and at the time of hospitalization. Adverse events will also be recorded. The occurrence of post-operative fistulas, including anastomotic leakage, will be recorded as the main severe post-operative adverse event and represent the primary endpoint.DiscussionThe safety and feasibility of EOF after gastrectomy has not been established. The SOFTLY trial will be the first randomized controlled trial involving total laparoscopic radical gastrectomy, in which the EOF group (POD1) will be compared with the DOF group (POD4). The results of the SOFTLY trial will provide data on the safety and feasibility of EOF after total laparoscopic radical gastrectomy.Trial registrationChinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR-IOR-15007660 . Registered on 28 December 2015. The study has full ethical and institutional approval.

Project description:BackgroundEffective nutrition programs are beneficial for nutritional recovery in infants. Few studies have focused on the effect of early high-energy feeding after open heart surgery. This study sought to assess the effects of early high-energy feeding in infants after congenital heart surgery.MethodsPatients at a tertiary pediatric cardiology center who underwent open heart surgery between July 2016 and July 2018 were recruited and randomly allocated to 1 of the following 2 groups: (I) the intervention group (postoperative early high-energy feeding; n=124); and (II) the control group (no intervention; n=120).The primary endpoints of average energy delivery and growth Z-scores [i.e., weight-for-height Z-score (WHZ), weight-for-age Z-score (WAZ), and height-for-age Z-score (HAZ)] were recorded preoperatively, during the intensive care unit (ICU) stay, at discharge, and at 1 and 3 months postoperatively. The secondary endpoints of malnutrition recovery, ventilator support time, infection rate, and cardiac ICU (CICU) stay were also recorded.ResultsA total of 244 infants were included in the study. There were no significant differences in the baseline features between the 2 groups. The intervention group received higher calories on average than the control group (44.5 vs. 34.7; P<0.001). At discharge from the ICU, the WHZ (-2.29 vs. -2.76; P<0.001) and WAZ (-3.08 vs. -3.43; P=0.005) of patients in the intervention group were higher than those of patients in the control group. Ventilator support time (P=0.004), CICU stay (P=0.045), and infection rate (P=0.001) were significantly lower in the intervention group than the control group. At 3 months post-surgery, the intervention group exhibited a higher malnutrition recovery rate than the control group (19.4% vs. 6.5%; P=0.002).ConclusionsThe administration of early high-energy feeding to infants after congenital heart surgery is associated with improved growth, reduced CICU stay, decreased ventilator support time, and reduced postoperative infection rates.Trial registrationClinicalTrials NCT04609358.

Project description:Multiple randomized controlled trials of remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) prior to cardiac surgery have failed to demonstrate clinical benefit. The aim of this updated meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect of RIPC on outcomes following cardiac surgery.Searches of PubMed, Cochrane, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases were performed for 1970 to December 13, 2015. Randomized controlled trials comparing RIPC with a sham procedure prior to cardiac surgery performed with cardiopulmonary bypass were assessed. All-cause mortality, acute kidney injury (AKI), and myocardial infarction were the primary outcomes of interest. We identified 21 trials that randomized 5262 patients to RIPC or a sham procedure prior to undergoing cardiac surgery. The majority of patients were men (72.6%) and the mean or median age ranged from 42.3 to 76.3 years. Of the 9 trials that evaluated mortality, 188 deaths occurred out of a total of 4210 randomized patients, with 96 deaths occurring in 2098 patients (4.6%) randomized to RIPC and 92 deaths occurring in 2112 patients (4.4%) randomized to a sham control procedure, demonstrating no significant reduction in all-cause mortality (risk ratio [RR], 0.987; 95% CI, 0.653-1.492, P=0.95). Twelve studies evaluated AKI in 4209 randomized patients. In these studies, AKI was observed in 516 of 2091 patients (24.7%) undergoing RIPC and in 577 of 2118 patients (27.2%) randomized to a sham procedure. RIPC did not result in a significant reduction in AKI (RR, 0.839; 95% CI, 0.703-1.001 [P=0.052]). In 6 studies consisting of 3799 randomized participants, myocardial infarction occurred in 237 of 1891 patients (12.5%) randomized to RIPC and in 282 of 1908 patients (14.8%) randomized to a sham procedure, resulting in no significant reduction in postoperative myocardial infarction (RR, 0.809; 95% CI, 0.615-1.064 [P=0.13]). A subgroup analysis was performed a priori based on previous studies suggesting that propofol may mitigate the protective benefits of RIPC. Three studies randomized patients undergoing cardiac surgery to RIPC or sham procedure in the absence of propofol anesthesia. Most of these patients were men (60.3%) and the mean or median age ranged from 57.0 to 70.6 years. In this propofol-free subgroup of 434 randomized patients, 71 of 217 patients (32.7%) who underwent RIPC developed AKI compared with 103 of 217 patients (47.5%) treated with a sham procedure. In this cohort, RIPC resulted in a significant reduction in AKI (RR, 0.700; 95% CI, 0.527-0.930 [P=0.014]). In studies of patients who received propofol anesthesia, 445 of 1874 (23.7%) patients randomized to RIPC developed AKI compared with 474 of 1901 (24.9%) who underwent a sham procedure. The RR for AKI was 0.928 (95% CI, 0.781-1.102; P=0.39) for RIPC versus sham. There was no significant interaction between the two subgroups (P=0.098).RIPC does not reduce morbidity or mortality in patients undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. In the subgroup of studies in which propofol was not used, a reduction in AKI was seen, suggesting that propofol may interact with the protective effects of RIPC. Future studies should evaluate RIPC in the absence of propofol anesthesia.

Project description:BackgroundAn increasing number of patients have received prophylactic or therapeutic oral anticoagulants (OACs) for thromboembolic complications of diseases. The use of OACs is associated with both clinical benefits and risks. Considering the challenges imposed by this class of drugs, as well as the enormous progress made in portable device technology, it is possible that technology-based interventions may improve clinical benefits for patients and optimize anticoagulation management.ObjectiveThis study was designed to comprehensively evaluate the role of technology-based interventions in the management of OACs.MethodsWe searched 6 databases-PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Scopus, and PsycINFO-to retrieve relevant studies published as of November 1, 2019, to evaluate the effect of technology-based interventions on oral anticoagulation management. RevMan (version 5.3; Cochrane) software was used to evaluate and analyze clinical outcomes. The methodological quality of studies was assessed by the Cochrane risk of bias tool.ResultsA total of 15 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were selected for analysis. They reported data for 2218 patients (1110 patients in the intervention groups and 1108 patients in the control groups). A meta-analysis was performed on the effectiveness and safety data reported in the RCTs. Technology-based interventions significantly improved the effectiveness of oral anticoagulation management (mean difference [MD]=6.07; 95% CI 0.84-11.30; I2=72%; P=.02). The safety of oral anticoagulation management was also improved, but the results were not statistically significant. Bleeding events were reduced (major bleeding events MD=1.02; 95% CI 0.78-1.32; I2=0%; P=.90; minor bleeding events MD=1.06, 95% CI 0.77-1.44; I2=41%; P=.73) and thromboembolism events were reduced (MD=0.71; 95% CI 0.49-1.01; I2=0%; P=.06). In general, patients were more satisfied with technology-based interventions, which could also improve their knowledge of anticoagulation management, improve their quality of life, and reduce mortality and hospitalization events.ConclusionsUsing technology to manage OACs can improve the effectiveness and safety of oral anticoagulation management, result in higher patient satisfaction, and allow greater understanding of anticoagulation.

Project description:BackgroundSeveral studies suggest beneficial effects of perioperative statin therapy on postoperative outcome after cardiac surgery. However, recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) show potential detrimental effects. The objective of this systematic review is to examine the association between perioperative statin therapy and clinical outcomes in cardiac surgery patients.MethodsElectronic databases were searched up to 1 November 2016 for RCTs of preoperative statin therapy versus placebo or no treatment in adult cardiac surgery. Postoperative outcomes were acute kidney injury, atrial fibrillation, myocardial infarction, stroke, infections, and mortality. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using fixed-effects meta-analyses. Primary analysis was restricted to trials with low risk of bias according to Cochrane methodology, and sensitivity analyses examined whether the risk of bias of included studies was associated with different results. We performed trial sequential analysis (TSA) to test the strength of the results.ResultsWe included data from 23 RCTs involving 5102 patients. Meta-analysis of trials with low risk of bias showed that statin therapy was associated with an increase in acute kidney injury (314 of 1318 (23.82%) with statins versus 262 of 1319 (19.86%) with placebo; OR 1.26 (95%CI 1.05 to 1.52); p = 0.01); these results were supported by TSA. No difference in postoperative atrial fibrillation, myocardial infarction, stroke, infections, or mortality was present. On sensitivity analysis, statin therapy was associated with a slight increase in hospital mortality. Meta-analysis including also trials with high or unclear risk of bias showed no beneficial effects of statin therapy on any postoperative outcomes.ConclusionsThere is no evidence that statin therapy in the days prior to cardiac surgery is beneficial for patients' outcomes. Particularly, statins are not protective against postoperative atrial fibrillation, myocardial infarction, stroke, or infections. Statins are associated with a possible increased risk of acute kidney injury and a detrimental effect on hospital survival could not be excluded. Future RCTs should further evaluate the safety profile of this therapy in relation to patients' outcomes and assess the more appropriate time point for discontinuation of statins before cardiac surgery.

Dataset Information

Is early oral feeding after gastric cancer surgery feasible? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Aim

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Is early oral feeding after gastric cancer surgery feasible? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets