Dataset Information

Effect of preoperative nutritional support in malnourished patients with pancreatobiliary cancer: a quasi-experimental study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In malnourished patients, postoperative morbidity, hospitalization period, and medical expenses are reportedly to be high. We evaluated the clinical impact of a preoperative nutritional support program (PNSP) among malnourished cancer patients.

Methods

For this quasi-experimental study, we enrolled 90 patients who underwent major pancreatobiliary cancer surgery. Malnutrition was defined as at least one of the following: (1) Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) grade B or C; (2) > 10% weight loss within 6 months; (3) body mass index <18.5 kg/m²; and (4) serum albumin level < 3.0 g/dL. Forty-five malnourished patients allocated to the PNSP group received in-hospital PNSP for a median of 6 (4-35) days. In the PNSP group, the nutrition support team calculated the patients' daily nutritional requirements based on their nutritional status and previous day's intake. The supplementation targets were as follows: total calorie intake, 30-35 kcal/kg/day; protein intake, 1.2-1.5 g/kg/day; and lipid intake, 1-1.5 g/kg/day. Patients who did not meet the diagnostic criteria for malnutrition were allocated to the well-nourished group and underwent surgery without receiving the PNSP (n = 45). We compared the perioperative nutritional indices (as measured using PG-SGA), postoperative outcome, and quality of life (QOL) according to the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire version 3.0.

Results

In the PNSP group, the proportion of patients with serum prealbumin <16 mg/dL decreased significantly after PNSP (29.5% vs. 8.9%, p = 0.013). Moreover, patients with PG-SGA grade A had a statistically significant increase (2.2% vs. 50%, p < 0.001). The overall and major complication rates were higher in the PNSP group than in the well-nourished group without significance (51.1%, 33.3%; 42.2%, 26.7%, respectively). However, the overall and major complication rates were similar between the subgroup with PG-SGA improvement after PNSP and the well-nourished group (40.9% vs. 42.2%, p = 0.958; 27.3% vs. 26.7%, p = 0.525, respectively). QOL indicators in the PNSP group were comparable with those in the well-nourished group after PNSP.

Conclusion

PNSP may improve perioperative nutritional status and clinical outcomes among malnourished patients with pancreatobiliary cancer.

SUBMITTER: Park HM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9277960 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Malnutrition is prevalent in hospitalized cancer patients and has been associated with poor therapy response and unfavorable clinical outcome. While recent studies have shown a survival benefit through nutritional support in a hospitalized malnourished medical population including cancer patients, we aimed to investigate the association of nutritional support with in-hospital mortality and other clinical outcomes in a nationwide inpatient cancer population. In this population-based cohort study, using a large Swiss administrative claims database from April 2013 to December 2018, we created two cohorts of malnourished cancer patients on medical wards. We generated two pairwise cohorts of malnourished patients who received nutritional support by 1:1 propensity-score matching to patients not receiving nutritional support. The primary outcome was all-cause in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were 30-days all-cause hospital readmission and discharge to a post-acute care facility. To account for disease activity, we stratified patients either admitted for cancer as main diagnosis or admitted with cancer as comorbidity. Among 1,851,498 hospitalizations on medical ward, we identified a total of 32,038 malnourished cancer patients. After matching, 11,906 (37%) cases were included in the "cancer main diagnosis cohort" and 5,954 (18.6%) in the "cancer comorbidity cohort." Patients prescribed a nutritional support showed a lower in-hospital mortality in both cohorts as compared to their respective matched controls not receiving nutritional support [cancer main diagnosis cohort: 15.4 vs. 19.4 %, OR 0.76 (95% CI 0.69-0.83); cancer comorbidity cohort: 7.4 vs. 10.2%, OR 0.71 (95% CI 0.59-0.85)]. While we found no difference in 30-days readmission rates, discharge to a post-acute care facility was less frequent in the nutritional support group of both cohorts. In this large cohort study, nutritional support in hospitalized patients with either cancer as main diagnosis or comorbidity was associated with a lower risk of in-hospital mortality and discharge to a post-acute care facility.

Project description:Background and objectiveProstate cancer (PCa) is one of the most common malignant tumors in men. Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) is an objective index for evaluating nutritional status of elderly people over 65 years old. The aim of the current study was to explore the correlation and predictive value between GNRI and postoperative recovery and complications in PCa patients undergoing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP).MethodsTaking 98 as the GNRI boundary value, 96 PCa patients (aged≥65 y) undergoing LRP in the Department of Urology, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College from January 2018 to December 2020 were grouped into malnutrition group (MNg, 34 patients, 35.4%) and normal nutrition group (NNg, 62 patients, 64.6%). Basic information, laboratory examination indexes, operation conditions, postoperative complications and postoperative recovery indexes of patients were recorded and retrospectively analyzed. Clavien-Dindo Classification System (CDCS) was used to assess postoperative complications. T-test was used to analyze differences between the two groups. ROC curve was generated to determine the predictive value of GNRI for postoperative complications.ResultsPercentage of complications was significantly higher in MNg group compared with that in NNg group (P < 0.01). The average grade based on CDCS was significantly lower in NNg group compared with that in MNg group (P < 0.01). Body weight, Body Mass Index (BMI), preoperative hemoglobin value (HGB), serum albumin (ALB) values of MNg and NNg were significantly positively correlated with GNRI (P<0.01). Incidence and severity of postoperative complications of MNg patients were significantly higher compared with those of NNg patients (P<0.05). Average hospitalization cost of MNg patients was higher in MNg patients compared with that of NNg patients (P<0.05). Duration of post-anesthesia care unit (PACU), duration of antibiotic use and duration of indwelling drainage tube were longer in MNg patients compared with those in NNg patients (P<0.05). Furthermore, volume of indwelling drainage tube was higher in MNg patients compared with that in NNg patients (P<0.05).ConclusionGNRI is an effective and reliable tool for evaluation of preoperative nutritional status of prostate cancer patients. The findings showed that GNRI is correlated with postoperative recovery and complications, and is an effective predictive marker.

Project description:ImportanceMalnutrition affects a considerable proportion of the medical inpatient population. There is uncertainty regarding whether use of nutritional support during hospitalization in these patients positively alters their clinical outcomes.ObjectiveTo assess the association of nutritional support with clinical outcomes in medical inpatients who are malnourished or at nutritional risk.Data sourcesFor this updated systematic review and meta-analysis, a search of the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and Embase was conducted from January 1, 2015, to April 30, 2019; the included studies were published between 1982 and 2019.Study selectionA prespecified Cochrane protocol was followed to identify trials comparing oral and enteral nutritional support interventions with usual care and the association of these treatments with clinical outcomes in non-critically ill medical inpatients who were malnourished.Data extraction and synthesisTwo reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias; data were pooled using a random-effects model.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was mortality. The secondary outcomes included nonelective hospital readmissions, length of hospital stay, infections, functional outcome, daily caloric and protein intake, and weight change.ResultsA total of 27 trials (n = 6803 patients) were included, of which 5 (n = 3067 patients) were published between 2015 and 2019. Patients receiving nutritional support compared with patients in the control group had significantly lower rates of mortality (230 of 2758 [8.3%] vs 307 of 2787 [11.0%]; odds ratio [OR], 0.73; 95% CI, 0.56-0.97). A sensitivity analysis suggested a more pronounced reduction in the risk of mortality in recent trials (2015 or later) (OR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.28-0.79) compared with that in older studies (OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.72-1.22), in patients with established malnutrition (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.34-0.80) compared with that in patients at nutritional risk (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.62-1.18), and in trials with high protocol adherence (OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.54-0.84) compared with that in trials with low protocol adherence (OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.44-1.76). Nutritional support was also associated with a reduction in nonelective hospital readmissions (14.7% vs 18.0%; risk ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.60-0.96), higher energy intake (mean difference, 365 kcal; 95% CI, 272-458 kcal) and protein intake (mean difference, 17.7 g; 95% CI, 12.1-23.3 g), and weight increase (0.73 kg; 95% CI, 0.32-1.13 kg). No significant differences were observed in rates of infections (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.64-1.16), functional outcome (mean difference, 0.32; 95% CI, -0.51 to 1.15), and length of hospital stay (mean difference, -0.24; 95% CI, -0.58 to 0.09).Conclusions and relevanceThis study's findings suggest that despite heterogeneity and varying methodological quality among trials, nutritional support was associated with improved survival and nonelective hospital readmission rates among medical inpatients who were malnourished and should therefore be considered when treating this population.