Original articlePostoperative complications in gastrointestinal cancer patients: The joint role of the nutritional status and the nutritional support
Introduction
In surgical patients, the traditional rationale behind the use of nutritional support was the attempt to correct malnutrition and, consequently, the malnutrition-associated adverse effects such as postoperative complications.
In the worldwide experience, weight loss (WL), alone or variously combined with other laboratory parameters, has been considered the main indicator of poor nutritional status. Therefore, its modification was the main target of the therapeutic efforts used to prevent postoperative complications through nutritional support.
Most recently, however, the above concepts evolved and the maintenance of a trophic gut mucosa through enteral nutrition,1 and the boost of the immune response through administration of specialized nutrients became the main aim of perioperative nutrition even in well-nourished patients.2, 3, 4, 5 Other strategies such as early postoperative oral intake and mobilization, and intravenous fluid restriction have been shown to be advantageous on outcome, particularly after colorectal surgery.6, 7
In the present study we reviewed a large series of cancer patients enrolled in previous randomized clinical trials (RCTs), who received different types of nutritional support such as total parenteral nutrition, enteral nutrition, immune enhancing enteral nutrition, or standard intravenous fluid, before and/or after abdominal surgery. The purpose was to investigate the potential joint prognostic role of baseline demographic and nutritional parameters, type of nutritional support, and intraoperative factors upon the occurrence of postoperative complications.
Section snippets
Materials and methods
The patient data used for the present analysis were extracted from electronic databases. All these databases were specifically created to archive charts of patients included in RCTs designed to test the effect of different nutritional approaches on clinical outcome.1, 2, 3, 8, 9, 10, 11 In these trials, patients were included if they had an histologically documented gastrointestinal malignancy and were candidate for major open elective surgery, or excluded if they had clinically relevant organ
Results
Clinical-demographic characteristics of the whole series of 1410 patients and of the four different treatment groups, defined by the type of nutritional support, are described in Table 2. Age was mostly distributed in the range between 55 and 75 years but it is noteworthy that 33.6% of patients were over 65% and 10.7% over 75. As regards the remaining characteristics, all the classes stratifying our series were well represented. However, it must be noted the relatively high frequency of missing
Univariate analysis of complications
At the univariate analysis of complications, categorized as absent, minor or major (Table 3) the following variables yielded significant results: among the preoperative ones, advanced patient age (p=0.001), pancreatic tumor site (p<0.001), low serum albumin (p=0.001), and WL (p=0.014); among the intraoperative factors, duration of the surgical procedure (p=0.001), operative blood loss (p=0.003), and blood transfusion (p=0.001). The trends for minor and major complications were generally similar.
Multivariate analysis of complications
Table 5 shows the results of the multivariate analysis on complications (pooled together regardless of their type). The exact percent of WL, available in 1240 patients, was analyzed as a continuous covariate. Similar results were obtained when WL was entered into the model as a categorical factor (1410 patients).
Among preoperative factors, significant results (ordered by increasing p-values) were obtained for all covariates entered into the logistic model, namely tumor site, patient age, WL and
Discussion
The purpose of this study was the attempt to elucidate the relationship between nutritional status, nutritional support and postoperative complications in cancer patients. We had the opportunity to utilize a large database from patients enrolled in previous RCTs (mainly from two major institutions in Milan) and to analyze data with a scope and a statistical power which are uncommon for clinical investigations of this type.
Notably, it was possible to perform multivariate analyses for the most
Acknowledgments
FB, LG, MB and VDC conceived and carried out the study and data analysis, and drafted the manuscript. LM participated in the design of the study, performed the statistical analysis and drafted the manuscript. All the authors read and approved the final manuscript.
References (28)
- et al.
Postoperative enteral versus parenteral nutrition in malnourished patients with gastrointestinal cancer: a randomised multicentre trial
Lancet
(2001) - et al.
Effect of salt and water balance on recovery of gastrointestinal function after elective colonic resection: a randomised controlled trial
Lancet
(2002) - et al.
A randomized controlled trial on pre-operative oral supplementation with a specialized diet in patients with gastrointestinal cancer
Gastroenterology
(2002) - et al.
Effect of intravenous nutrition on nutrition and function in acute attacks of inflammatory bowel disease
Gastroenterology
(1990) - et al.
Preoperative oral carbohydrate administration reduces postoperative insulin resistance
Clin Nutr
(1998) - et al.
Perioperative nutrition support: a randomized clinical trial
Clin Nutr
(1992) - et al.
Effect of route of delivery and formulation of postoperative nutritional support in patients undergoing major operations for malignancy
Arch Surg
(1997) - et al.
Perioperative immunonutrition in patients undergoing cancer surgery: results of a randomized double-blind phase III trial
Arch Surg
(1999) - et al.
Should immunonutrition become routine in critically ill patients? A systematic review of the evidence
J. Am Med Assd
(2001) - et al.
Glutamine supplementation in serious illness: a systematic review of the evidence
Crit Care Med
(2002)
Management of patients in fast track surgery
Br Med J
Perioperative total parenteral nutrition in malnourished, gastrointestinal cancer patients: a randomized, clinical trial
J Parenter Enteral Nutr
Early postoperative enteral nutrition improves gut oxygenation and reduces costs compared with total parenteral nutrition
Crit Care Med
Nutritional approach in malnourished surgical patients: a prospective randomized trial
Arch Surg
Cited by (299)
How Important Is Nutrition in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery?
2023, Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial SurgeryA low prognostic nutritional index is associated with increased remote infections within 30 days of colorectal surgery: A retrospective cohort study
2023, American Journal of Infection ControlUtilization of parenteral nutrition in major gastrointestinal surgery: An opportunity for quality improvement
2023, Clinical Nutrition ESPENReply to: Is it time to optimize immunonutrition in cancer patients according to muscle mass?
2023, European Journal of Surgical OncologyCurrent practice in assessment and management of malnutrition in surgical oncology practice – An ESSO-EYSAC snapshot analysis
2023, European Journal of Surgical Oncology