Skip to main content
Innovative Surgical Sciences logoLink to Innovative Surgical Sciences
. 2019 Nov 30;4(4):152–157. doi: 10.1515/iss-2019-0012

Is there a rationale for perioperative nutrition therapy in the times of ERAS?

Arved Weimann 1,
PMCID: PMC8059352  PMID: 33977125

Abstract

In order to increase patient compliance in Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) programs, assessment and monitoring of functional and nutritional status should be routinely performed. Sarcopenic obesity is frequently underestimated and has been shown to be a significant risk factor for the development of postoperative complications. With special regard to gastrointestinal cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant treatment, nutritional deficiencies may develop stepwise and increase during therapy. In the case of proven deficits, recent strategies including “prehabilitation” focus on making the patient fit for an ERAS program. Evidence-based guidelines for perioperative nutrition therapy have been available.

Keywords: cancer patient, conditioning, Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS), neoadjuvant treatment, nutrition therapy, perioperative, prehabilitation

Introduction

In the time of Enhanced Recovery after Surgery programs (ERAS), perioperative nutrition therapy seems to be very “traditional” and even redundant. However, ERAS also focuses on metabolism including in the bundle of treatment modalities nutrition as well. It is also appropriate for patients at risk like the elderly [1], [2], [3]. A nutritional goal is the prevention of deterioration of the nutritional status. From a metabolic and nutritional point of view, the European Society for Clinical Nutrition in Surgery (ESPEN) guidelines are in line with ERAS and include the following [4]:

  • integration of nutrition into the overall management of the patient

  • avoidance of long periods of preoperative fasting

  • re-establishment of oral feeding as early as possible after surgery

  • start of nutritional therapy early, as soon as a nutritional risk becomes apparent

  • metabolic control e.g. of blood glucose

  • reduction of factors which exacerbate stress-related catabolism or impair gastrointestinal function

  • minimized time on paralytic agents for ventilator management in the postoperative period

  • early mobilization to facilitate protein synthesis and muscle function

The recent ERAS guideline update also recommends correction of derangements such as anemia and malnutrition [5]. High compliance to ERAS protocols may be associated with improved 5-year cancer-specific survival after major colorectal surgery [6]. However, the implementation is not easy and may be optimized as had been demonstrated in a recent study from several European countries [7].

Recent observational data show that patients with high ERAS compliance consumed more protein. Consumption of ≥60% protein needed after surgery and Malnutrition Screening Tool scores were independent predictors of length of hospital stay [8].

In a recent ERAS implementation study from Canada, nutritional risk measured by the Nutritional Risk Score (NRS) predicted low overall compliance (<70%) to ERAS (OR 2.77; 95% CI 2.11–3.64); p<0.001 and a trend for LOS >5 days (OR 1.40; 95% CI 1.00–1.96); p=0.052. Low compliance to ERAS (<70%) predicted postoperative complications (OR 2.69; 95% CI 2.23–3.24); p<0.001 [9].

Surgical risk and functional status

With special regard to the elderly functional status and dependency, cognitive function and nutritional status have been proven to be significantly associated with postoperative morbidity and mortality [10], [11]. Preoperative geriatric assessment before surgery including cognitive and nutritional status should be the new standard of care. Appropriate and validated tools and scores are available [12].

Sarcopenic obesity

Next to age-related comorbidity, functional status is determined by muscle mass which is a key component of nutritional status. From a metabolic point of view, a special risk combination for postoperative complications is the impairment of functional and nutritional status. This is a classical issue in patients undergoing surgery, and the risk to neglect had been emphasized by the pioneer in surgical metabolism Graham L. Hill many years ago [13].

Nowadays, most surgical patients are overweight or obese. Even in overweight and obese patients impaired body composition may occur. Deficiency in muscle mass and strength – so called sarcopenia – has been considered to have considerable impact on postoperative function regarding mobilization and respiratory parameters.

A meta-analysis from 28 studies showed a significantly increased risk in sarcopenic patients for major (p<0.0001) and total postoperative complications (p=0.001) [14]. In 750 obese patients with signs of malnutrition, an in-hospital mortality of 7% was found [15]. In surgical cancer, patient’s nutritional deficiencies are more frequently related to sarcopenia than to low body mass index associated with advanced tumor stage, e.g. in the upper gastrointestinal cancer.

New definition of malnutrition

In 2018, the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition has presented a new consensus for the definition of malnutrition endorsed by the major clinical nutrition societies worldwide [16]. As a two-step approach, phenotypic and etiologic criteria have to be fulfilled.

Phenotypic criteria:

  • Non volitional weight loss

  • Low body mass index

  • Reduced muscle mass

Etiologic criteria

  • Reduced food intake or assimilation

  • Inflammation

  • Disease burden

In line with these criteria and according to the ESPEN guidelines, severe metabolic risk can be defined in case of at least one of the following criteria [4].

  • Weight loss >10–15% within 6 months

  • Body mass index <18.5 kg/m2

  • Subjective Global Assessment Grade C or NRS ≥5

  • Preoperative serum albumin <30 g/L (with no evidence of hepatic or renal dysfunction).

Preoperative serum albumin is a prognostic factor for complications after surgery [17] and also associated with impaired nutritional status. Therefore, albumin may also be considered to define surgical patients at metabolic risk.

A persistently low, even decreasing or increasing serum albumin concentration is a good parameter of whether recovery is successful or not [18]. The magnitude of the postoperative systemic inflammatory response shown in the C-reactive protein may be even significantly associated with long-term outcome after colorectal surgery independent of postoperative complications or disease stage [18].

Routine computerized tomography for the assessment of body composition

Quantitative analysis of muscle in abdominal cross sections on the level of L3 has shown good correlation with muscle and fat mass of the whole body. During the past years numerous studies have clearly shown the prognostic impact of computerized tomography (CT)-derived body composition in oncological patients and those undergoing cancer surgery. L3 skeletal muscle index can be considered to be a surrogate marker for sarcopenia [19], [20]. For the measurement, two software tools are available: ImageJ des National Institute of Health (Bethesda, MD, USA) and Siliceomatic (TomoVision), Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Because sarcopenia and myosteatosis are prevalent in overweight and obese cancer patients, it is reasonable to assess muscle mass using CT [21]. With special regard to cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant treatment, CT scans are usually performed several times during the course of treatment. It may be reasonable to implement this tool for additional assessment of body composition in clinical practice.

Indication for nutrition therapy

The ESPEN guideline [4] state as a good clinical practice recommendation: “Perioperative nutritional support therapy is indicatedin patients with malnutrition and those at nutritional risk. Perioperative nutritional therapy should also be initiated, if it is anticipated that the patient will be unable to eat for more than 5 days perioperatively. It is also indicated in patients expected to have low oral intake and who cannot maintain above 50% of recommended intake for more than 7 days. In these situations, it is recommended to initiate nutritional support therapy (preferably by the enteral route) without delay.” Following guideline recommendations, perioperative nutrition therapy should be also part of an ERAS program and focus on avoiding perioperative weight loss.

Prehabilitation

In case of obvious functional and nutritional deficits, “prehabilitation” offers a new concept of conditioning making the patient fit for ERAS [22]. Prehabilitation is especially appropriate in the time interval after neoadjuvant treatment before surgery.

After neoadjuvant therapy the time period for recovery before surgery is about 4–6 weeks. So far, structured preparation for surgery for several weeks is uncommon. This period may be used for conditioning the patient in a prehabilitation program with endurance and resistance exercise training. Prehabilitation modules are also nutritional and psychological therapy [22]. First results showed significant improvement of cardiopulmonary parameters with diminished oxygen consumption and improvement of quality of life. Regarding postoperative complications and outcome in colorectal cancer patients and those undergoing liver resection, no significant benefit could be found [23], [24]. However, in colorectal cancer patients prehabilitation significantly reduced the surgical stress-induced loss of lean body mass when compared with rehabilitation interventions starting after surgery [25]. A randomized blinded controlled trial investigated personalized prehabilitation in 125 high-risk patients undergoing elective major abdominal surgery. Inclusion criteria were age >70 years and/or ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) score III/IV. The results are promising. Patients suffering from postoperative complications, number of complications per patient, and medical complications were significantly lower in the prehabilitation group (p=0.001) [26].

The major interest on this topic of high clinical importance is clearly illustrated by seven very recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses [22], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32]. Summarizing these results there is significant heterogeneity between studies. Suitable target populations and optimum protocols including appropriate supervision have to be defined. Long-term results are missing. Most likely, high-risk patients with functional and nutritional impairment will benefit most. It remains to be elucidated whether other modules should be added whenever appropriate. There is growing evidence that prehabilitation may decrease complications and shorten hospital length of stay. Results from ongoing trials have to be awaited. In Germany, appropriate outpatient modalities in the framework of interprofessional cooperation reimbursed by the health care insurances are pending.

Oral nutritional supplements (ONS)

It is a key intervention of ERAS that preoperative fasting should be minimized and postoperatively patients should be encouraged to take normal food as soon as possible after surgery. ONS can be used for supplementing total intake and have shown in a recent meta-analysis significant impact on the decrease of postoperative complications and the hospital length of stay [33]. More data from controlled trials are needed with special regard to the postoperative patient after discharge.

Oral nutritional supplements may be also used for prehabilitation. The ESPEN guidelines state as an A recommendation “Preoperatively, oral nutritional supplements shall be given to all malnourished cancer and high-risk patients undergoing major abdominal surgery. A special risk group are the elderly people with sarcopenia” (A) [4].

Metabolic conditioning

Metabolic conditioning – the so called “carbohydrate loading” – means a glucose drink focusing on the perioperative normoglycemia with special regard to the avoidance of postoperative insulin resistance and the reduction of perioperative discomfort. In the guidelines carbohydrate loading is recommended on the night before (200 mL) and 2 h before surgery (100 mL). A recent meta-analysis including 43 trials with 3110 patients showed a small reduction of hospital length of stay in comparison with fasting only. No benefit was observed in comparison with water and placebo. No reduction in postoperative complication rate was found [34]. It has to be argued that a considerable number of studies had included patients with minor surgery and very short hospital length of stay. The most recent multicenter randomized study from Italy included 662 patients. While significantly less patients had the requirement of 1 dose insulin/day and blood glucose levels >140 mg/dL, no difference in clinical complications could be found [35].

The ESPEN guideline recommendation focuses on patients undergoing major surgery. “In order to reduce perioperative discomfort including anxiety oral preoperative carbohydrate treatment (instead of overnight fasting), the night before and 2 h before surgery should beadministered (B)(QL). To impact postoperative insulin resistance and hospital length of staymetabolic conditioning can be considered in patients undergoing major surgery (0)” [4].

Immunologic conditioning

The stimulation of immune defense by appropriate nutrition – called “immunonutrition” – is a challenging concept with special regard to the conditioning of patients undergoing major cancer surgery. Stimulation of T-cell antitumoral activity has been shown by arginine [36], [37]. For the combination of arginine, omega-3-fatty acids, and ribonucleotides numerous prospective randomized controlled studies and meta-analyses have been performed investigating the pre-, peri-, and postoperative use. Significant advantages regarding the cost-benefit analysis had been shown as well [38].

The sole administration before surgery revealed significant benefits in comparison with a regular hospital diet in a former meta-analysis. However, no advantage was found for the comparison with a standard oral nutritional supplement [39]. A very recent meta-analysis focused on patients undergoing gastrointestinal cancer surgery and included data from 16 randomized controlled trials with 1387 (n=715 immunonutrition and n=672 control group). In this meta-analysis the sole use of immunonutrition before surgery again led to a significant decrease of infectious complications when compared with normal diet but also with isonitrogenous standard nutritional supplement (OR 0.52; 95% CI 0.38–0.71, p<0.0001). For the hospital length of stay a significant reduction was found for immunonutrition vs. hospital diet, and a tendency vs. standard nutritional supplement [40].

The ESPEN guideline recommends the intake of oral nutritional supplements before major surgery, while immunomodulating substrates should be preferred for 5–7 days. Aiming to decrease postoperative infection rate, the available data also emphasize continuation of immunonutrition after surgery for 5–7 days [4].

Immunonutrition was also investigated within an ERAS program. In a randomized controlled study in 264 patients undergoing colorectal surgery, a diet enriched with immunonutrients was compared with a standard oral nutritional supplement administered 7 days before surgery and continued for 5 days postoperatively. In the immunonutrition group a significant decrease in the rate of infectious complications was found (23.8% vs. 10.7%; p=0.0007) [41]. Therefore, the integration of immunonutrition in an ERAS protocol may be considered.

Conclusion

In order to increase patient compliance in ERAS, functional and nutritional status should not be ignored and needs critical observation. With special regard to gastrointestinal cancer patients, sarcopenic obesity may be underestimated. In case of proven deficits, a “prehabilitation” program has to be considered. Recent guidelines for preoperative nutrition therapy have been available and focus on making the patient fit for ERAS.

Supporting Information

Supplementary Material

The article (https://doi.org/10.1515/iss-2019-0012) offers reviewer assessments as supplementary material.

Author Statement

Research funding: Authors state no funding involved. Material and Methods: No individuals were included in this study.

Publication Funding

The German Society of Surgery funded the article processing charges of this article.

Conflicts of Interests: Speakers’ fees for Baxter Deutschland, Berlin Chemie, B. Braun Melsungen, Ethicon, Falk Foundation, Fresenius Kabi, Lilly, Medtronic, Nestlé, Research grants from Baxter, Danone.

References

  • [1]. Ljungqvist O Enhanced recovery after surgery – knowing not guessing. JAMA Surg 2019. epub ahead of print. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [2]. Braga M, Pecorelli N, Scatizzi M, Borghi F, Missana G, Radrizzani D Perioperative Italian Society Enhance Recovery program in high-risk patients undergoing colorectal surgery: results from the PeriOperative Italian Society Registry. World J Surg 2017;41:860–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [3]. Slieker J, Frauche P, Jurt J, Addor V, Blanc C, Demartines N, et al. Enhanced recovery ERAS for elderly: a safe and beneficial pathway in colorectal surgery. Int J Colorectal Dis 2017;32:215–21. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [4]. Gustafsson UO, Oppelstrup H, Thorell A, Nygren J, Ljungqvist O Adherence to the ERAS protocol is associated with 5-year survival after colorectal cancer surgery: a retrospective cohort study. World J Surg 2016;40:1741–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [5]. Gustafsson UO, Scott MJ, Hübner M, Nygren J, Demartines N, Francis N, et al. Guidelines for perioperative care in elective colorectal surgery: Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) Society Recommendations 2018. World J Surg 2019;43:659–95. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [6]. Van Zelm R, Coeckelberghs E, Sermeus W, De Buck van Overstraeten A, Weimann A, Seys D, et al. Variation in care for surgical patients with colorectal cancer: protocol adherence in 12 European hospitals. Int J Colorectal Dis 2017;32:1471–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [7]. Yeung SE, Hilkewich L, Gillis C, Heine JA, Fenton TR Protein intakes are associated with reduced length of stay: a comparison between Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) and conventional care after elective colorectal surgery. Am J Clin Nutr 2017;106:44–61. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [8]. Martin L, Gillis C, Atkins M, Gillam M, Sheppard C, Buhler S, et al. Implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery program can change nutrition care practice: a multicenter experience in elective colorectal surgery. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Surg 2019;43:206–19. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [9]. Meguid RA, Bronsert MR, Juarez-Colunga E, Hammermeister KE, Henderson WG Surgical Risk Preoperative Assessment System (SURPAS): I. Parsimonious, clinically meaningful groups of postoperative complications by factor analysis. Ann Surg 2016;264:23–31. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [10]. Cheema FN, Abraham NS, Berger DH, Albo D, Taffet GE, Naik AD Novel approaches to perioperative assessment and intervention may improve long-term outcomes after colorectal cancer resection in older adults. Ann Surg 2011;253:867–74. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [11]. Olotu C, Weimann A, Bahrs C, Schwenk W, Scherer M, Kiefmann R The perioperative care of older patients. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2019;116:63–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [12]. Hill GL, Hill GL, Blackett RL, Pickford I, Burkinshaw L, Young GA, et al. Malnutrition in surgical patients. Lancet 1977;1:689–92. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [13]. Simonsen C, de Heer P, Bjerre ED, Suetta C, Hojman P, Pedersen BK, et al. Sarcopenia and postoperative complication risk in gastrointestinal surgical oncology: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg 2018;268:58–69. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [14]. Agarawal E, Ferguson M, Banks M, Vivanti A, Batterham B, Bauer J, et al. Malnutrition, poor food intake, and adverse healthcare outcomes in non-critically ill obese acute care hospital patients. Clin Nutr 2019;38:759–66. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [15]. Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, Gonzalez MC, Fukushima R, Higashiguchi T, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition. a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. Clin Nutr 2019;38:1–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [16]. Weimann A, Braga M, Carli F, Higashiguchi T, Hübner M, Klek S, et al. ESPEN guideline clinical nutrition in surgery. Clin Nutr 2017;36:623–50. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [17]. Aahlin EK, Tranø G, Johns N, Horn A, Søreide JA, Fearon KC, et al. Risk factors, complications and survival after upper abdominal surgery: a prospective cohort study. BMC Surg 2015;15:83. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [18]. McSorley ST, Watt DG, Horgan PG, McMillan DC Postoperative systemic inflammatory response, complication severity, and survival following surgery for colorectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2016;23:2832–40. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [19]. Gomez-Perez SL, Haus JM, Shehan P, Patel B, Mar W, Chaudry V, et al. Measuring abdominal circumference and skeletal muscle from a single cross-sectional CT image: a step-by-step guide for clinicians using National Institutes of Health ImageJ. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 2016;40:308–18. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [20]. Carrara G, Pecorelli N, De Cobelli F, Christel G, Damascelli A, Beretta L, et al. Preoperative sarcopenia determinants in pancreatic cancer patients. Clin Nutr 2017;36:16449–53. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [21]. Martin L, Gioulbasanis I, Senesse P, Baracos VE Cancer associated malnutrition and CT-defined sarcopenia and myosteatosis are endemic in overweight and obese patients. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Surg 2019. epub ahead of print.. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [22]. Gillis C, Buhler K, Bresee L, Carli F, Gramlich L, Culos-Reed N, et al. Effects of nutritional prehabilitation with and without exercise, on outcomes of patients who undergo colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastroenterology 2018;155:391–410. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [23]. Dunne DF, Jack S, Jones L, Lythgoe DT, Malik HZ, Poston GJ, et al. Randomized clinical trial of prehabilitation before planned liver resection. Br J Surg 2016;103:504–12. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [24]. Looijaard SM, Slee-Valentijn MS, Otten RH, Maier AB Physical and nutritional prehabilitation in older patients with colorectal carcinoma: a systematic review. J Geriatr Phy Ther 2018;41:236–44. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [25]. Gillis C, Ferton T, Sajobi TT, Minnella EM, Awasthi R, Loiselle SE, et al. Trimodal prehabilitation for colorectal surgery attemuates post-surgical losses in lean body mass: a pooled analysis of randomized controlled trials. Clin Nutr 2019;38:1053–60. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [26]. Barberan-Garcia A, Ubre M, Roca J, Lacy AM, Burgos F, Risco R, et al. Personalised prehabilitation in high-risk patients undergoing elective major abdominal surgery: a randomized blinded controlled trial. Ann Surg 2018;267:50–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [27]. Luther A, Gabriel J, Watson RP, Francis NK The impact of total body prehabilitation on post-operative outcomes after major abdominal surgery: a systematic review. World J Surg 2018;42:2781–91. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [28]. Piraux E, Caty G, Reychler G Effects of preoperative combined aerobic and resistance exercise training in cancer patients undergoing tumour resection surgery: a systematic review of randomized trials. Surg Oncol 2018;27:584–94. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [29]. Thomas G, Tahir MR, Bongers BC, Kallen VL, Slooter GD, van Meeteren NL A systematic review of randomised controlled trials investigating prehabilitation before major intra-abdominal cancer surgery: an analysis of prehabilitation content and outcome measures. Eur J Anaestesiol 2019;36:933–45. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [30]. Bolger JC, Loughney L, Tully R, Cunningham M, Keogh S, McCaffrey N, et al. Perioperative prehabilitation and rehabilitation in esophagogastric malignancies: a systematic review. Dis Esophagus 2019;32:doz058. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [31]. Heger P, Probst P, Wiskemann J, Steindorf K, Diener MK, Mihaljevic AL A sytematic review and meta-analysis of physical exercise prehabilitation in major abdominal surgery (PROSPERO 2017 CRD42017080366). J Gastrointest Surg 2019. Jun 21. doi: 10.1007/s11605-019-04287w; epub ahead of print. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [32]. Hughes MJ, Hackney RJ, Lamb PJ, Wigmore SJ, Christopher Deans DA, Skipworth RJE Prehabilitation before major abdominal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Surg 2019;43:1661–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [33]. Elia M, Normand C, Norman K, Laviano A, Norman K A systematic review of the cost and cost effectiveness of using standard oral nutritional supplements in the hospital setting. Clin Nutr 2016;35:370–80. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [34]. Amer MA, Smith MD, Herbison GP, Plank LD, McCall JL Network meta-analysis of the effect of preoperative carbohydrate loading on recovery after elective surgery. Br J Surg 2017;104:187–97. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [35]. Gianotti L, Biffi R, Sandini M, Marrelli D, Vignali A, Caccialanza R, et al. Preoperative oral carbohydrate load versus placebo in major elective abdominal surgery (PROCY): a randomized placebo-controlled multicenter phase III trial. Ann Surg 2018;267:623–30. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [36]. Alazawi W, Pirmadid N, Lahiri R, Bhattacharya S Inflammatory and immune responses to surgery and their clinical impact. Ann Surg 2016;64:73–80. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [37]. Geiger R, Rieckmann JC, Wolf T, Basso C, Feng Y, Fuhrer T, et al. Arginine modulates T cell metabolism and enhances survival and anti-tumor activity. Cell 2016;167:829–42. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [38]. Chevrou-Séverac H, Pinget C, Cerantola Y, Demartines N, Wasserfallen JB, Schäfer M Cost-effictiveness analysis of immunemodulating nutritional support for gastrointestinal cancer patients. Clin Nutr 2014;33:649–54. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [39]. Hegazi RA, Hustead DS, Evans DC Preoperative standard oral nutrition supplements vs immunonutrition: results of a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Coll Surg 2014;219:1078–87. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [40]. Adiamah A, Skorepa P, Weimann A, Lobo DN The impact of preoperative immune modulating nutrition on outcomes in patients undergoing surgery for gastrointestinal cancer: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Ann Surg 2019;270:247–56. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [41]. Moya P, Soriano-Irigiaray L, Ramirez JM, Garcea A, Blasco O, Blanco F, et al. Perioperative standard oral nutrition supplements versus immunonutrition in patients undergoing colorectal resection in an enhanced recovery (ERAS) protocol: a multicenter randomized clinical trial (SONV) study. Medicine (Balt) 2016;95:e3704. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials


Articles from Innovative Surgical Sciences are provided here courtesy of De Gruyter

RESOURCES