Physical Prehabilitation in Patients who Underwent Major Abdominal Surgery: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Component Network Meta-Analysis Using GRADE and CINeMA Approach.

BACKGROUND: Physical prehabilitation is recommended before major abdominal surgery to ameliorate short-term outcomes. METHODS: A frequentist, random-effects network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to clarify which type of preoperative physical activity among aerobic exercise (AE), inspiratory muscle training (IMT), and resistance training produces benefits in patients who underwent major abdominal surgery. The surface under the P-score, odds ratio (OR), or mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) were reported. The results were adjusted by using the component network approach. The critical endpoints were overall and major morbidity rate and mortality rate. The important but not critical endpoints were the length of stay (LOS) and pneumonia. RESULTS: The meta-analysis included 25 studies. The best approaches for overall morbidity rate were AE and AE + IMT (OR = 0.61, p-score = 0.76, and OR = 0.66, p-score = 0.68). The best approaches for pneumonia were AE + IMT and AE (OR = 0.21, p-score = 0.91, and OR = 0.52, p-score = 0.68). The component analysis confirmed that the best incremental OR (0.30; 95% CI 0.12-0.74) could be obtained using AE + IMT. The best approach for LOS was AE alone (MD - 1.63 days; 95% CI - 3.43 to 0.18). The best combination of components was AE + IMT (MD - 1.70; 95% CI - 2.06 to - 1.27). CONCLUSIONS: Physical prehabilitation reduces the overall morbidity rate, pneumonia, and length of stay. The most relevant effect of prehabilitation requires the simultaneous use of AE and IMT.

Immunonutrition in patients who underwent major abdominal surgery: A comprehensive systematic review and component network metanalysis using GRADE and CINeMA approaches.

BACKGROUND: The benefits of immunonutrition in patients who underwent major abdominal surgery have been recently established, but the optimal combination of immunonutrients has remained unclear. The aim is to clarify this point. METHODS: A systematic search of randomized clinical trials about immunonutrition in major abdominal surgery was made. A frequentist random-effects component network meta-analysis was conducted, reporting the P score and odds ratio or mean difference with a 95% confidence interval. The best components and best plausible strategies were described. The critical endpoints were morbidity and mortality rates. The important endpoints were infectious complication rate and length of stay. RESULTS: The meta-analysis includes 87 studies and 8,375 patients. The best approach for morbidity rate, with a moderate grade of certainty, was the use of perioperative enteral/oral immunonutrition with arginine, glutamine, and polyunsaturated fatty acids (odds ratio 0.32; 0.10 to 0.98; P score of 0.93). The mortality rate was reduced by postoperative enteral immunonutrition with RNA, arginine, and polyunsaturated fatty acids (odds ratio 59; 0.29 to 1.22; P score 0.84) but with a low grade of certainty. No significant heterogeneity or incoherence is observed. The length of stay and infectious results are "at risk" for high heterogeneity or network meta-analysis incoherence. The component analysis confirmed that postoperative oral/enteral use of 2 or 3 components is crucial to reducing morbidity rate. CONCLUSION: The oral/enteral immunonutrition in the postoperative period, with multiple immunonutrients, can reduce the morbidity rate in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery. The effect of immunonutrition on mortality, infectious disease, and length of stay is unclear.

Value of immunonutrition in patients undergoing pancreatic resection: a trial sequential meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The benefits of immunonutrition (IM) in patients who underwent pancreatic surgery are unclear. METHODS: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing IM with standard nutrition (SN) in pancreatic surgery was carried out. A random-effects trial sequential meta-analysis was made, reporting Risk Ratio (RR), mean difference (MD), and required information size (RIS). If RIS was reached, false negative (type II error) and positive results (type I error) could be excluded. The endpoints were morbidity, mortality, infectious complication, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) rates, and length of stay (LOS). RESULTS: The meta-analysis includes 6 RCTs and 477 patients. Morbidity (RR 0.77; 0.26 to 2.25), mortality (RR 0.90; 0.76 to 1.07), and POPF rates were similar. The RISs were 17,316, 7,417, and 464,006, suggesting a type II error. Infectious complications were lower in the IM group, with a RR of 0.54 (0.36-0.79; 95 CI). The LOS was shorter in IM (MD -0.3 days; -0.6 to -0.1). For both, the RISs were reached, excluding type I error. CONCLUSION: The IM can reduce infectious complications and LOS The small differences in mortality, morbidity, and POPF make it impossible to exclude type II error due to large RISs.

Trial sequential meta-analysis of laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: is it the time to stop the randomization?

BACKGROUND: The advantages of LPD compared with OPD remain debatable. The study aimed to compare the laparoscopic (LPD) versus open (OPD) for pancreaticoduodenectomy. METHODS: A meta-analysis of randomized studies (RCTs) comparing LPD and OPD was made. The results were reported as relative risk (RRs) or mean differences (MDs). The trial sequential analysis was used to test the type I and type II errors defining the required information size (RIS). The primary outcome was mortality, major morbidity, and postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). R1 resection, post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage, delayed gastric emptying, biliary fistula, reoperation, readmission, operative time (OT), lymph nodes harvested, and length of stay (LOS) were also studied. RESULTS: Four RCTs, counting 818 patients, were found. The RRs for mortality, major morbidity, and POPF were 1.16, 1.04, and 0.86, without significant differences. The RISs were 35,672, 16,548, and 8206. To confirm this equivalence, at least 34,854, 15,730, and 7338 should be randomized. OT was significantly longer in LPD than OPD, with an MD of 63.22. The LOS was significantly shorter in LPD than in OPD, with - 1.76 days. The RISs were 1297 and 1273, excluding a false-positive result. No significant differences were observed for the remaining endpoints, and RISs suggested that more than 3000 patients should be randomized to confirm the equivalence. CONCLUSION: The equivalence of LPD and OPD for mortality, major morbidity, and POPF is affected by type II error. The RISs to demonstrate a superiority of one of the two techniques seem unrealistic to obtain.

Effect of malnutrition on postoperative results after pancreatic resection: An entropy balancing analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Malnutrition is a well-recognized risk factor for major surgery-related complications, but the impact of preoperative nutritional therapy is still debated due to a lack of high-level evidence. The study aims to evaluate the role of preoperative malnutrition in the postoperative course of patients who underwent pancreatic resection. METHODS: This is a retrospective study involving 488 patients who underwent pancreatic resection. An entropy balance was applied to 134 patients at risk for moderate or severe malnutrition (M/S-MAL) to obtain a cohort equal to 354 patients, with the null or low risk of malnutrition (N/L-MAL). The reweighting scheme was made in two steps. In the 1st reweighting, the two cohorts were homogenized for confounding factors not modifiable. In the 2nd reweighting, the two cohorts were matched for modifiable factors by preoperative dietary support. The entropy balance was evaluated with the d-value. The postoperative results were reported as mean differences (MD) or odds ratio (OR) with a confidence interval at 95% (95 CI). RESULTS: The M/S-MAL included patients with lower values of BMI (d < 0.750), hemoglobin (d = 0.671), serum albumin (d = 0.554), total protein (d = 0.381). The M/S-MAL patients were more frequent ECOG 1-2 (d = 0.418), with jaundice (d = 0.445) or back pain (d = 0.366). The pancreaticoduodenectomy (d = 0.440) and vascular resection (d = 0.620) in the M/S-MAL group were performed more frequently. The pancreatic remnant was more often hard (d = 0.527), and the Wirsung duct dilated (d = 0.459) in the N/L-MAL group. The rate of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma was higher in M/S-MAL (d = 0.399). After 1st weighting, M/S-MAL patients have a high comprehensive complication index (CCI) (MD = 5.5; 0.3 to 10.7), were more frequently discharged not at home (OR 2.3; 1.1 to 5.4) with a prolonged mean hospital stay (MD 6.1.1; 0.1 to 12.1, days), After 2nd weighting, the two groups have similar postoperative results. CONCLUSION: The correction of malnutrition could play an independent role in reducing the severity of complication, length of stay, and type of discharge in patients who underwent pancreatic resection.

Preoperative carbohydrate loading before elective abdominal surgery: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of phase II/III randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The preoperative use of carbohydrate loading (CHO) is recommended in patients undergoing abdominal surgery, even if the advantages remain debatable. The aim was to evaluate the CHO benefits in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. METHODS: A systematic search of randomized clinical trials was made. A frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis was carried out, reporting the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA). The primary endpoint regarded the morbidity rate. The secondary endpoints were aspiration/regurgitation rates, the length of stay (LOS), the rate of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), the changes (Δ) in insulin sensitivity or resistance, and the postoperative C- reactive protein (CRP) values. RESULTS: CHO loading and water administration had a similar probability of being the approach with a lower morbidity rate (SUCRA = 62.4% and 64.7%). CHO and clear water also had a similar chance of avoiding the PONV (SUCRA of 80.8% and 77%). The aspiration regurgitation rate was not relevant in non-fasting patients (0.06%). CHO administration was associated with the shorter hospitalization (SUCRA 86.9%), with the best metabolic profile (SUCRA values for insulin resistance and sensitivity were 81.1% and 76%). CHO enriched was the best approach for postoperative CRP values. Preoperative fasting was the worst approach for morbidity, PONV, insulin resistance and sensitivity, and CRP (SUCRA values of 32.1%, 21.7%, 10.2%, 3.2%, and 2.0%). CONCLUSION: Both preoperative CHO loading and clear water use were superior to the fasting about morbidity. CHO drinks use could provide specific advantages, reduce the PONV rate, and improve carbohydrate homeostasis, inflammatory pathway, and hospitalization.