Preoperative nutrition therapy in people undergoing gastrointestinal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Poor preoperative nutritional status has been consistently linked to an increase in postoperative complications and worse surgical outcomes. We updated a review first published in 2012. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of preoperative nutritional therapy compared to usual care in people undergoing gastrointestinal surgery. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases and two trial registries on 28 March 2023. We searched reference lists of included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of people undergoing gastrointestinal surgery and receiving preoperative nutritional therapy, including parenteral nutrition, enteral nutrition or oral nutrition supplements, compared to usual care. We only included nutritional therapy that contained macronutrients (protein, carbohydrate and fat) and micronutrients, and excluded studies that evaluated single nutrients. We included studies regardless of the nutritional status of participants, that is, well-nourished participants, participants at risk of malnutrition, or mixed populations. We excluded studies in people undergoing pancreatic and liver surgery. Our primary outcomes were non-infectious complications, infectious complications and length of hospital stay. Our secondary outcomes were nutritional aspects, quality of life, change in macronutrient intake, biochemical parameters, 30-day perioperative mortality and adverse effects. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodology. We assessed risk of bias using the RoB 1 tool and applied the GRADE criteria to assess the certainty of evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included 16 RCTs reporting 19 comparisons (2164 participants). Seven studies were new for this update. Participants' ages ranged from 21 to 79 years, and 62% were men. Three RCTs used parenteral nutrition, two used enteral nutrition, eight used immune-enhancing nutrition and six used standard oral nutrition supplements. All studies included mixed groups of well-nourished and malnourished participants; they used different methods to identify malnutrition and reported this in different ways. Not all the included studies were conducted within an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programme, which is now current clinical practice in most hospitals undertaking GI surgery. We were concerned about risk of bias in all the studies and 14 studies were at high risk of bias due to lack of blinding. We are uncertain if parenteral nutrition has any effect on the number of participants who had a non-infectious complication (risk ratio (RR) 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 1.02; 3 RCTs, 260 participants; very low-certainty evidence); infectious complication (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.80; 3 RCTs, 260 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or length of hospital stay (mean difference (MD) 5.49 days, 95% CI 0.02 to 10.96; 2 RCTs, 135 participants; very low-certainty evidence). None of the enteral nutrition studies reported non-infectious complications as an outcome. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of enteral nutrition on the number of participants with infectious complications after surgery (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.38; 2 RCTs, 126 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or length of hospital stay (MD 5.10 days, 95% CI -1.03 to 11.23; 2 RCTs, 126 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Immune-enhancing nutrition compared to controls may result in little to no effect on the number of participants experiencing a non-infectious complication (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.00; 8 RCTs, 1020 participants; low-certainty evidence), infectious complications (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.04; 7 RCTs, 925 participants; low-certainty evidence) or length of hospital stay (MD -1.22 days, 95% CI -2.80 to 0.35; 6 RCTs, 688 participants; low-certainty evidence). Standard oral nutrition supplements may result in little to no effect on number of participants with a non-infectious complication (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.20; 5 RCTs, 473 participants; low-certainty evidence) or the length of hospital stay (MD -0.65 days, 95% CI -2.33 to 1.03; 3 RCTs, 299 participants; low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of oral nutrition supplements on the number of participants with an infectious complication (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.27; 5 RCTs, 473 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Sensitivity analysis based on malnourished and weight-losing participants found oral nutrition supplements may result in a slight reduction in infections (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.85; 2 RCTs, 184 participants). Studies reported some secondary outcomes, but not consistently. Complications associated with central venous catheters occurred in RCTs involving parenteral nutrition. Adverse events in the enteral nutrition, immune-enhancing nutrition and standard oral nutrition supplements RCTs included nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea and abdominal pain. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We were unable to determine if parenteral nutrition, enteral nutrition, immune-enhancing nutrition or standard oral nutrition supplements have any effect on the clinical outcomes due to very low-certainty evidence. There is some evidence that standard oral nutrition supplements may have no effect on complications. Sensitivity analysis showed standard oral nutrition supplements probably reduced infections in weight-losing or malnourished participants. Further high-quality multicentre research considering the ERAS programme is required and further research in low- and middle-income countries is needed.

Getting the consistency right in thickened liquids using Viscgo Sticks: A validation study.

BACKGROUND: Dysphagia is a condition whereby a person's ability to swallow, eat and drink is impacted. One strategy to manage dysphagia and aid safe swallowing is the modification of food and drink, including using thickening agents to thicken drinks. Drinks are thickened to levels appropriate to a person's swallowing abilities and the underutilised 'syringe flow test' is currently the recommended method for checking thickness levels. Viscgo Sticks were developed as a practical alternative to the flow test. METHODS: This is a real-world validation study designed to determine validity and reliability of Viscgo Sticks. Independent researchers and healthcare professionals tested Viscgo Sticks (Viscgo Limited) against the flow test in three levels of thickened drinks. Researchers also conducted tests with different thickening agents and different drink types: water, milk, orange juice and hot tea. RESULTS: The intra- and inter-rater reliability of Viscgo Sticks was moderate to almost perfect (κ = 0.45-0.98) within and between researchers and substantial (κ = 0.66-0.67) within and between healthcare professionals. When tested by researchers and healthcare professionals against the flow test, Viscgo Sticks correctly classified 83.33%-100% of thickened drinks with high accuracy (area under curve = 0.70-1.00). CONCLUSIONS: A simple and reliable tool like Viscgo Sticks, which can verify a prescribed thickness level of liquid, is invaluable in healthcare settings where day-to-day drink preparation occurs. Overall, Viscgo Sticks provide a reliable and valid means to test thickened drinks in clinical practice with a few exceptions identified.

Food intolerance related to gastrointestinal symptoms amongst adults living with bile acid diarrhoea: A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: The role of food in managing bile acid diarrhoea (BAD) is poorly understood. The present study explored the prevalence of food intolerance amongst adults with BAD. METHODS: The study comprised a cross-sectional survey of adults with BAD determined by the 75 selenium homotaurocholic acid test (SeHCAT) living in the UK. Participants anonymously completed an online questionnaire on 39 food items. Frequency of food in general affecting BAD symptoms, as well as frequencies of diarrhoea, abdominal pain, bloating, flatulence and consequential food avoidance after food item ingestion, were assessed. Food group avoidance was also assessed. RESULTS: There were 434 participants who completed the questionnaire between April and May 2021 of whom 80% reported moderate to severe chronic diarrhoea. Food intolerances were reported by 88.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 84.6-90.9) of participants. Diarrhoea was reported most frequently after take-away food, fish and chips, creamy sauces, cream and large quantities of fruit (range 41.0%-33.6%). Lowest frequencies were for potato, avocado, mango, watermelon and pear (range 3.7%-7.4%) for the foods listed in the questionnaire. Similar trends were found for abdominal pain, bloating, flatulence and consequential food avoidance. Symptom-triggering within 30 min of ingestion was more prevalence than after 30 min for almost all foods. Food group avoidance was highest for fatty foods (81.2%; 95% CI = 77.8-85.3) followed by dairy (53.9%; 95% CI = 49.1-58.7). CONCLUSIONS: Perceived food intolerance amongst adults with BAD and persisting diarrhoeal symptoms is high. Important triggers were meals with a higher fat content and higher-fat dairy products. Diets amongst those with persisting diarrhoeal symptoms may be overly restrictive.

A scoping review of parenteral requirements (macronutrients, fluid, electrolytes and micronutrients) in adults with chronic intestinal failure receiving home parenteral nutrition.

INTRODUCTION: Home parenteral nutrition (HPN) prescriptions should be individualised in adults with chronic intestinal failure (IF). The aims of the review were to explore HPN requirements and available guidelines and to determine whether adults (≥ 18 years) receive recommended parenteral nutrient doses. METHODS: Online databases searches identified empirical evidence (excluding case-reports), reviews and guidelines (Published 2006-2024 in English language). Additional reference lists were hand-searched. Older studies, cited in national guidelines were highlighted to map evidence source. Two reviewers screened 1660 articles independently, with 98 full articles assessed and 78 articles included (of which 35 were clinical studies). Citation tracking identified 12 older studies. RESULTS: A lack of evidence was found assessing parenteral macronutrient (amounts and ratios to meet energy needs), fluid and electrolyte requirements. For micronutrients, 20 case series reported serum levels as biomarkers of adequacy (36 individual micronutrient levels reported). Studies reported levels below (27 out of 33) and above (24 out of 26) reference ranges for single micronutrients, with associated factors explored in 11 studies. Guidelines stated recommended parenteral dosages. Twenty-four studies reported variable proportions of participants receiving HPN dosages outside of guideline recommendations. When associated factors were assessed, two studies showed nutrient variation with type of HPN administered (multichamber or individually compounded bags). Five studies considered pathophysiological IF classification, with patients with short bowel more likely to require individualised HPN and more fluid and sodium. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights substantial evidence gaps in our understanding of the parenteral nutritional requirements of adult receiving HPN. The conclusions drawn were limited by temporal bias, small samples sizes, and poor reporting of confounders and dose. Optimal HPN nutrient dose still need to be determined to aid clinical decision-making and further research should explore characteristics influencing HPN prescribing to refine dosing recommendations.

Do people change their eating habits after a diagnosis of cancer? A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: People who live with and beyond cancer are considered to be motivated to change their diet. However, there is a lack of reviews conducted on what specific dietary changes people make and further evaluation may inform future interventional studies. Hence, we aim to summarise the evidence on dietary changes in observational studies before and after a cancer diagnosis. METHODS: This systematic review followed the guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis. Electronic searches were conducted in four databases to identify cohort and cross-sectional studies on dietary changes before and after a cancer diagnosis, excluding studies that evaluated an intervention. Quality assessment was undertaken, and meta-analyses were conducted where suitable. RESULTS: We identified 14 studies with 16,443 participants diagnosed with cancer, with age range 18-75 years. Dietary change was assessed <1-5 years before diagnosis and up to 12 years post-diagnosis. Meta-analyses showed that the standard mean difference (SMD) for energy (SMD-0.32, 95% confidence interval = -0.46 to -0.17) and carbohydrate consumption (SMD 0.20, 95% confidence interval = -0.27 to -0.14). Studies showed inconsistent findings for fat, protein and fibre, most food groups, and supplement intake. A small decrease in red and processed meat consumption was consistently reported. CONCLUSIONS: All studies reported some positive changes in dietary intake and supplement consumption after receiving a cancer diagnosis without any intervention. However, differences for food groups and nutrients were mainly small and not necessarily clinically meaningful. Evidence demonstrates that a cancer diagnosis alone is insufficient to motivate people to change their dietary intake, indicating that most people would benefit from a dietary intervention to facilitate change.

Nutritional screening in a cancer prehabilitation programme: A cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients are often malnourished pre-operatively. The present study aimed to establish whether current screening was appropriate for use in prehabilitation and investigate any association between nutritional risk, functionality and quality of life (QoL). METHODS: This cohort study used routinely collected data from September 2020 to August 2021 from patients in a Prehab4cancer programme. Included patients were aged ≥ 18 years, had colorectal, lung or oesophago-gastric cancer and were scheduled for surgery. Nutritional assessment included Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) Short-Form and QoL with a sit-to-stand test. Association between nutritional risk and outcomes was analysed using adjusted logistic regression. RESULTS: From 928 patients referred to Prehab4Cancer service over 12 months, data on nutritional risk were collected from 526 patients. Pre-operatively, 233 out of 526 (44%) patients were at nutritional risk (score ≥ 2). During prehabilitation, 31% of patients improved their PG-SGA and 74% of patients maintained or improved their weight. Odds ratios (OR) with confidence intervals (CI) showed that patients with better QoL using EuroQol-5 Dimensions (OR = 0.05, 95% CI = 0.01, 0.45, p = 0.01), EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale (OR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.93, 1.00, p = 0.04) or sit-to-stand (OR = 0.96, 95% 0.93, 1.00, p = 0.04) were less likely to be nutritional at risk. CONCLUSIONS: Almost half of patients in Prehab4Cancer programme assessed using PG-SGA were at risk of malnutrition. However, almost half of the sample did not have their risk assessed. Patients at risk of malnutrition were more likely to have a poorer QoL and sit-to-stand test than those who were not at risk.

Effectiveness of diet, psychological, and exercise therapies for the management of bile acid diarrhoea in adults: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Bile acid diarrhoea (BAD) causes chronic diarrhoea and is primarily treated pharmacologically. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of non-pharmacological therapies for evidence-based management of BAD in adults. METHODS: A systematic review of the medical literature was performed from 1975 to 13 July 2021 to identify studies on diet, psychological, and exercise therapies that met diagnostic criteria for BAD in adults with diarrhoea. Effectiveness was judged by responder or improvement in diarrhoea at study endpoint according to each study's definition of diarrhoea. Therapeutic effect on abdominal pain and flatulence was also measured. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk Of Bias In Non-Randomised Studies of Interventions tool. A narrative review was conducted using 'Synthesis Without Meta-analysis' guidance. Certainty of the evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. RESULTS: Eight prospective cohort studies were identified on diet therapies from 2 weeks to over 2 years involving 192 patients. No psychological or exercise therapies were found. Carbohydrate modification (one study, n = 2) in primary BAD, and dietary fat intake reductions (five studies, n = 181) and an exclusive elemental diet therapy (two studies, n = 9) in secondary BAD, showed beneficial directions of effect on diarrhoea, abdominal pain, and flatulence. Risks of bias for each study and across studies for each therapy type were serious. Certainty of the evidence was very low for all outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: No conclusions could be drawn on the effectiveness of diet, psychological, or exercise therapies on diarrhoea, abdominal pain, and flatulence for the management of BAD in adults. High-quality randomised controlled trials are needed.

The provision of nutritional advice and care for cancer patients: a UK national survey of healthcare professionals.

PURPOSE: People living with and beyond cancer often experience nutrition-related issues and should receive appropriate advice on nutrition that is consistent and evidence based. The aim of this study was to investigate current practice for the provision of nutritional care by healthcare professionals (HCPs) from a UK national survey produced by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Cancer and Nutrition Collaboration. METHODS: An online survey sent to professional groups and networks included questions on discussing nutrition, providing information, awareness of guidelines, confidence in providing nutritional advice, training and strategies for improving nutritional management. RESULTS: There were 610 HCPs who responded including nurses (31%), dietitians (25%), doctors (31%) and speech and language therapists (9%). The majority of HCPs discusses nutrition (94%) and provides information on nutrition (77%). However, only 39% of HCPs reported being aware of nutritional guidelines, and just 20% were completely confident in providing nutritional advice. Awareness of guidelines varied between the different professional groups with most but not all dietitians reporting the greatest awareness of guidelines and GPs the least (p = 0.001). Those HCPs with a greater awareness of guidelines had received training (p = 0.001) and were more likely to report complete confidence in providing nutritional advice (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Whilst HCPs discuss nutrition with cancer patients and may provide information, many lack an awareness of guidelines and confidence in providing nutritional advice. To ensure consistency of practice and improvements in patient care, there is scope for enhancing the provision of appropriate nutrition education and training.

Measurement of Muscle Mass and Sarcopenia Using Anthropometry, Bioelectrical Impedance, and Computed Tomography in Surgical Patients with Colorectal Malignancy: Comparison of Agreement Between Methods.

Background: Low skeletal muscle index (SMI) and sarcopenia adversely affect clinical outcomes in oncology patients. Study aims were to assess the agreement of bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), mid-arm muscle circumference (MAMC), and computed tomography (CT) at the third lumbar vertebra (L3), for the measurement of muscle mass and identification of sarcopenia, in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC).Method: A comparison study of low SMI and sarcopenia determined by BIA and MAMC, compared to CT. Sensitivity, specificity and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated.Results: CT scans were obtained for 100 participants. Low SMI was identified in 29%, 57%, and 20% of participants using CT at L3, BIA, and MAMC, respectively. For low muscle mass BIA showed 60% of participants were correctly classified (AUC 0.619, sensitivity 80%, specificity 52%, kappa 0.241, P = 0.009) and for MAMC, 73% of participants were correctly classified (AUC 0.625, sensitivity 38%, specificity 88%, kappa 0.286, P = 0.005). There were 14%, 31%, and 10% of participants identified as having sarcopenia from CT, BIA, and MAMC, respectively.Conclusions: Both BIA and MAMC show a poor level of agreement for measuring muscle mass compared to CT scans using L3 in patients with CRC.

Perioperative nutrition for the treatment of bladder cancer by radical cystectomy.

BACKGROUND: Radical cystectomy (RC) is the primary surgical treatment for muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. This major operation is typically associated with an extended hospital stay, a prolonged recovery period and potentially major complications. Nutritional interventions are beneficial in some people with other types of cancer and may be of value in this setting too. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of perioperative nutrition in people undergoing radical cystectomy for the treatment of bladder cancer. SEARCH METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search using multiple databases (Evidence Based Medicine Reviews, MEDLINE, Embase, AMED, CINAHL), trials registries, other sources of grey literature, and conference proceedings published up to 22 February 2019, with no restrictions on the language or status of publication. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included parallel-group randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adults undergoing RC for bladder cancer. The intervention was any perioperative nutrition support. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and the quality of evidence using GRADE. Primary outcomes were postoperative complications at 90 days and length of hospital stay. The secondary outcome was mortality up to 90 days after surgery. When 90-day outcome data were not available, we reported 30-day data. MAIN RESULTS: The search identified eight trials including 500 participants. Six trials were conducted in the USA and two in Europe.1. Parenteral nutrition (PN) versus oral nutrition: based on one study with 157 participants, PN may increase postoperative complications within 30 days (risk ratio (RR) 1.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07 to 1.82; low-quality evidence). We downgraded the quality of evidence for serious study limitations (unclear risk of selection, performance and selective reporting bias) and serious imprecision. This corresponds to 198 more complications per 1000 participants (95% CI 35 more to 405 more). Length of hospital stay may be similar (mean difference (MD) 0.5 days higher, CI not reported; low-quality evidence).2. Immuno-enhancing nutrition versus standard nutrition: based on one study including 29 participants, immuno-enhancing nutrition may reduce 90-day postoperative complications (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.23; low-quality evidence). These findings correspond to 322 fewer complications per 1000 participants (95% CI 429 fewer to 107 more). Length of hospital stay may be similar (MD 0.20 days, 95% CI 1.69 lower to 2.09 higher; low-quality evidence). We downgraded the quality of evidence of both outcomes for very serious imprecision.3. Preoperative oral nutritional support versus normal diet: based on one study including 28 participants, we are very uncertain if preoperative oral supplements reduces postoperative complications. We downgraded quality for serious study limitations (unclear risk of selection, performance, attrition and selective reporting bias) and very serious imprecision. The study did not report on length of hospital stay.4. Early postoperative feeding versus standard postoperative management: based on one study with 102 participants, early postoperative feeding may increase postoperative complications (very low-quality evidence) but we are very uncertain of this finding. We downgraded the quality of evidence for serious study limitations (unclear risk of selection and performance bias) and very serious imprecision. Length of hospital stay may be similar (MD 0.95 days less, CI not reported; low-quality evidence). We downgraded the quality of evidence for serious study limitations (unclear risk of selection and performance bias) and serious imprecision.5. Amino acid with dextrose versus dextrose: based on two studies with 104 participants, we are very uncertain whether amino acids reduce postoperative complications (very low-quality evidence). We are also very uncertain whether length of hospital stay is similar (very low-quality evidence). We downgraded the quality of evidence for both outcomes for serious study limitations (unclear and high risk of selection bias; unclear risk of performance, detection and selective reporting bias), serious indirectness related to the patient population and very serious imprecision.6. Branch chain amino acids versus dextrose only: based on one study including 19 participants, we are very uncertain whether complication rates are similar (very low-quality evidence). We downgraded the quality of evidence for serious study limitations (unclear risk of selection, performance, detection, attrition and selective reporting bias), serious indirectness related to the patient population and very serious imprecision. The study did not report on length of hospital stay.7. Perioperative oral nutritional supplements versus oral multivitamin and mineral supplement: based on one study with 61 participants, oral supplements compared to a multivitamin and mineral supplement may slightly decrease postoperative complications (low-quality evidence). These findings correspond to 135 fewer occurrences per 1000 participants (95% CI 256 fewer to 65 more). Length of hospital stay may be similar (low-quality evidence). We downgraded the quality of evidence of both outcomes for study limitations and imprecision. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on few, small and dated studies, with serious methodological limitations, we found limited evidence for a benefit of perioperative nutrition interventions. We rated the quality of evidence as low or very low, which underscores the urgent need for high-quality research studies to better inform nutritional support interventions for people undergoing surgery for bladder cancer.

Dietary interventions for adult cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: International dietary recommendations include guidance on healthy eating and weight management for people who have survived cancer; however dietary interventions are not provided routinely for people living beyond cancer. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of dietary interventions for adult cancer survivors on morbidity and mortality, changes in dietary behaviour, body composition, health-related quality of life, and clinical measurements. SEARCH METHODS: We ran searches on 18 September 2019 and searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials (CENTRAL), in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE via Ovid; Embase via Ovid; the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED); the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL); and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE). We searched other resources including reference lists of retrieved articles, other reviews on the topic, the International Trials Registry for ongoing trials, metaRegister, Physicians Data Query, and appropriate websites for ongoing trials. We searched conference abstracts and WorldCat for dissertations. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that recruited people following a cancer diagnosis. The intervention was any dietary advice provided by any method including group sessions, telephone instruction, written materials, or a web-based approach. We included comparisons that could be usual care or written information, and outcomes measured included overall survival, morbidities, secondary malignancies, dietary changes, anthropometry, quality of life (QoL), and biochemistry. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Two people independently assessed titles and full-text articles, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. For analysis, we used a random-effects statistical model for all meta-analyses, and the GRADE approach to rate the certainty of evidence, considering limitations, indirectness, inconsistencies, imprecision, and bias. MAIN RESULTS: We included 25 RCTs involving 7259 participants including 977 (13.5%) men and 6282 (86.5%) women. Mean age reported ranged from 52.6 to 71 years, and range of age of included participants was 23 to 85 years. The trials reported 27 comparisons and included participants who had survived breast cancer (17 trials), colorectal cancer (2 trials), gynaecological cancer (1 trial), and cancer at mixed sites (5 trials). For overall survival, dietary intervention and control groups showed little or no difference in risk of mortality (hazard ratio (HR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 1.23; 1 study; 3107 participants; low-certainty evidence). For secondary malignancies, dietary interventions versus control trials reported little or no difference (risk ratio (RR) 0.99, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.15; 1 study; 3107 participants; low-certainty evidence). Co-morbidities were not measured in any included trials. Subsequent outcomes reported after 12 months found that dietary interventions versus control probably make little or no difference in energy intake at 12 months (mean difference (MD) -59.13 kcal, 95% CI -159.05 to 37.79; 5 studies; 3283 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Dietary interventions versus control probably led to slight increases in fruit and vegetable servings (MD 0.41 servings, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.71; 5 studies; 834 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); mixed results for fibre intake overall (MD 5.12 g, 95% CI 0.66 to 10.9; 2 studies; 3127 participants; very low-certainty evidence); and likely improvement in Diet Quality Index (MD 3.46, 95% CI 1.54 to 5.38; 747 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). For anthropometry, dietary intervention versus control probably led to a slightly decreased body mass index (BMI) (MD -0.79 kg/m², 95% CI -1.50 to -0.07; 4 studies; 777 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Dietary interventions versus control probably had little or no effect on waist-to-hip ratio (MD -0.01, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.02; 2 studies; 106 participants; low-certainty evidence). For QoL, there were mixed results; several different quality assessment tools were used and evidence was of low to very low-certainty. No adverse events were reported in any of the included studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence demonstrated little effects of dietary interventions on overall mortality and secondary cancers. For comorbidities, no evidence was identified. For nutritional outcomes, there was probably little or no effect on energy intake, although probably a slight increase in fruit and vegetable intake and Diet Quality Index. Results were mixed for fibre. For anthropometry, there was probably a slight decrease in body mass index (BMI) but probably little or no effect on waist-to-hip ratio. For QoL, results were highly varied. Additional high-quality research is needed to examine the effects of dietary interventions for different cancer sites, and to evaluate important outcomes including comorbidities and body composition. Evidence on new technologies used to deliver dietary interventions was limited.

Palliative home parenteral nutrition in patients with ovarian cancer and malignant bowel obstruction: experiences of women and family caregivers.

BACKGROUND: Malnutrition is a problem in advanced cancer, particularly ovarian cancer where malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) is a frequent complication. Parenteral nutrition is the only way these patients can received adequate nutrition and is a principal indication for palliative home parenteral nutrition (HPN). Giving HPN is contentious as it may increase the burden on patients. This study investigates patients' and family caregivers' experiences of HPN, alongside nutritional status and survival in patients with ovarian cancer and MBO. METHODS: This mixed methods study collected data on participant characteristics, clinical details and body composition using computed tomography (CT) combined with longitudinal in-depth interviews underpinned by phenomenological principles. The cohort comprised 38 women with ovarian cancer and inoperable MBO admitted (10/2016 to 12/ 2017) to a tertiary referral hospital. Longitudinal interviews (n = 57) were carried out with 20 women considered for HPN and 13 of their family caregivers. RESULTS: Of the 38 women, 32 received parenteral nutrition (PN) in hospital and 17 were discharged on HPN. Nutritional status was poor with 31 of 33 women who had a CT scan having low muscle mass, although 10 were obese. Median overall survival from admission with MBO for all 38 women was 70 days (range 8-506) and for those 17 on HPN was 156 days (range 46-506). Women experienced HPN as one facet of their illness, but viewed it as a "lifeline" that allowed them to live outside hospital. Nevertheless, HPN treatment came with losses including erosion of normality through an impact on activities of daily living and dealing with the bureaucracy surrounding the process. Family caregivers coped but were often left in an emotionally vulnerable state. CONCLUSIONS: Women and family caregivers reported that the inconvenience and disruption caused by HPN was worth the extended time they had at home.

An Observational Cohort Study Investigating Risk of Malnutrition Using the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool in Patients with Stroke.

BACKGROUND: Malnutrition in patients hospitalized with a stroke have been assessed using different nutritional screening methods but there is a paucity of data linking risk of malnutrition to clinical outcomes using a validated tool. AIMS: To identify the prevalence of malnutrition risk in patients after a stroke and assess the predictive value of the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) on clinical outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using data from electronic records and the Sentinel Stroke National Audit Programme (January 2013 and March 2016), patients aged more than 18 years with confirmed stroke admitted to a tertiary care stroke unit were assessed for risk of malnutrition. The association between malnutrition risk and clinical outcomes was investigated and adjusted for confounding variables. RESULTS: Of 1101 patients, 66% were screened at admission. Most patients (n = 571, 78.5%) were identified as being at low risk, 4.1% (n = 30) at medium risk, and 17.4% (n = 126) at high risk of malnutrition. Compared with low risk, patients with medium or high risk of malnutrition were more likely to have a longer hospital stay (IRR 1.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07, 1.58), and had greater risk of mortality (10.9% versus 3.5%, 95% CI .03, .13). CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of malnutrition assessed by MUST in patients after a stroke was relatively low, but nearly a third of patients were not screened. Patients classified as being at medium or high risk of malnutrition were more likely to experience negative outcomes. Early identification of this population may improve outcome if appropriate care is provided.

Interventions to reduce acute and late adverse gastrointestinal effects of pelvic radiotherapy for primary pelvic cancers.

BACKGROUND: An increasing number of people survive cancer but a significant proportion have gastrointestinal side effects as a result of radiotherapy (RT), which impairs their quality of life (QoL). OBJECTIVES: To determine which prophylactic interventions reduce the incidence, severity or both of adverse gastrointestinal effects among adults receiving radiotherapy to treat primary pelvic cancers. SEARCH METHODS: We conducted searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase in September 2016 and updated them on 2 November 2017. We also searched clinical trial registries. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions to prevent adverse gastrointestinal effects of pelvic radiotherapy among adults receiving radiotherapy to treat primary pelvic cancers, including radiotherapy techniques, other aspects of radiotherapy delivery, pharmacological interventions and non-pharmacological interventions. Studies needed a sample size of 20 or more participants and needed to evaluate gastrointestinal toxicity outcomes. We excluded studies that evaluated dosimetric parameters only. We also excluded trials of interventions to treat acute gastrointestinal symptoms, trials of altered fractionation and dose escalation schedules, and trials of pre- versus postoperative radiotherapy regimens, to restrict the vast scope of the review. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodology. We used the random-effects statistical model for all meta-analyses, and the GRADE system to rate the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included 92 RCTs involving more than 10,000 men and women undergoing pelvic radiotherapy. Trials involved 44 different interventions, including radiotherapy techniques (11 trials, 4 interventions/comparisons), other aspects of radiotherapy delivery (14 trials, 10 interventions), pharmacological interventions (38 trials, 16 interventions), and non-pharmacological interventions (29 trials, 13 interventions). Most studies (79/92) had design limitations. Thirteen studies had a low risk of bias, 50 studies had an unclear risk of bias and 29 studies had a high risk of bias. Main findings include the following:Radiotherapy techniques: Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) versus 3D conformal RT (3DCRT) may reduce acute (risk ratio (RR) 0.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26 to 0.88; participants = 444; studies = 4; I2 = 77%; low-certainty evidence) and late gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity grade 2+ (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.65; participants = 332; studies = 2; I2 = 0%; low-certainty evidence). Conformal RT (3DCRT or IMRT) versus conventional RT reduces acute GI toxicity grade 2+ (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.82; participants = 307; studies = 2; I2 = 0%; high-certainty evidence) and probably leads to less late GI toxicity grade 2+ (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.09; participants = 517; studies = 3; I2 = 44%; moderate-certainty evidence). When brachytherapy (BT) is used instead of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in early endometrial cancer, evidence indicates that it reduces acute GI toxicity (grade 2+) (RR 0.02, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.18; participants = 423; studies = 1; high-certainty evidence).Other aspects of radiotherapy delivery: There is probably little or no difference in acute GI toxicity grade 2+ with reduced radiation dose volume (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.81; participants = 211; studies = 1; moderate-certainty evidence) and maybe no difference in late GI toxicity grade 2+ (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.15 to 6.97; participants = 107; studies = 1; low-certainty evidence). Evening delivery of RT may reduce acute GI toxicity (diarrhoea) grade 2+ during RT compared with morning delivery of RT (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.76; participants = 294; studies = 2; I2 = 0%; low-certainty evidence). There may be no difference in acute (RR 2.22, 95% CI 0.62 to 7.93, participants = 110; studies = 1) and late GI toxicity grade 2+ (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.65; participants = 81; studies = 1) between a bladder volume preparation of 1080 mls and that of 540 mls (low-certainty evidence). Low-certainty evidence on balloon and hydrogel spacers suggests that these interventions for prostate cancer RT may make little or no difference to GI outcomes.Pharmacological interventions: Evidence for any beneficial effects of aminosalicylates, sucralfate, amifostine, corticosteroid enemas, bile acid sequestrants, famotidine and selenium is of a low or very low certainty. However, evidence on certain aminosalicylates (mesalazine, olsalazine), misoprostol suppositories, oral magnesium oxide and octreotide injections suggests that these agents may worsen GI symptoms, such as diarrhoea or rectal bleeding.Non-pharmacological interventions: Low-certainty evidence suggests that protein supplements (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.74; participants = 74; studies = 1), dietary counselling (RR 0.04, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.60; participants = 74; studies = 1) and probiotics (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.82; participants = 923; studies = 5; I2 = 91%) may reduce acute RT-related diarrhoea (grade 2+). Dietary counselling may also reduce diarrhoeal symptoms in the long term (at five years, RR 0.05, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.78; participants = 61; studies = 1). Low-certainty evidence from one study (108 participants) suggests that a high-fibre diet may have a beneficial effect on GI symptoms (mean difference (MD) 6.10, 95% CI 1.71 to 10.49) and quality of life (MD 20.50, 95% CI 9.97 to 31.03) at one year. High-certainty evidence indicates that glutamine supplements do not prevent RT-induced diarrhoea. Evidence on various other non-pharmacological interventions, such as green tea tablets, is lacking.Quality of life was rarely and inconsistently reported across included studies, and the available data were seldom adequate for meta-analysis. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Conformal radiotherapy techniques are an improvement on older radiotherapy techniques. IMRT may be better than 3DCRT in terms of GI toxicity, but the evidence to support this is uncertain. There is no high-quality evidence to support the use of any other prophylactic intervention evaluated. However, evidence on some potential interventions shows that they probably have no role to play in reducing RT-related GI toxicity. More RCTs are needed for interventions with limited evidence suggesting potential benefits.

Home parenteral nutrition for people with inoperable malignant bowel obstruction.

BACKGROUND: People with advanced ovarian or gastrointestinal cancer may develop malignant bowel obstruction (MBO). They are able to tolerate limited, if any, oral or enteral (via a tube directly into the gut) nutrition. Parenteral nutrition (PN) is the provision of macronutrients, micronutrients, electrolytes and fluid infused as an intravenous solution and provides a method for these people to receive nutrients. There are clinical and ethical arguments for and against the administration of PN to people receiving palliative care. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of home parenteral nutrition (HPN) in improving survival and quality of life in people with inoperable MBO. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following electronic databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2018, Issue 1), MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), BNI, CINAHL, Web of Science and NHS Economic Evaluation and Health Technology Assessment up to January 2018, ClinicalTrials.gov (http://clinicaltrials.gov/) and in the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) search portal (http://apps.who.int/trialsearch/). In addition, we handsearched included studies and used the 'Similar articles' feature on PubMed for included articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included any studies with more than five participants investigating HPN in people over 16 years of age with inoperable MBO. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted the data and assessed risk of bias for each study. We entered data into Review Manager 5 and used GRADEpro to assess the quality of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included 13 studies with a total of 721 participants in the review. The studies were observational, 12 studies had only one relevant treatment arm and no control and for the one study with a control arm, very few details were given. The risk of bias was high and the certainty of evidence was graded as very low for all outcomes. Due to heterogeneity of data, meta-analysis was not performed and therefore the data were synthesised via a narrative summary.The evidence for benefit derived from PN was very low for survival and quality of life. All the studies measured overall survival and 636 (88%) of participants were deceased at the end of the study. However there were varying definitions of overall survival that yielded median survival intervals between 15 to 155 days (range three to 1278 days). Three studies used validated measures of quality of life. The results from assessment of quality of life were equivocal; one study reported improvements up until three months and two studies reported approximately similar numbers of participants with improvements and deterioration. Different quality of life scales were used in each of the studies and quality of life was measured at different time points. Due to the very low certainty of the evidence, we are very uncertain about the adverse events related to PN use. Adverse events were measured by nine studies and data for individual participants could be extracted from eight studies. This revealed that 32 of 260 (12%) patients developed a central venous catheter infection or were hospitalised because of complications related to PN. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We are very uncertain whether HPN improves survival or quality of life in people with MBO as the certainty of evidence was very low for both outcomes. As the evidence base is limited and at high risk of bias, further higher-quality prospective studies are required.

Healthcare professionals' views of the enhanced recovery after surgery programme: a qualitative investigation.

BACKGROUND: The Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programme is an approach to the perioperative care of patients which aims to improve outcomes and speed up recovery after surgery. Although the evidence base appears strong for this programme, the implementation of ERAS has been slow. This study aimed to gain an understanding of the facilitating factors and challenges of implementing the programme with a view to providing additional contextual information to aid implementation. The study had a particular focus on the nutritional elements as these have been highlighted as important. METHODS: The study employed qualitative research methods, guided by the Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) to explore the experiences and opinions of 26 healthcare professionals from a range of disciplines implementing the programme. RESULTS: This study identified facilitating factors to the implementation of ERAS: alignment with evidence based practice, standardising practice, drawing on the evidence base of other specialties, leadership, teamwork, ERAS meetings, patient involvement and education, a pre-operative assessment unit, staff education, resources attached to obtaining The Commissioning for Quality and Innovation (CQUIN) money, the ward layout, data collection and feedback, and adapting the care pathway. A number of implementation challenges were also identified: resistance to change, standardisation affecting personalised patient care, the buy-in of relevant stakeholders, keeping ERAS visible, information provision to patients, resources, palatability of nutritional drinks, aligning different ward cultures, patients going to non-ERAS departments, spreading the programme within the hospital, differences in health issue, and utilising a segmental approach.  CONCLUSIONS: The findings presented here provide useful contextual information from diverse surgical specialties to inform healthcare providers when implementing ERAS in practice. Addressing the challenges and utilising the facilitating factors identified in this study, could speed up the rate at which ERAS is adopted, implemented and embedded.

Strategies designed to help healthcare professionals to recruit participants to research studies.

BACKGROUND: Identifying and approaching eligible participants for recruitment to research studies usually relies on healthcare professionals. This process is sometimes hampered by deliberate or inadvertent gatekeeping that can introduce bias into patient selection. OBJECTIVES: Our primary objective was to identify and assess the effect of strategies designed to help healthcare professionals to recruit participants to research studies. SEARCH METHODS: We performed searches on 5 January 2015 in the following electronic databases: Cochrane Methodology Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, British Nursing Index, PsycINFO, ASSIA and Web of Science (SSCI, SCI-EXPANDED) from 1985 onwards. We checked the reference lists of all included studies and relevant review articles and did citation tracking through Web of Science for all included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We selected all studies that evaluated a strategy to identify and recruit participants for research via healthcare professionals and provided pre-post comparison data on recruitment rates. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened search results for potential eligibility, read full papers, applied the selection criteria and extracted data. We calculated risk ratios for each study to indicate the effect of each strategy. MAIN RESULTS: Eleven studies met our eligibility criteria and all were at medium or high risk of bias. Only five studies gave the total number of participants (totalling 7372 participants). Three studies used a randomised design, with the others using pre-post comparisons. Several different strategies were investigated. Four studies examined the impact of additional visits or information for the study site, with no increases in recruitment demonstrated. Increased recruitment rates were reported in two studies that used a dedicated clinical recruiter, and five studies that introduced an automated alert system for identifying eligible participants. The studies were embedded into trials evaluating care in oncology mainly but also in emergency departments, diabetes and lower back pain. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no strong evidence for any single strategy to help healthcare professionals to recruit participants in research studies. Additional visits or information did not appear to increase recruitment by healthcare professionals. The most promising strategies appear to be those with a dedicated resource (e.g. a clinical recruiter or automated alert system) for identifying suitable participants that reduced the demand on healthcare professionals, but these were assessed in studies at high risk of bias.