Cargando…
Faster recovery and bowel movement after early oral feeding compared to late oral feeding after upper GI tumor resections: a meta-analysis
BACKGROUND: There were more than 1 million new cases of stomach cancer concerning oesophageal cancer, there were more than 600,000 new cases of oesophageal cancer in 2020. After a successful resection in these cases, the role of early oral feeding (EOF) was questionable, due to the possibility of fa...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10248085/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37304183 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2023.1092303 |
_version_ | 1785055295414730752 |
---|---|
author | Sindler, Dóra Lili Mátrai, Péter Szakó, Lajos Berki, Dávid Berke, Gergő Csontos, Armand Papp, Csenge Hegyi, Péter Papp, András |
author_facet | Sindler, Dóra Lili Mátrai, Péter Szakó, Lajos Berki, Dávid Berke, Gergő Csontos, Armand Papp, Csenge Hegyi, Péter Papp, András |
author_sort | Sindler, Dóra Lili |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: There were more than 1 million new cases of stomach cancer concerning oesophageal cancer, there were more than 600,000 new cases of oesophageal cancer in 2020. After a successful resection in these cases, the role of early oral feeding (EOF) was questionable, due to the possibility of fatal anastomosis leakage. It is still debated whether EOF is more advantageous compared to late oral feeding. Our study aimed to compare the effect of early postoperative oral feeding and late oral feeding after upper gastrointestinal resections due to malignancy. METHODS: Two authors performed an extensive search and selection of articles independently to identify randomized control trials (RCT) of the question of interest. Statistical analyses were performed including mean difference, odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals, statistical heterogeneity, and statistical publication bias, to identify potential significant differences. The Risk of Bias and the quality of evidence were estimated. RESULTS: We identified 6 relevant RCTs, which included 703 patients. The appearance of the first gas (MD = −1.16; p = 0.009), first defecation (MD = −0.91; p < 0.001), and the length of hospitalization (MD = −1.92; p = 0.008) favored the EOF group. Numerous binary outcomes were defined, but significant difference was not verified in the case of anastomosis insufficiency (p = 0.98), pneumonia (p = 0.88), wound infection (p = 0.48), bleeding (p = 0.52), rehospitalization (p = 0.23), rehospitalization to the intensive care unit (ICU) (p = 0.46), gastrointestinal paresis (p = 0.66), ascites (p = 0.45). CONCLUSION: Early postoperative oral feeding, compared to late oral feeding has no risk of several possible postoperative morbidities after upper GI surgeries, but has several advantageous effects on a patient's recovery. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: identifier, CRD 42022302594. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10248085 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-102480852023-06-09 Faster recovery and bowel movement after early oral feeding compared to late oral feeding after upper GI tumor resections: a meta-analysis Sindler, Dóra Lili Mátrai, Péter Szakó, Lajos Berki, Dávid Berke, Gergő Csontos, Armand Papp, Csenge Hegyi, Péter Papp, András Front Surg Surgery BACKGROUND: There were more than 1 million new cases of stomach cancer concerning oesophageal cancer, there were more than 600,000 new cases of oesophageal cancer in 2020. After a successful resection in these cases, the role of early oral feeding (EOF) was questionable, due to the possibility of fatal anastomosis leakage. It is still debated whether EOF is more advantageous compared to late oral feeding. Our study aimed to compare the effect of early postoperative oral feeding and late oral feeding after upper gastrointestinal resections due to malignancy. METHODS: Two authors performed an extensive search and selection of articles independently to identify randomized control trials (RCT) of the question of interest. Statistical analyses were performed including mean difference, odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals, statistical heterogeneity, and statistical publication bias, to identify potential significant differences. The Risk of Bias and the quality of evidence were estimated. RESULTS: We identified 6 relevant RCTs, which included 703 patients. The appearance of the first gas (MD = −1.16; p = 0.009), first defecation (MD = −0.91; p < 0.001), and the length of hospitalization (MD = −1.92; p = 0.008) favored the EOF group. Numerous binary outcomes were defined, but significant difference was not verified in the case of anastomosis insufficiency (p = 0.98), pneumonia (p = 0.88), wound infection (p = 0.48), bleeding (p = 0.52), rehospitalization (p = 0.23), rehospitalization to the intensive care unit (ICU) (p = 0.46), gastrointestinal paresis (p = 0.66), ascites (p = 0.45). CONCLUSION: Early postoperative oral feeding, compared to late oral feeding has no risk of several possible postoperative morbidities after upper GI surgeries, but has several advantageous effects on a patient's recovery. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: identifier, CRD 42022302594. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-05-25 /pmc/articles/PMC10248085/ /pubmed/37304183 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2023.1092303 Text en © 2023 Sindler, Mátrai, Szakó, Berki, Berke, Csontos, Papp, Hegyi and Papp. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Surgery Sindler, Dóra Lili Mátrai, Péter Szakó, Lajos Berki, Dávid Berke, Gergő Csontos, Armand Papp, Csenge Hegyi, Péter Papp, András Faster recovery and bowel movement after early oral feeding compared to late oral feeding after upper GI tumor resections: a meta-analysis |
title | Faster recovery and bowel movement after early oral feeding compared to late oral feeding after upper GI tumor resections: a meta-analysis |
title_full | Faster recovery and bowel movement after early oral feeding compared to late oral feeding after upper GI tumor resections: a meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Faster recovery and bowel movement after early oral feeding compared to late oral feeding after upper GI tumor resections: a meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Faster recovery and bowel movement after early oral feeding compared to late oral feeding after upper GI tumor resections: a meta-analysis |
title_short | Faster recovery and bowel movement after early oral feeding compared to late oral feeding after upper GI tumor resections: a meta-analysis |
title_sort | faster recovery and bowel movement after early oral feeding compared to late oral feeding after upper gi tumor resections: a meta-analysis |
topic | Surgery |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10248085/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37304183 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2023.1092303 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sindlerdoralili fasterrecoveryandbowelmovementafterearlyoralfeedingcomparedtolateoralfeedingafteruppergitumorresectionsametaanalysis AT matraipeter fasterrecoveryandbowelmovementafterearlyoralfeedingcomparedtolateoralfeedingafteruppergitumorresectionsametaanalysis AT szakolajos fasterrecoveryandbowelmovementafterearlyoralfeedingcomparedtolateoralfeedingafteruppergitumorresectionsametaanalysis AT berkidavid fasterrecoveryandbowelmovementafterearlyoralfeedingcomparedtolateoralfeedingafteruppergitumorresectionsametaanalysis AT berkegergo fasterrecoveryandbowelmovementafterearlyoralfeedingcomparedtolateoralfeedingafteruppergitumorresectionsametaanalysis AT csontosarmand fasterrecoveryandbowelmovementafterearlyoralfeedingcomparedtolateoralfeedingafteruppergitumorresectionsametaanalysis AT pappcsenge fasterrecoveryandbowelmovementafterearlyoralfeedingcomparedtolateoralfeedingafteruppergitumorresectionsametaanalysis AT hegyipeter fasterrecoveryandbowelmovementafterearlyoralfeedingcomparedtolateoralfeedingafteruppergitumorresectionsametaanalysis AT pappandras fasterrecoveryandbowelmovementafterearlyoralfeedingcomparedtolateoralfeedingafteruppergitumorresectionsametaanalysis |