Early versus traditional postoperative feeding in patients undergoing resectional gastrointestinal surgery: A meta-analysis

Emma J Osland, Rossita Mohamad Yunus, Shahjahan Khan, Muhammed Ashra Memon

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

125 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: A meta-analysis evaluating surgical outcomes following nutritional provision provided proximal to the anastomosis within 24 hours of gastrointestinal surgery compared with traditional postoperative management was conducted. Methods: Databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials comparing the outcomes of early and traditional postoperative feeding. Trials involving gastrointestinal tract resection followed by patients receiving nutritionally significant oral or enteral intake within 24 hours after surgery were included for analysis. Results: Fifteen studies involving a total of 1240 patients were analyzed. A statistically significant reduction (45%) in relative odds of total postoperative complications was seen in patients receiving early postoperative feeding (odds ratio [OR] 0.55; confidence interval [CI], 0.35 -0.87, P = .01). No effect of early feeding was seen with relation to anastomotic dehiscence (OR 0.75; CI, 0.39-1.4, P = .39), mortality (OR 0.71; CI, 0.32-1.56, P = .39), days to passage of flatus (weighted mean difference [WMD] -0.42; CI, -1.12 to 0.28, P = .23), first bowel motion (WMD -0.28; CI, -1.20 to 0.64, P = .55), or reduced length of stay (WMD -1.28; CI, -2.94 to 0.38, P = .13); however, the direction of clinical outcomes favored early feeding. Nasogastric tube reinsertion was less common in traditional feeding interventions (OR 1.48; CI, 0.93-2.35, P = .10). Conclusions: Early postoperative nutrition is associated with significant reductions in total complications compared with traditional postoperative feeding practices and does not negatively affect outcomes such as mortality, anastomotic dehiscence, resumption of bowel function, or hospital length of stay.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)473-487
Number of pages15
JournalJournal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition
Volume35
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jul 2011

Fingerprint

Meta-Analysis
Confidence Intervals
Odds Ratio
Length of Stay
Pyridinolcarbamate
Flatulence
Mortality
Small Intestine
Gastrointestinal Tract
Randomized Controlled Trials
Databases

Cite this

Osland, Emma J ; Yunus, Rossita Mohamad ; Khan, Shahjahan ; Memon, Muhammed Ashra. / Early versus traditional postoperative feeding in patients undergoing resectional gastrointestinal surgery : A meta-analysis. In: Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition. 2011 ; Vol. 35, No. 4. pp. 473-487.
@article{55d7d6b821d24ece91a95412e24e8953,
title = "Early versus traditional postoperative feeding in patients undergoing resectional gastrointestinal surgery: A meta-analysis",
abstract = "Background: A meta-analysis evaluating surgical outcomes following nutritional provision provided proximal to the anastomosis within 24 hours of gastrointestinal surgery compared with traditional postoperative management was conducted. Methods: Databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials comparing the outcomes of early and traditional postoperative feeding. Trials involving gastrointestinal tract resection followed by patients receiving nutritionally significant oral or enteral intake within 24 hours after surgery were included for analysis. Results: Fifteen studies involving a total of 1240 patients were analyzed. A statistically significant reduction (45{\%}) in relative odds of total postoperative complications was seen in patients receiving early postoperative feeding (odds ratio [OR] 0.55; confidence interval [CI], 0.35 -0.87, P = .01). No effect of early feeding was seen with relation to anastomotic dehiscence (OR 0.75; CI, 0.39-1.4, P = .39), mortality (OR 0.71; CI, 0.32-1.56, P = .39), days to passage of flatus (weighted mean difference [WMD] -0.42; CI, -1.12 to 0.28, P = .23), first bowel motion (WMD -0.28; CI, -1.20 to 0.64, P = .55), or reduced length of stay (WMD -1.28; CI, -2.94 to 0.38, P = .13); however, the direction of clinical outcomes favored early feeding. Nasogastric tube reinsertion was less common in traditional feeding interventions (OR 1.48; CI, 0.93-2.35, P = .10). Conclusions: Early postoperative nutrition is associated with significant reductions in total complications compared with traditional postoperative feeding practices and does not negatively affect outcomes such as mortality, anastomotic dehiscence, resumption of bowel function, or hospital length of stay.",
author = "Osland, {Emma J} and Yunus, {Rossita Mohamad} and Shahjahan Khan and Memon, {Muhammed Ashra}",
year = "2011",
month = "7",
doi = "10.1177/0148607110385698",
language = "English",
volume = "35",
pages = "473--487",
journal = "Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition",
issn = "0148-6071",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "4",

}

Early versus traditional postoperative feeding in patients undergoing resectional gastrointestinal surgery : A meta-analysis. / Osland, Emma J; Yunus, Rossita Mohamad; Khan, Shahjahan; Memon, Muhammed Ashra.

In: Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, Vol. 35, No. 4, 07.2011, p. 473-487.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Early versus traditional postoperative feeding in patients undergoing resectional gastrointestinal surgery

T2 - A meta-analysis

AU - Osland, Emma J

AU - Yunus, Rossita Mohamad

AU - Khan, Shahjahan

AU - Memon, Muhammed Ashra

PY - 2011/7

Y1 - 2011/7

N2 - Background: A meta-analysis evaluating surgical outcomes following nutritional provision provided proximal to the anastomosis within 24 hours of gastrointestinal surgery compared with traditional postoperative management was conducted. Methods: Databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials comparing the outcomes of early and traditional postoperative feeding. Trials involving gastrointestinal tract resection followed by patients receiving nutritionally significant oral or enteral intake within 24 hours after surgery were included for analysis. Results: Fifteen studies involving a total of 1240 patients were analyzed. A statistically significant reduction (45%) in relative odds of total postoperative complications was seen in patients receiving early postoperative feeding (odds ratio [OR] 0.55; confidence interval [CI], 0.35 -0.87, P = .01). No effect of early feeding was seen with relation to anastomotic dehiscence (OR 0.75; CI, 0.39-1.4, P = .39), mortality (OR 0.71; CI, 0.32-1.56, P = .39), days to passage of flatus (weighted mean difference [WMD] -0.42; CI, -1.12 to 0.28, P = .23), first bowel motion (WMD -0.28; CI, -1.20 to 0.64, P = .55), or reduced length of stay (WMD -1.28; CI, -2.94 to 0.38, P = .13); however, the direction of clinical outcomes favored early feeding. Nasogastric tube reinsertion was less common in traditional feeding interventions (OR 1.48; CI, 0.93-2.35, P = .10). Conclusions: Early postoperative nutrition is associated with significant reductions in total complications compared with traditional postoperative feeding practices and does not negatively affect outcomes such as mortality, anastomotic dehiscence, resumption of bowel function, or hospital length of stay.

AB - Background: A meta-analysis evaluating surgical outcomes following nutritional provision provided proximal to the anastomosis within 24 hours of gastrointestinal surgery compared with traditional postoperative management was conducted. Methods: Databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials comparing the outcomes of early and traditional postoperative feeding. Trials involving gastrointestinal tract resection followed by patients receiving nutritionally significant oral or enteral intake within 24 hours after surgery were included for analysis. Results: Fifteen studies involving a total of 1240 patients were analyzed. A statistically significant reduction (45%) in relative odds of total postoperative complications was seen in patients receiving early postoperative feeding (odds ratio [OR] 0.55; confidence interval [CI], 0.35 -0.87, P = .01). No effect of early feeding was seen with relation to anastomotic dehiscence (OR 0.75; CI, 0.39-1.4, P = .39), mortality (OR 0.71; CI, 0.32-1.56, P = .39), days to passage of flatus (weighted mean difference [WMD] -0.42; CI, -1.12 to 0.28, P = .23), first bowel motion (WMD -0.28; CI, -1.20 to 0.64, P = .55), or reduced length of stay (WMD -1.28; CI, -2.94 to 0.38, P = .13); however, the direction of clinical outcomes favored early feeding. Nasogastric tube reinsertion was less common in traditional feeding interventions (OR 1.48; CI, 0.93-2.35, P = .10). Conclusions: Early postoperative nutrition is associated with significant reductions in total complications compared with traditional postoperative feeding practices and does not negatively affect outcomes such as mortality, anastomotic dehiscence, resumption of bowel function, or hospital length of stay.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80051879644&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0148607110385698

DO - 10.1177/0148607110385698

M3 - Article

VL - 35

SP - 473

EP - 487

JO - Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition

JF - Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition

SN - 0148-6071

IS - 4

ER -