Comparison of different nutritional assessments in detecting malnutrition among gastric cancer patients

Ryu, Seung Wan; Kim, In Ho

doi:10.3748/wjg.v16.i26.3310

Cited by 150 publications

(104 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…considering subjective concepts 7 . From the beginning of this century, attempts have been made to demonstrate the nutritional assessment method that would be more accurate and reliable for certain types of patients or specific clinical conditions 3,8 .…”

Section: General Review Of Nutritional Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Nutritional Risk Index (NRI) is calculated by the equation of serum albumin and weight ratio 3,34 ; the levels of serum protein and albumin significantly correlated with malnutrition, but not with subgroups of SGA or Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS-2002) 34 .…”

Section: Reliability Of Nutritional Assessment In Patients With Gastrmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The NRS-2002 is a nutritional and disease severity score, being the preferred method for evaluating patients at risk or malnourished and for selecting those that could benefit from nutritional support 3 . This nutritional screening was directly related to tumor stage in 100 newly diagnosed patients with stomach cancer, and…”

Section: Reliability Of Nutritional Assessment In Patients With Gastrmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, malnutrition and subsequent weight loss have long been among the leading causes of morbidity and mortality, as well as increased costs with other organs dysfunction associated to cancer patients undergoing surgery 2 . Malnutrition is defined as the energy, protein and other specific nutrients deficient state, which significantly modifies organic functions 3 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Among these factors, malnutrition is the most important due to its high prevalence and negative impact on clinical outcomes such as longer hospital stay 3 and mortality. The latter is much more related to malnutrition than cancer alone and can occur in 20% of cases 4 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Reliability of nutritional assessment in patients with gastrointestinal tumors

Poziomyck

Fruchtenicht

Kabke

et al. 2016

Rev. Col. Bras. Cir.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A B S T R A C TPatients with gastrointestinal cancer and malnutrition are less likely to tolerate major surgical procedures, radiotherapy or chemotherapy.In general, they display a higher incidence of complications such as infection, dehiscence and sepsis, which increases the length of stay and risk of death, and reduces quality of life. The aim of this review is to discuss the pros and cons of different points of view to assess nutritional risk in patients with gastrointestinal tract (GIT) tumors and their viability, considering the current understanding and screening approaches in the field. A better combination of anthropometric, laboratory and subjective evaluations is needed in patients with GIT cancer, since malnutrition in these patients is usually much more severe than in those patients with tumors at sites other than the GIT. Therefore, in the daily practice of oncology, the definition of an appreciable and simple to apply nutritional assessment tool is necessary to identify nutritional risk patients and thus determine the best approach and appropriate nutritional support 8 . The objective of this review is to present an overview of the methods and tools used to determine nutritional risk, considering the pros and cons when applied to patients with GIT cancer. METHODSWe systematically identified studies on nutritional status of patients with GIT cancer through the PubMed and MEDLINE databases. We researched articles published in the last ten years by combining the terms "nutritional assessment", "GI cancer", "gastrointestinal tract", "gastric cancer", "oesophageal cancer" and "pancreatic cancer". We considered for evaluation only complete articles with those terms in English or Portuguese. We identified additional articles from citations in the articles evaluated. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION General review of nutritional assessmentIt was in the 1950s that authors first published research related to nutritional assessment procedures. Subjective methodsIn 1980, Detsky et al. described the Subjective Global Assessment (SGA) used to assess preoperative patients with GIT tumors (n = 202) undergoing major surgical procedures; They have shown that SGA could be easily applied and considered it a valid and reliable method to estimate the surgical patients' nutritional status 12 .Other authors have published several articles supporting the SGA in determining nutritional status, which differed from other methods in considering not only changes in body composition, but also functional changes. In addition, SGA is a simple, inexpensive, non-invasive method and can be performed at bedside.Correct guidance on the SGA application is essential, since its accuracy depends on the observer's ability to detect subjectively significant nutritional changes 8,13,14 .Subsequently, the SGA has undergone modi- Wu et al. had higher incidence of complications and longer hospital stay the worse the level of SGA in patients undergoing major procedures for GIT cancer (mainly gastric) 18 . These results were also supported by our series o...

show abstract

Section: General Review Of Nutritional Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Reliability Of Nutritional Assessment In Patients With Gastrmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Reliability Of Nutritional Assessment In Patients With Gastrmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Reliability of nutritional assessment in patients with gastrointestinal tumors

Poziomyck

Fruchtenicht

Kabke

et al. 2016

Rev. Col. Bras. Cir.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Perioperative Risk Assessment in Robotic General Surgery

Buchs¹,

Addeo²,

Bianco³

et al. 2012

Arch Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Eight hundred eightyfour consecutive patients who underwent a robotic procedure in our institution between April 2007 and July 2010. Main Outcomes Measures: Perioperative morbidity and mortality.Results: During the study period, 884 patients underwent a robotic procedure. The conversion rate was 2%, the mortality rate was 0.5%, and the overall postoperative morbidity rate was 16.7%. The reoperation rate was 2.4%. Mean length of stay was 4.5 days (range, 0.2-113 days). In univariate analysis, several factors were associated with increased morbidity and included either patientrelated (cardiovascular and renal comorbidities, Ameri-can Society of Anesthesiologists score Ն3, body mass index [calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared] Ͻ30, age Ն70 years, and malignant disease) or procedure-related (blood loss Ն500 mL, transfusion, multiquadrant operation, and advanced procedure) factors. In multivariate analysis, advanced procedure, multiquadrant surgery, malignant disease, body mass index of less than 30, hypertension, and transfusion were factors significantly associated with a higher risk for complications. American Society of Anesthesiologists score of 3 or greater, age 70 years or older, cardiovascular comorbidity, and blood loss of 500 mL or more were also associated with increased risk for mortality.Conclusions: Use of the robotic approach for general surgery can be achieved safely with low morbidity and mortality. Several risk factors have been identified as independent causes for higher morbidity and mortality. These can be used to identify patients at risk before and during the surgery and, in the future, to develop a scoring system for the use of robotic general surgery.

show abstract

Early vs delayed enteral nutrition or parenteral nutrition in hospitalized patients: An umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta‐analyses of randomized trials

Zeraattalab-Motlagh

Vajdi²,

Nielsen

et al. 2023

Nut in Clin Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We conducted an umbrella review to summarize the existing evidence on the effect of early enteral nutrition (EEN) compared with other approaches, including delayed enteral nutrition (DEN), parenteral nutrition (PN), and oral feeding (OF) on clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients. We performed a systematic search up to December 2021, in MEDLINE (via PubMed), Scopus, and Institute for Scientific Information Web of Science. We included systematic reviews with meta-analyses (SRMAs) of randomized trials investigating EEN compared with DEN, PN, or OF for any clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients. We used "A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews" (AMSTAR2) and the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for assessing the methodological quality of the systematic reviews and their included trial, respectively. The certainty of the evidence was rated using the "Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation" (GRADE) approach. We included 45 eligible SRMAs contributing with a total of 103 randomized controlled trials.

show abstract

Comparison of different nutritional assessments in detecting malnutrition among gastric cancer patients

Abstract: A combination of objective and subjective assessments is needed for the early detection of the nutritional status in case of gastric cancer patients after gastrectomy.

Cited by 150 publications

References 29 publications

Reliability of nutritional assessment in patients with gastrointestinal tumors

Reliability of nutritional assessment in patients with gastrointestinal tumors

Perioperative Risk Assessment in Robotic General Surgery

Early vs delayed enteral nutrition or parenteral nutrition in hospitalized patients: An umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta‐analyses of randomized trials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About