Peri-operative oral immunonutrition in malnourished ovarian cancer patients assessed by the nutritional risk screening

Abstract

The current study showed no improvement of the complication rate or the time of hospitalization due to additional peri-operative immunonutrition in malnourished ovarian cancer patients. However, a trend towards the reduction of infectious complications could be seen in the IG.

Prehabilitation to Improve Outcomes of Patients with Gynaecological Cancer: A New Window of Opportunity?

“…Arnaboldi [25] Aubrey [29] Diaz-Feijoo [28] Fernández-Candea [30] Hertlein [26] Seibaek [27] Serious risk; Moderate risk; Low risk; No information.…”

“…Four of the included studies were nonrandomised prospective studies [ 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 ], two were retrospective studies [ 29 , 30 ] and one was a case report [ 31 ]. All studies were single-institution designs, with five studies being comparative studies, comparing prehabilitation to standard care [ 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 30 ].…”

“…Four of the included studies were nonrandomised prospective studies [ 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 ], two were retrospective studies [ 29 , 30 ] and one was a case report [ 31 ]. All studies were single-institution designs, with five studies being comparative studies, comparing prehabilitation to standard care [ 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 30 ]. The study by Diaz-Feijoo et al was included as a preliminary report prior to their later publication in 2022 [ 28 , 32 ].…”

“…As chemotherapy is an integral part of ovarian cancer management, a delay in adjuvant treatment beyond 25 to 35 days due to surgical morbidity will result in a significantly poorer prognosis [29]. Other studies, however, failed to demonstrate such improvements [26][27][28]30]. Whilst this may be related to differences in the outcome measures reported, it is also likely that bias related to confounding and selection impacted on the ability of these studies to accurately measure the true effectiveness of the interventions.…”

“…A total of seven stud gynaecological cancer pa outcome measures were with adequate handling improvements in time to patients [28]. As chemoth in adjuvant treatment be significantly poorer prog Hertlein [26] methods used to measure outcomes, such as questionnaires [27]; and significant differences in standard care between intervention and control groups [30]. Several studies had a significant selection bias, with Arnaboldi et al allocating patients to the intervention based on their preoperative psychological distress inventory (PDI) score and Seibaek et al allocating patients to the intervention based on presence of ascites [25,27].…”