Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 259

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 47 of the 47 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Pre-operative Nutrition Support in Patients Undergoing Gastrointestinal Surgery.

Open access
Burden, Sorrel, Todd, Chris, Hill, James, Lal, Simon·2012·Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Abstract

Post-operative management in gastrointestinal (GI) surgery is becoming well established with 'Enhanced Recovery After Surgery' protocols starting 24 hours prior to surgery with carbohydrate loading and early oral or enteral feeding given to patients the first day following surgery. However, whether or not nutritional intervention should be initiated earlier in the preoperative period remains unclear. Poor pre-operative nutritional status has been linked consistently to an increase in post-operative complications and poorer surgical outcome. To review the literature on preoperative nutritional support in patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery (GI). The searches were initially run in March 2011 and subsequently updated in February 2012. Databases including all EBM Reviews (Cochrane DSR, ACP Journal Club, DARE, CCTR, CMR, HTA and NHSEED) MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, British Nursing Index Archive using OvidSP were included and a search was run on each database separately after which duplicates were excluded. The inclusion criteria were randomised controlled trials that evaluated pre-operative nutritional support in GI surgical participants using a nutritional formula delivered by a parenteral, enteral or oral route. The primary outcomes included post-operative complications and length of hospital stay. Two observers screened the abstracts for inclusion in the review and performed data extraction. Bias was assessed for each of the included studies using the bias assessment tables in the Cochrane Software Review Manager (version 5.1, Cochrane Collaboration). The trials were analysed using risk ratios with Mantel-Haenszel in fixed effects methods displayed with heterogeneity. Meta-analyses were undertaken on trials evaluating immune enhancing (IE) nutrition, standard oral supplements, enteral and parenteral nutrition (PN) which were administered pre-operatively.Study characteristics were summarised in tables. Dichotomous and ratio data were entered into meta-analyses for the primary outcomes. These were then summarised in tables with assumed and corresponding risk with relative effect giving 95% confidence intervals. The searches identified 9900 titles and, after excluding duplicates, 6433 titles were initially screened. After the initial title screen, 6266 were excluded. Abstracts were screened for 167 studies and 33 articles were identified as meeting the inclusion criteria, of which 13 were included in the review after an assessment of the complete manuscripts.Seven trials evaluating IE nutrition were included in the review, of which 6 were combined in a meta-analysis. These studies showed a low to moderate level of heterogeneity and significantly reduced total post-operative complications (risk ratio (RR) 0.67 CI 0.53 to 0.84). Three trials evaluating PN were included in a meta-analysis and a significant reduction in post-operative complications was demonstrated (RR 0.64 95% CI 0.46 to 0.87) with low heterogeneity, in predominantly malnourished participants. Two trials evaluating enteral nutrition (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.10) and 3 trials evaluating standard oral supplements (RR 1.01 95% CI 0.56 to 1.10) were included, neither of which showed any difference in the primary outcomes. There have been significant benefits demonstrated with pre-operative administration of IE nutrition in some high quality trials. However, bias was identified which may limit the generalizability of these results to all GI surgical candidates and the data needs to be placed in context with other recent innovations in surgical management (eg-ERAS). Some unwanted effects have also been reported with components of IE nutrition in critical care patients and it is unknown whether there would be detrimental effects by administering IE nutrition to patients who could require critical care support after their surgery. The studies evaluating PN demonstrated that the provision of PN to predominantly malnourished surgical candidates reduced post-operative complications; however, these data may not be applicable to current clinical practice, not least because they have involved a high degree of 'hyperalimentation'. Trials evaluating enteral or oral nutrition were inconclusive and further studies are required to select GI surgical patients for these nutritional interventions.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/14651858.cd008879.pub2

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 47 references

Cited by

See all 259

Metadata

Authors
Burden, S., Todd, C., Hill, J., & Lal, S.
Venue
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-11-14
ISSN
  • 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-1858
OpenAlex
W4365787129
Cited by
259
References
47
FWCI
12.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Pre-operative Nutrition Support in Patients Undergoing Gastrointestinal Surgery. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/14651858.cd008879.pub2
The paper
Burden, S., Todd, C., Hill, J., & Lal, S. (2012). Pre-operative Nutrition Support in Patients Undergoing Gastrointestinal Surgery. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd008879.pub2

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.