Loading…

Efficacy of preoperative immunonutrition in locally advanced pancreatic cancer undergoing irreversible electroporation (IRE)

Abstract Background Improved preoperative immunonutrition has been shown to decrease the length of stay (LOS) and complications among patients undergoing elective gastrointestinal cancer surgeries. The purpose of this study was to determine whether preoperative immunonutrition supplementation decrea...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:European journal of surgical oncology 2017-04, Vol.43 (4), p.772-779
Main Authors: Martin, R.C.G, Agle, S, Schlegel, M, Hayat, T, Scoggins, C.R, McMasters, K.M, Philips, P
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Abstract Background Improved preoperative immunonutrition has been shown to decrease the length of stay (LOS) and complications among patients undergoing elective gastrointestinal cancer surgeries. The purpose of this study was to determine whether preoperative immunonutrition supplementation decreases postoperative LOS, infectious complications, and morbidity in patients undergoing irreversible electroporation (IRE) surgery for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). Methods At a regional hepatopancreatobiliary referral center within an academic medical center 71 patients receiving IRE treatment of LAPC were included in the study. The participants were divided into those receiving preoperative immunonutrition (n=44) and those receiving no supplemental preoperative immunonutrition (n=27). Main outcomes and measures were LOS, postoperative complications, nutritional risk index (NRI), and albumin levels. Results Patients in both groups were similar for preoperative nutrition parameters and operative therapy. Patients in the immunonutrition group experienced a statistically significant decrease in postoperative complications (p=0.05) and LOS (10.7 vs. 17.4, p=0.01), and less of a decrease in nutritional risk index (-12.6 vs. -16.2, p=0.03) and albumin levels (-1.1 vs. -1.5, p
ISSN:0748-7983
1532-2157
DOI:10.1016/j.ejso.2017.01.002