Gastric Cancer, Pancreatic Cancer
Conditions
Keywords
immunonutrition, enteral nutrition, parenteral nutrition, surgery
Brief summary
The aim of the study was to assess the clinical effect of immunostimulatory enteral and parenteral nutrition in patients undergoing resection for gastrointestinal cancer. 205 subjects were randomly assigned into four study groups, standard and immunostimulating, enteral and parenteral. The study was designed to test the hypothesis that immunonutrition and enteral nutrition would reduce the incidence of infectious complications following upper gastrointestinal surgery.
Detailed description
All patients qualified between June 2001 and December 2005 to total and distal subtotal gastrectomy or pancreaticoduodenectomy were screened for eligibility to participate in the study. Additional eligibility criteria included: age between 18 and 80 years, Karnofsky performance status score of 80 or more, and adequate organ function measured by routine blood tests. Patients requiring preoperative nutritional support, as well as those with disseminated tumors, serious comorbidities (American Society of Anesthesiologists risk class of 4 or 5), and renal or liver failure were excluded. The study was designed to test the hypothesis that immunonutrition and enteral nutrition would reduce the incidence of infectious complications following upper gastrointestinal surgery. Therefore, patients were randomly assigned in a 2×2 factorial design to four groups receiving immunostimulating versus normal diets, and enteral versus intravenous nutritional support. The secondary objective of the study was to evaluate the effect of nutritional intervention on overall morbidity and mortality rates, and the length of hospital stay. After completing tumor resection, patients who met the eligibility criteria were intraoperatively assigned to either of the treatment groups using sealed envelopes containing computer-generated allocation numbers. The following groups were generated: standard enteral nutrition (SEN), immunostimulating enteral nutrition (IMEN), standard parenteral nutrition (SPN), and immunostimulating parenteral nutrition (IMPN). The study was carried out following the international ethical recommendations stated in the Declaration of Helsinki.
Interventions
DRUGpeptisorb
standard isocaloric eteral diet (1 ml = 1 kcal)
DRUGStresson
Oligopeptic, enteral diet (1 ml=1.25 kcal)
DRUGParenteral nutrition
Protein requirements were covered by 10 and 15% amino acid solutions (Aminoplasmal, B Braun, Poland). Energy requirements were covered by glucose (10, 20 and 40% solutions, B Braun, Poland) and lipid emulsions (10 and 20% Lipofundin MCT/ LCT, B Braun, Poland). Addtional: Tracutil, Addamel
DRUGOmegaven, Dipeptiven
Immunostimulating components: Omegaven (omega-3-fatty acids) and Dipeptiven (Glutamine Arginine) Protein requirements were covered by 10 and 15% amino acid solutions (Aminoplasmal, B Braun, Poland). Energy requirements were covered by glucose (10, 20 and 40% solutions, B Braun, Poland) and lipid emulsions (10 and 20% Lipofundin MCT/ LCT, B Braun, Poland). Addtional: Tracutil, Addamel
Sponsors
Jagiellonian University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
CROSSOVER
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 85 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* resectable gastric or pancreatic cancer * age between 18 and 80 years, * Karnofsky performance status score of 80 or more, * adequate organ function
Exclusion criteria
* unresectable gastric or pancreatic cancer * patients requiring preoperative nutritional support, * disseminated tumors, * serious comorbidities (American Society of Anesthesiologists risk class of 4 or 5), * renal or liver failure were excluded
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| During the postoperative period, all patients were observed for both surgical and non-surgical complications | 52 months |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| The secondary objective of the study was to evaluate the effect of nutritional intervention on overall morbidity and mortality rates, and hospital stay. | 52 months |
Countries
Poland
Outcome results
None listed