4.3 Article

The Impact of Preoperative Enteral Nutrition Enriched with Eicosapentaenoic Acid on Postoperative Hypercytokinemia after Pancreatoduodenectomy: The Results of a Double-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial

Journal

DIGESTIVE SURGERY
Volume 36, Issue 4, Pages 348-356

Publisher

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000490110

Keywords

Pancreatoduodenectomy; Eicosapentaenoic acid; Interleukin-6

Funding

  1. Pharma-Valley Center, Shizuoka

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aims: To investigate whether preoperative enteral diets enriched in eicosapentaenoic acid ( EPA) supplements could reduce the incidence of hypercytokinemia after pancreato-duodenectomy ( PD) in a double- blinded randomized controlled trial. Methods: Patients with resectable periampullary cancer were randomized into either the control group or the treatment group. Patients in the treatment group received oral supplementation (600 kcal/day) containing EPA for 7 days before surgery. Patients in the control group received isocaloric isonitrogenous standard nutrition (600 kcal/day) without EPA for 7 days before surgery. The primary endpoint was postoperative serum concentrations of interleukin-6 (IL-6). The secondary endpoints were the postoperative nutritional status and the incidence of post-operative infectious complications. Results: Twenty-four patients were enrolled in the present study. After exclusion, 20 patients (control group, n = 9; treatment group, n = 11) were analyzed. There were no significant differences in the curves for the serum concentration of IL-6 (p = 0.68) or the incidence of infectious complications between the 2 groups (control group: 78%, treatment group: 55%, p = 0.37). Conclusions: The results of a double-blinded randomized controlled trial indicated that preoperative immunonutrition had no marked impact on the rates of postoperative hypercytokinemia or infectious complications after PD. (C) 2018 S. Karger AG, Basel

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available