Best evidence summary for nutritional management of cancer patients with chyle leaks following surgery
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Chyle leaks (CL) is a significant postoperative complication following lymph node dissection in cancer patients. Persistent CK is related to a series of adverse outcomes. Nutritional management is considered an effectively strategy that treat CL. However, the existing evidence on nutritional management for this patient cohort fails to provide actionable clinical guidance. Aim: This study was aimed to establish an evidence-based framework for nutritional management, offering reliable basis for clinical nursing practice. Methods: Utilizing the "6S" mode, we conducted a systematic search of UpToDate, BMJ, Best Practice, Cochrane Library, Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Center for Evidence-Based Health Care Database, National Guideline Clearinghouse (NGC), Guidelines International Network (GIN), National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN), Registered Nurses' Association of Ontario (RNAO), World Health Organization, Medlive, American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN), European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN), Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, China Biology Medicine (CBM), and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) for all evidence on the nutritional management of postoperative coeliac leakage in cancer patients. This search included guidelines, evidence summaries, expert consensus, clinical decision-making, recommended practices, systematic evaluations or Meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and class experiments. The search timeframe was from the library's establishment to June 2024. Quality assessment of the literature was completed independently by two researchers with professional evidence-based training and expert advice, and evidence was extracted and summarized for those that met the quality criteria. Results: A total of 13 articles were included in the analysis, comprising two expert consensus, one guideline, one class of experimental studies, seven systematic evaluations, and two clinical decisions. We summarized 22 pieces of evidence across five categories: nutritional screening, assessment, and monitoring, timing of nutritional therapy, methods and approaches to nutritional therapy, nutrient requirements, and dietary modification strategies. Conclusion: This study presents key evidence for nutritional management in cancer patients with CL post-surgery, emphasizing nutritional screening, assessment, timing and methods of therapy, and dietary adjustment strategies. It emphasized the necessity of thorough screening tools for the assessment of nutritional condition, and the benefits of early enteral feeding. A multidisciplinary team approach is vital for conducting personalized dietary, while sustained nutritional support, dietary fat restrictions, and medium-chain triglycerides enhance nutrient absorption. Consistent monitoring of chylous fluid output and timely dietary adjustments are crucial for improving patient outcomes and recovery. Systematic review registration: http://ebn.nursing.fudan.edu.cn/registerResources, identifier ES20244732.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».