Effects of omega-3 fatty acids supplementation on perioperative blood loss and complications after radical prostatectomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Many dietary supplements, including omega-3 fatty acids (ω3), are suspected to affect blood coagulation and platelet function. Despite no clinical evidence, discontinuation is recommended before radical prostatectomy. However, long-chain ω3 (LCω3) appear beneficial against prostate cancer progression. Here, we aim to determine the effect of LCω3 supplements on perioperative bleeding, hemoglobin, platelets, and postoperative complications after radical prostatectomy. METHODS: This is a planned exploratory analysis of 130 patients diagnosed with prostate cancer grade group 2 or greater enrolled in a randomized controlled trial (NCT02333435) testing the effects of LCω3, on prostate cancer biological and pathological outcomes at radical prostatectomy as main outcomes. The LCω3 intervention (MAG-EPA 3 g daily) or equivalent placebo was given 4-10 weeks prior to radical prostatectomy. An intention-to-treat analysis approach was used with bi-variate statistical testing of bleeding and complications outcomes. We also estimated the difference between groups using linear regression and non-parametric quantile regression models. All models were adjusted for confounding variables selected on clinical relevance. RESULTS: We found no clinically significant effect of LCω3 versus placebo on perioperative bleeding, laboratory tests or postoperative complications. In contrast, as expected, we found a significant increase in perioperative bleeding in open retropubic radical prostatectomy compared to robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (adjusted difference 115.8 mL, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that ω3 supplements can be safely taken before radical prostatectomy without increasing surgical bleeding risk. These findings are relevant since ω3 may beneficially affect prostate cancer evolution.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".