Effect of Whey Protein Supplementation on Postoperative Outcomes After Gynecological Cancer Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Whey protein's biochemical properties make it an ideal nutritional supplement for patients with cancer, especially in perioperative care. Thus, the present study aims to assess the efficacy of whey protein supplementation (WPS) compared to standard care in enhancing postoperative outcomes for patients undergoing comprehensive surgical staging for gynecological cancer. Methods: In an open-label, randomized controlled trial conducted at Rajavithi Hospital between November 28, 2023 and July 8, 2024, 61 patients scheduled for comprehensive surgical staging were enrolled. Participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either the WPS group (n = 30) or the control group (n = 31). The WPS group received isolated whey protein powder (20 g of protein per serving), administered at 6 pm before surgery and 6 am on the first postoperative day. The control group received standard postoperative care. The primary endpoint was the length of hospital stay (LOHS), with secondary outcomes including gastrointestinal function recovery, postoperative analgesic use, complications, and potential WPS-related adverse events such as transaminitis, acute kidney injury, and electrolyte imbalances. Results: The WPS group had a significantly shorter LOHS than the control group (79.0 ± 6.7 vs. 93.3 ± 28.4 h, P = 0.021). Additionally, the WPS group demonstrated significant improvements in gastrointestinal function, with shorter times to first flatus (P < 0.001), first defecation (P = 0.013), and first ambulation (P = 0.043). No significant differences were observed between the groups regarding postoperative analgesic use or complications, including fever, nausea/vomiting, wound infection, and readmission (P > 0.05). Furthermore, no WPS-related adverse events were reported. Conclusion: The use of WPS in the perioperative operative management of gynecological cancer surgery yields promising results by significantly reducing the LOHS and accelerating the recovery of gastrointestinal function while maintaining a favorable safety profile.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".