Perioperative Intravenous Glutamine Supplemetation in Major Abdominal Surgery for Cancer A Randomized Multicenter Trial

Department of Surgery, Milano-Bicocca University, S. Gerardo Hospital, Monza, Italy.
Annals of surgery (Impact Factor: 8.33). 10/2009; 250(5):684-90. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181bcb28d
Source: PubMed


To investigate whether perioperative intravenous glutamine supplementation may affect surgical morbidity.
Small-sized randomized trials showed a trend toward a reduction of postoperative infections in surgical patients receiving glutamine.
: A randomized, multicentre trial was carried out in 428 subjects who were candidates for elective major gastrointestinal surgery. Inclusion criteria were: documented gastrointestinal cancer, weight loss <10% in previous 6 months, and age >18 years. Patients received either intravenous infusion of L-alanine-L-glutamine dipeptide (0.40 g/kg/d; equal to 0.25 g of free glutamine) (Ala-Glu group, n = 212), or no supplementation (control group, n = 216). Glutamine infusion began the day before operation and continued postoperatively for at least 5 days. No postoperative artificial nutrition was allowed unless patients could not adequately eat by day 7. Postoperative morbidity was assessed by independent observers according to a priori definition.
Patients were homogenous for baseline and surgical characteristics. Mean percent of weight loss was 1.4 (2.7) in controls and 1.4 (2.4) in Ala-Glu group. Overall postoperative complication rate was 34.9% (74/212) in Ala-Glu and 32.9% (71/216) in control group (P = 0.65). Infectious morbidity was 19.3% (41/212) in Ala-Glu group and 17.1% (37/216) in controls (P = 0.55). The rate of major complications was 7.5% (16/212) in Ala-Glu group and 7.9% (17/216) in controls (P = 0.90). Mean length of hospitalization was 10.2 days (4.8) in Ala-Glu group versus 9.9 days (3.9) in controls (P = 0.90). The rate of patients requiring postoperative artificial nutrition was 13.2% (28/212) in Ala-Glu group and 12.0% (26/216) in controls (P = 0.71).
Perioperative glutamine does not affect outcome in well-nourished GI cancer patients.

Download full-text


Available from: Luca Gianotti, Dec 28, 2013
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A progressive deterioration of nutritional status is frequent-ly found in cancer patients [1]. The clinical relevance of malnutrition is underlined by its close association with increased morbidi-ty and mortality. Malnourished cancer patients present with a higher risk of devel-oping severe chemotherapy-associated toxi-city, leading to a dose reduction or failure to complete the planned anti-neoplastic thera-py [2]. Moreover, malnutrition negatively impacts on the quality of life of cancer patients [3]. It is therefore highly appropriate that prevention and/or treatment of cancer-associated malnutrition is now a clinical pri-ority in oncology. Pathogenesis of cancer-associated malnutrition: cachexia The pathogenesis of cancer-associated malnutrition is multifactorial, with evi-dence indicating that two main catabolic factors are involved; cancer-induced reduc-tion of appetite and energy intake (anorex-ia), and profound changes in host metabo-lism [1]. Body weight loss which is induced by caloric restriction activates a number of biochemical pathways protect-ing body mass by reducing energy expen-diture and preserving muscle mass at the expense of fat mass. In contrast, tumour-induced weight loss fails to trigger these protective pathways, and the efficient utili-sation of nutrients by host tissues is also compromised. As a consequence, weight loss in cancer patients is unavoidable, occurs rapidly and severely, and although normalisation of food intake by artificial nutrition may improve body weight it may not restore normal body composition [4]. Indeed, muscle loss remains largely unaf-fected, and water retention and body fat gain account for the increase of body weight observed during artificial nutrition.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In modern surgical practice it is advisable to manage patients within an enhanced recovery protocol and thereby have them eating normal food within 1-3 days. Consequently, there is little room for routine perioperative artificial nutrition. Only a minority of patients may benefit from such therapy. These are predominantly patients who are at risk of developing complications after surgery. The main goals of perioperative nutritional support are to minimize negative protein balance by avoiding starvation, with the purpose of maintaining muscle, immune, and cognitive function and to enhance postoperative recovery. Several studies have demonstrated that 7-10 days of preoperative parenteral nutrition improves postoperative outcome in patients with severe undernutrition who cannot be adequately orally or enterally fed. Conversely, its use in well-nourished or mildly undernourished patients is associated with either no benefit or with increased morbidity. Postoperative parenteral nutrition is recommended in patients who cannot meet their caloric requirements within 7-10 days orally or enterally. In patients who require postoperative artificial nutrition, enteral feeding or a combination of enteral and supplementary parenteral feeding is the first choice. The main consideration when administering fat and carbohydrates in parenteral nutrition is not to overfeed the patient. The commonly used formula of 25 kcal/kg ideal body weight furnishes an approximate estimate of daily energy expenditure and requirements. Under conditions of severe stress requirements may approach 30 kcal/kg ideal body weights. In those patients who are unable to be fed via the enteral route after surgery, and in whom total or near total parenteral nutrition is required, a full range of vitamins and trace elements should be supplemented on a daily basis.
    Clinical nutrition (Edinburgh, Scotland) 06/2009; 28(4):378-86. DOI:10.1016/j.clnu.2009.04.002 · 4.48 Impact Factor
  • Source

    Clinical Nutrition Supplements 12/2009; 4(2):69-69. DOI:10.1016/S1744-1161(09)70153-X
Show more