ReviewNeuro-oncology advances
Nutrition optimization in enhanced recovery after brain tumor surgery: scoping review of evidence, gaps, and a proposed perioperative nutrition score.
Review in Neuro-oncology advances. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Nutrition protocols are integral to enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS), as inadequate nutrition is associated with adverse outcomes. Yet, evidence regarding the impact of specific nutritional interventions, particularly in brain tumor surgery (ERABTS), remains limited. We performed the first comparison of nutritional strategies in general ERAS versus ERABTS, to clarify outcomes and develop a structured perioperative nutrition score. Methods: We conducted a scoping review of PubMed, Scopus, and Embase (2020-2024) for ERAS protocols incorporating nutrition. A systematic literature review identified ERAS protocols with a nutrition focus. Data were categorized into general surgery ERAS and ERABTS cohorts. Pre- and postoperative nutritional strategies were analyzed in relation to outcomes. Results: A total of 2,908 patients across 22 ERAS studies and 1,802 patients across 14 ERABTS studies met inclusion criteria. Preoperative carbohydrate loading was implemented in 86% of ERAS and 64% of ERABTS studies; however, no consistent improvement in length of stay (LOS) or complications was demonstrated. Preoperative nutritional screening was performed in fewer than 50% of studies and often lacked a structured criterion. Postoperative interventions were inconsistently reported and poorly defined. Across ERABTS studies, favorable but heterogeneous outcomes included improved ambulation (50%), reduced ICU utilization (40%), and lower pain and nausea (25%). Conclusions: Our work highlights that nutritional elements frequently included in ERAS and ERABTS protocols are inconsistently defined and insufficiently linked to outcomes. To address this gap, we propose a perioperative nutrition score (PONS) to improve risk identification and stratification, as well as support tailored nutritional interventions in brain tumor surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.