PURPOSE: There is paucity of data on the prevalence of malnutrition among cancer patients in India and a brief tool to identify the same would be an asset. Our aim was to evaluate two nutrition screening tools and calf circumference (CC) with the European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) consensus guidelines for malnutrition among patients with head and neck (H&N) and gastrointestinal (GI) cancers. METHODS: Nutritional evaluation was performed preoperatively using Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST), Short Form of Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA-SF), and calf circumference (CC) in 206 patients. The diagnostic accuracy of these tools was compared with the ESPEN criteria for malnutrition. Patients evaluated were grouped as normal or malnourished. The incidence of infection, antibiotic days, antibiotic escalation, and length of stay was compared among the groups. Clavien-Dindo score at discharge, 30-day readmission, and mortality were also examined. RESULTS: A total of 28.6% were malnourished as per ESPEN criteria and 25.2% had CC less than the cut-off. With respect to ESPEN criteria, MUST and MNA-SF had 100% sensitivity and negative predictive value. CC had the highest specificity and positive predictive value for the total population (91.16%, 75% respectively). The agreement between the tools was acceptable except in MNA-SF (MNA-SF-ESPEN κ = 0.228, MUST-ESPEN κ = 0.565, CC-ESPEN κ = 0.594). There was no difference in postoperative outcomes between the malnourished and normal. CONCLUSION: Thus, more than a quarter of patients with H&N and GI cancers are malnourished preoperatively. As the best agreement between the screening tools was for MUST-ESPEN and CC-ESPEN, either of them can be used to identify malnutrition at admission.
PURPOSE: There is paucity of data on the prevalence of malnutrition among cancer patients in India and a brief tool to identify the same would be an asset. Our aim was to evaluate two nutrition screening tools and calf circumference (CC) with the European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) consensus guidelines for malnutrition among patients with head and neck (H&N) and gastrointestinal (GI) cancers. METHODS: Nutritional evaluation was performed preoperatively using Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST), Short Form of Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA-SF), and calf circumference (CC) in 206 patients. The diagnostic accuracy of these tools was compared with the ESPEN criteria for malnutrition. Patients evaluated were grouped as normal or malnourished. The incidence of infection, antibiotic days, antibiotic escalation, and length of stay was compared among the groups. Clavien-Dindo score at discharge, 30-day readmission, and mortality were also examined. RESULTS: A total of 28.6% were malnourished as per ESPEN criteria and 25.2% had CC less than the cut-off. With respect to ESPEN criteria, MUST and MNA-SF had 100% sensitivity and negative predictive value. CC had the highest specificity and positive predictive value for the total population (91.16%, 75% respectively). The agreement between the tools was acceptable except in MNA-SF (MNA-SF-ESPEN κ = 0.228, MUST-ESPEN κ = 0.565, CC-ESPEN κ = 0.594). There was no difference in postoperative outcomes between the malnourished and normal. CONCLUSION: Thus, more than a quarter of patients with H&N and GI cancers are malnourished preoperatively. As the best agreement between the screening tools was for MUST-ESPEN and CC-ESPEN, either of them can be used to identify malnutrition at admission.
Authors: C Velasco; E García; V Rodríguez; L Frias; R Garriga; J Alvarez; P García-Peris; M León Journal: Eur J Clin Nutr Date: 2010-11-17 Impact factor: 4.016
Authors: A Attar; D Malka; J M Sabaté; F Bonnetain; T Lecomte; T Aparicio; C Locher; D Laharie; J Ezenfis; J Taieb Journal: Nutr Cancer Date: 2012-04-11 Impact factor: 2.900
Authors: Kalaiselvi Selvaraj; R Jayalakshmy; Arjumand Yousuf; Arvind Kumar Singh; Gomathi Ramaswamy; C Palanivel Journal: J Family Med Prim Care Date: 2017 Apr-Jun