Options
Effectiveness and Safety of Preoperative Nutritional Interventions on Surgical Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Journal
Nutrients
ISSN
2072-6643
Date Issued
2025-04-30
Author(s)
Universidad UTE, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona Facultat de Medicina
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador, Universidad UTE
Juan Marcos Parise-Vasco
Jaime Angamarca-Iguago
Eloisa Garcia-Velasquez
Ashley Carolina Cuzco-Macias
Evelyn Frias-Toral
Luigi Schiavo
Abstract
Background: Preoperative nutritional interventions, including low-calorie diets (LCDs) and very low-calorie diets (VLCDs), are commonly implemented in metabolic and bariatric surgery. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of preoperative dietary interventions in patients undergoing bariatric surgery, with primary outcomes including perioperative complications, operative time, and length of hospital stay.
Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted, including studies that compared LCD and VLCD with regular diets in adults undergoing bariatric surgery. The primary outcomes assessed were perioperative complications, operative time, and length of hospital stay. Random- and fixed effects models were used for quantitative synthesis. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and ROBINS-I, while the certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.
Results: Eight trials comprising 1197 patients were included in the meta-analysis. VLCDs were associated with a significant reduction in perioperative complications (OR 0.59; 95% CI: 0.37–0.94; p = 0.03), whereas LCDs showed no significant effect on complications (OR 1.64; 95% CI: 0.71–3.78; p = 0.25). No significant reduction in operative time was observed (MD −2.64 min; 95% CI: −6.01 to 0.73; p = 0.12). Hospital stay was slightly reduced (MD −0.17 days; p = 0.0001), though the clinical significance remains uncertain. The certainty of evidence was low, primarily due to the risk of bias and small sample sizes.
Conclusions: VLCDs may lower the risk of perioperative complications, while LCDs do not appear to provide this benefit. However, the evidence is limited by methodological heterogeneity and low certainty. Further high-quality studies are needed to establish optimal preoperative nutritional protocols.
Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted, including studies that compared LCD and VLCD with regular diets in adults undergoing bariatric surgery. The primary outcomes assessed were perioperative complications, operative time, and length of hospital stay. Random- and fixed effects models were used for quantitative synthesis. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and ROBINS-I, while the certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.
Results: Eight trials comprising 1197 patients were included in the meta-analysis. VLCDs were associated with a significant reduction in perioperative complications (OR 0.59; 95% CI: 0.37–0.94; p = 0.03), whereas LCDs showed no significant effect on complications (OR 1.64; 95% CI: 0.71–3.78; p = 0.25). No significant reduction in operative time was observed (MD −2.64 min; 95% CI: −6.01 to 0.73; p = 0.12). Hospital stay was slightly reduced (MD −0.17 days; p = 0.0001), though the clinical significance remains uncertain. The certainty of evidence was low, primarily due to the risk of bias and small sample sizes.
Conclusions: VLCDs may lower the risk of perioperative complications, while LCDs do not appear to provide this benefit. However, the evidence is limited by methodological heterogeneity and low certainty. Further high-quality studies are needed to establish optimal preoperative nutritional protocols.