Early initiation of oral feeding following upper gastrointestinal tumor surgery: a randomized controlled trial

Early Oral Feeding is Safe and Comfortable in Patients with Gastric Cancer Undergoing Radical Total Gastrectomy

Data supporting the safety and clinical efficacy of early oral feeding (EOF) after total gastrectomy are limited. The aim of this prospective randomized controlled study was to explore the safety and clinical efficacy of two early enteral nutrition approaches for gastric cancer patients after radical total gastrectomy. The EOF group had faster postoperative recovery of intestinal function than the enteral tube feeding (ETF) group. The times to first flatus and first defecation were shorter in the EOF group (p < 0.05). In addition, the EOF protocol effectively avoided abdominal distension (p < 0.05). The hospitalization cost of the EOF group was lower than that of the ETF group (p < 0.05). Moreover, oral nutrition satisfied the physiological need for oral intake. People were more satisfied with EOF (p < 0.01). Furthermore, it is worth noting that compared with ETF, EOF did not increase the risk of anastomotic complications such as leakage and bleeding. Most obviously, EOF not only avoided the risk of complications during tube insertion, but also avoided the discomfort experience of nasal feeding tube. In summary, compared with ETF, EOF promotes early bowel recovery effectively without increasing the risk of postoperative complications. It is safe and comfortable for gastric cancer patients undergoing radical total gastrectomy.

Enteral Nutrition in Operated-On Gastric Cancer Patients: An Update

It is well established that the preoperative nutritional status of gastric cancer (GC) patients significantly affects the prognosis of the operated patients, their overall survival, as well as the disease-specific survival. Existing data support that preoperative assessment of nutritional status and early correction of nutritional deficiencies exert a favorable effect on early postoperative outcomes. A variety of relevant indices are used to assess the nutritional status of GC patients who are candidates for surgery. The guidelines of almost all international organizations recommend the use of oral enteral nutrition (EN). Oncologically acceptable types of gastrectomy and methods of patient rehabilitation should take into account the expected postoperative nutritional status. The majority of data support that perioperative EN reduces complications and hospital stay, but not mortality. Oral EN in the postoperative period, albeit in small amounts, helps to reduce the weight loss that is a consequence of gastrectomy. Iron deficiency with or without anemia and low serum levels of vitamin B12 are common metabolic sequelae after gastrectomy and should be restored. EN also significantly helps patients undergoing neoadjuvant or adjuvant antineoplastic therapy. The occurrence of the so-called "postgastrectomy syndromes" requires dietary modifications and drug support. This review attempts to highlight the benefits of EN in GC patients undergoing gastrectomy and to emphasize the type of necessary nutritional management, based on current literature data.

The efficacy and safety of modified ultraearly oral hydration for alleviating thirst in patients after thoracoscopic surgery: a prospective randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

Postoperative fasting following thoracoscopic surgery can cause intense thirst and oral discomfort. However, there is currently no research on ultraearly oral hydration (UEOH) in middle-aged or elderly patients after thoracoscopic surgery. The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness and safety of UEOH for improving oral discomfort after thoracoscopic surgery.

METHODS

This single-center prospective double-blind randomized controlled trial was conducted from April 2022 to November 2023. A total of 64 middle-aged and elderly patients who underwent the first thoracoscopic surgery on the day were enrolled at our institution. Postoperatively, in the Postanesthesia Care Unit (PACU), patients were randomly assigned at a 1:1 ratio to either the UEOH group or the standard care (SC) group. The primary outcome was the patient's thirst score at 6 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of postoperative oral discomfort; pain scores; the occurrence of adverse reactions such as nausea, vomiting, regurgitation and aspiration; anxiety scores on the first postoperative day; the time to first flatus; and recovery satisfaction scores.

RESULTS

The demographic and surgical characteristics were similar between the two groups. Patients in the UEOH group had lower thirst scores 6 h after surgery than did those in the SC group(16.1 ± 6.70 vs. 78.4 ± 8.42, P < 0.01). The incidence of postoperative oral discomfort (P < 0.01), anxiety scores on the first postoperative day (P<0.05), and time to first flatus (P<0.05) were better in the UEOH group. Additionally, the incidences of adverse reactions, such as postoperative nausea, vomiting, regurgitation and aspiration, were similar between the two groups (P>0.05).

CONCLUSION

For middle-aged and elderly patients undergoing thoracoscopic surgery, the use of a modified UEOH protocol postoperatively can improve thirst and promote gastrointestinal recovery without increasing complications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This single-center, prospective, RCT has completed the registration of the Chinese Clinical Trial Center at 07/12/2023 with the registration number ChiCTR2300078425.

Optimal time to initiate early oral feeding in postoperative patients with upper gastrointestinal malignancy: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

With the development of enhanced recovery after surgery, early oral feeding is likely to become the preferred mode of nutrition after surgery for upper gastrointestinal tract malignancies. However, the optimal time to initiate early oral feeding remains unknown.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to compare the effects of different introduction times of early oral feeding in patients with upper gastrointestinal malignancies in terms of safety, tolerance, and effectiveness and to identify the optimal time for early oral feeding after surgery.

METHODS

A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to identify evidence from relevant randomized controlled trials. Ten electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials from their earliest records to May 2023. Data were analyzed using the Stata 16.0 software.

RESULTS

A total of 22 randomized controlled trials including 2510 patients and seven time points for oral feeding after surgery were considered. Regarding safety, oral feeding initiated on postoperative day 3 may be the safest (high-quality evidence) compared with other times. Regarding tolerance, oral feeding initiated on postoperative day 5 may be the most well-tolerated (moderate-quality evidence) compared with other times. Regarding effectiveness, oral feeding initiated on postoperative day 3 may be the most effective (moderate-quality evidence) compared with other times.

CONCLUSIONS

Early oral feeding is safe, tolerable, and effective in postoperative patients with upper gastrointestinal malignancies. The optimal time to initiate early oral feeding after surgery was most likely postoperative day 3. The results of this meta-analysis provide evidence-based guidelines for clinical decision-making.

Long-Term Survival Associated with Direct Oral Feeding Following Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: Results from a Randomized Controlled Trial (NUTRIENT II)

Advancements in perioperative care have improved postoperative morbidity and recovery after esophagectomy. The direct start of oral intake can also enhance short-term outcomes following minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (MIE-IL). Subsequently, short-term outcomes may affect long-term survival. This planned sub-study of the NUTRIENT II trial, a multicenter randomized controlled trial, investigated the long-term survival of direct versus delayed oral feeding following MIE-IL. The outcomes included 3- and 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS), and the influence of complications and caloric intake on OS. After excluding cases of 90-day mortality, 145 participants were analyzed. Of these, 63 patients (43.4%) received direct oral feeding. At 3 years, OS was significantly better in the direct oral feeding group (p = 0.027), but not at 5 years (p = 0.115). Moreover, 5-year DFS was significantly better in the direct oral feeding group (p = 0.047) and a trend towards improved DFS was shown at 3 years (p = 0.079). Postoperative complications and caloric intake on day 5 did not impact OS. The results of this study show a tendency of improved 3-year OS and 5-year DFS, suggesting a potential long-term survival benefit in patients receiving direct oral feeding after esophagectomy. However, the findings should be further explored in larger future trials.

Nutritional status efficacy of early nutritional support in gastrointestinal care: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Gastrointestinal surgery is a complicated process used to treat many gastrointestinal diseases, and it is associated with a large trauma: Most patients often have different degrees of malnutrition and immune dysfunction before surgery and are prone to various infectious complications during postoperative recovery, thus affecting the efficacy of surgical treatment. Therefore, early postoperative nutritional support can provide essential nutritional supply, restore the intestinal barrier and reduce complication occurrence. However, different studies have shown different conclusions.

AIM

To assess whether early postoperative nutritional support can improve the nutritional status of patients based on literature search and meta-analysis.

METHODS

Articles comparing the effect of early nutritional support and delayed nutritional support were retrieved from PubMed, EMBASE, Springer Link, Ovid, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, China Biology Medicine databases. Notably, only randomized controlled trial articles were retrieved from the databases (from establishment date to October 2022). The risk of bias of the included articles was determined using Cochrane Risk of Bias V2.0. The outcome indicators, such as albumin, prealbumin, and total protein, after statistical intervention were combined.

RESULTS

Fourteen literatures with 2145 adult patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery (1138 patients (53.1%) receiving early postoperative nutritional support and 1007 patients (46.9%) receiving traditional nutritional support or delayed nutritional support) were included in this study. Seven of the 14 studies assessed early enteral nutrition while the other seven studies assessed early oral feeding. Furthermore, six literatures had "some risk of bias," and eight literatures had "low risk". The overall quality of the included studies was good. Meta-analysis showed that patients receiving early nutritional support had slightly higher serum albumin levels, than patients receiving delayed nutritional support [MD (mean difference) = 3.51, 95%CI: -0.05 to 7.07, Z = 1.93, P = 0.05]. Also, patients receiving early nutritional support had shorter hospital stay (MD = -2.29, 95%CI: -2.89 to -1.69), Z = -7.46, P < 0.0001) shorter first defecation time (MD = -1.00, 95%CI: -1.37 to -0.64), Z = -5.42, P < 0.0001), and fewer complications (Odd ratio = 0.61, 95%CI: 0.50 to 0.76, Z = -4.52, P < 0.0001) than patients receiving delayed nutritional support.

CONCLUSION

Early enteral nutritional support can slightly shorten the defecation time and overall hospital stay, reduce complication incidence, and accelerate the rehabilitation process of patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery.

Faster recovery and bowel movement after early oral feeding compared to late oral feeding after upper GI tumor resections: a meta-analysis

Background

There were more than 1 million new cases of stomach cancer concerning oesophageal cancer, there were more than 600,000 new cases of oesophageal cancer in 2020. After a successful resection in these cases, the role of early oral feeding (EOF) was questionable, due to the possibility of fatal anastomosis leakage. It is still debated whether EOF is more advantageous compared to late oral feeding. Our study aimed to compare the effect of early postoperative oral feeding and late oral feeding after upper gastrointestinal resections due to malignancy.

Methods

Two authors performed an extensive search and selection of articles independently to identify randomized control trials (RCT) of the question of interest. Statistical analyses were performed including mean difference, odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals, statistical heterogeneity, and statistical publication bias, to identify potential significant differences. The Risk of Bias and the quality of evidence were estimated.

Results

We identified 6 relevant RCTs, which included 703 patients. The appearance of the first gas (MD = -1.16; p = 0.009), first defecation (MD = -0.91; p < 0.001), and the length of hospitalization (MD = -1.92; p = 0.008) favored the EOF group. Numerous binary outcomes were defined, but significant difference was not verified in the case of anastomosis insufficiency (p = 0.98), pneumonia (p = 0.88), wound infection (p = 0.48), bleeding (p = 0.52), rehospitalization (p = 0.23), rehospitalization to the intensive care unit (ICU) (p = 0.46), gastrointestinal paresis (p = 0.66), ascites (p = 0.45).

Conclusion

Early postoperative oral feeding, compared to late oral feeding has no risk of several possible postoperative morbidities after upper GI surgeries, but has several advantageous effects on a patient's recovery.

Systematic Review Registration

identifier, CRD 42022302594.

Nutrition as prevention for improved cancer health outcomes: a systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

Among adults with cancer, malnutrition is associated with decreased treatment completion, more treatment harms and use of health care, and worse short-term survival. To inform the National Institutes of Health Pathways to Prevention workshop, "Nutrition as Prevention for Improved Cancer Health Outcomes," this systematic review examined the evidence for the effectiveness of providing nutrition interventions before or during cancer therapy to improve outcomes of cancer treatment.

METHODS

We identified randomized controlled trials enrolling at least 50 participants published from 2000 through July 2022. We provide a detailed evidence map for included studies and grouped studies by broad intervention and cancer types. We conducted risk of bias (RoB) and qualitative descriptions of outcomes for intervention and cancer types with a larger volume of literature.

RESULTS

From 9798 unique references, 206 randomized controlled trials from 219 publications met the inclusion criteria. Studies primarily focused on nonvitamin or mineral dietary supplements, nutrition support, and route or timing of inpatient nutrition interventions for gastrointestinal or head and neck cancers. Most studies evaluated changes in body weight or composition, adverse events from cancer treatment, length of hospital stay, or quality of life. Few studies were conducted within the United States. Among intervention and cancer types with a high volume of literature (n = 114), 49% (n = 56) were assessed as high RoB. Higher-quality studies (low or medium RoB) reported mixed results on the effect of nutrition interventions across cancer and treatment-related outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Methodological limitations of nutrition intervention studies surrounding cancer treatment impair translation of findings into clinical practice or guidelines.

Contrast-Enhanced Radiologic Evaluation of Gastric Conduit Emptying After Esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Nasogastric tube (NGT) insertion is the standard of care in many hospitals after esophagectomy for gastric conduit decompression. An upper gastrointestinal contrast passage evaluation (UGI-CE) is a diagnostic test to evaluate passage through the gastric conduit. The authors hypothesized that introducing routine UGI-CE after esophagectomy results in earlier removal of the NGT and resumption of oral intake.

METHODS

This retrospective study evaluated two consecutive series of patients undergoing esophagectomy, one before (control group) and one after the introduction of a routine UGI-CE on postoperative day (POD) 3 or 4 (UGI-CE group). If contrast passage was found on the UGI-CE, the NGT was capped and removed. In the control group, the NGT was routinely capped and removed on day 5 after surgery. The primary outcome was the POD on which oral diet was initiated. The secondary outcomes were the day of NGT removal, NGT reinsertions, postoperative complications, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Each cohort included 74 patients. In the UGI-CE group, the contrast test was performed on median POD 3.5 (IQR, 3-4). The median day of NGT removal, initiation of clear liquids, and full liquid and solid intake was 1 to 2 days earlier in the UGI-CE group than in the control group (i.e. POD 4, 4, 5, and 6 vs. POD 5, 5, 6.5, and 8; all p < 0.001). The study found no significant differences in NGT reinsertions, pneumonias, anastomotic leakages, or hospital stay.

CONCLUSION

The routine use of a UGI-CE after esophagectomy led to earlier removal of the NGT and earlier resumption of oral intake.

Early versus delay oral feeding for patients after upper gastrointestinal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of early oral feeding (EOF) in patients after upper gastrointestinal surgery through meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

We analyzed the endpoints of patients including the length of stay (LOS), time of first exhaust, anastomotic leakage and pneumonia from included studies. And we retrieved RCTs from medical literature databases. Weighted mean difference (WMD), risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated to compare the endpoints.

RESULTS

In total, we retrieved 12 articles (13 trial comparisons) which contained 1771 patients. 887 patients (50.1%) were randomized to EOF group whereas 884 patients (49.9%) were randomized to delay oral feeding group. The result showed that compared with the delay oral feeding group, EOF after upper gastrointestinal surgery significantly shorten the LOS [WMD = - 1.30, 95% CI - 1.79 to - 0.80, I² = 0.0%] and time of first exhaust [WMD = - 0.39, 95% CI - 0.58 to - 0.20, I² = 62.1%]. EOF also reduced the risk of pneumonia (RR: 0.74, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.99, I² = 0.0%). There is no significant difference in the risk of anastomotic leak, anastomotic bleeding, abdominal abscess, reoperation, readmission and mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, compared with the traditional oral feeding, EOF could shorten the LOS and time of first exhaust without increasing complications after upper gastrointestinal surgery.

Oncologic Surgical Care Using an Enhanced Recovery Approach

Enhanced recovery programs are multimodal, evidence-based perioperative programs designed to improve a patient's functional recovery after surgery. Enhanced recovery programs promote standardized, multidisciplinary care throughout the perioperative course to improve patient outcomes, rather than focusing on surgical technique. It is important for nurses working in acute and critical care to be aware of the paradigm shift created by the trend toward the enhanced recovery approach. By learning more about facets of the approach, the nurse will be better prepared to adopt whatever aspects of enhanced recovery their institution implements for the surgical oncology population. An overview is provided of the potential components of enhanced recovery.

Early enteral feeding versus traditional feeding in neonatal congenital gastrointestinal malformation undergoing intestinal anastomosis: A randomized multicenter controlled trial of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) component

PURPOSE

the aim of this clinical trial was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of early enteral feeding (EEN) following intestinal anastomosis in neonates with congenital gastrointestinal malformation.

METHODS

a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled trial (registered under chictr.org.cn Identifier no.ChiCTR-INR-17014179) was conducted between 2018 and 2019. Four centers in China analyzed 156 newborns of congenital gastrointestinal malformation undergoing intestinal anastomosis to EEN group (n = 78) or control (C) group (n = 78). The primary outcomes of this study were length of postoperative stay (LOPS) and time to full feeds. Secondary outcomes included morbidity of complications, parenteral nutrition (PN) duration, feeding intolerance, 30 day mortality rate and 30 day readmission rate.

RESULTS

the mean time to full feeds and LOPS in the EEN group were 15.0 (9.8-22.8) days and 17.6 (12.0-29.8) days, while that were 18.0 (12.0-24.0) days and 20.0 (15.0-30.3) days in C groups respectively. There was no significant difference between two groups(P >0.05). No significant intergroup difference was found with respect to postoperative morbidity, PN duration or feeding intolerance(P >0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

early enteral feeding following intestinal anastomosis in neonates with congenital gastrointestinal malformation is safe. Post-operative outcomes demonstrated a trend toward improvement.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level Ⅰ.

Efficacy and safety of early oral feeding in postoperative patients with upper gastrointestinal tumor: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Early oral feeding (EOF) is an important measure for early recovery of patients with gastrointestinal tumors after surgery, which has emerged as a safe and effective postoperative strategy for improving clinical outcomes.

AIM

To determine the safety and efficacy of early oral feeding in postoperative patients with upper gastrointestinal tumor.

METHODS

This meta-analysis was analyzed using Review Manager version 5.3 and Stata version 14. All clinical studies that analyzed efficacy and safety of EOF for postoperative patients with upper gastrointestinal tumor were included.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies comprising 2100 adult patients met all the inclusion criteria. A significantly lower risk of pneumonia was presented in the EOF compared with TOF group [relative risk (RR) = 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.44–0.89, P = 0.01]. Length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the EOF group than in the TOF group [weighted mean difference (WMD) = -1.91, 95%CI: -2.42 to -1.40; P < 0.01]. Cost of hospitalization was significantly lower (WMD = -4.16, 95%CI: -5.72 to -2.61; P < 0.01), and CD4 cell count and CD4/CD8 cell ratio on postoperative day 7 were significantly higher in the EOF group than in the TOF group: CD4 count (WMD = 7.17, 95%CI: 6.48–7.85; P < 0.01), CD4/CD8 ratio (WMD = 0.29, 95%CI: 0.23–0.35; P < 0.01). There was no significant difference in risk of anastomotic leak and total postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

EOF as compared with TOF was associated with lower risk of pneumonia, shorter hospital length of stay, lower cost of hospitalization, and significantly improved postoperative immune function of patients.

Therapeutic Effect and Cost-Benefit Analysis of Three Different Nutritional Schemes for Esophageal Cancer Patients in the Early Post-operative Period

Objective: To retrospectively investigate the comparative efficacy, safety and cost-benefits of three nutritional treatment schemes including short peptide jejunal nutrition (SPJN), whole protein jejunal nutrition (WPJN), and partial parenteral nutrition (PPN) in patients underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer in our hospital. This study was carried out in accordance with the conceptual framework of nutritional therapy in fast-track rehabilitation surgery.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 305 patients who were assigned to receive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Eligible patients was naturally divided into SPJN group [n = 98 (32.1%)], WPJN group [n = 95 (31.1%)], and PPN group [n = 112 (36.7%)] according to the type of nutritional scheme which was actually prescribed to patients by the attendingphysician in clinical practice. The differences of the serum total protein (TP), albumin (ALB), pre-albumin (PA), hemoglobin (HGB), white blood cells (WBCs), red blood cells (RBCs) and neutrophils were compared among 3 nutritional schemes groups. We also investigated the relationship of the fluid intake, urine output, gastric juice drainage volume and thoracic drainage volume among 3 nutritional groups at 3 days after surgery. Moreover, the differences of cost-benefit indexes, complications, length of hospitalization and hospital expenditure were also compared.

Results: The serum TP, ALB, and PA in the SPJN group were all higher than those in the WPJN and PPN groups (p < 0.05). The gastric juice volume of gastrointestinal decompression drainage and fluid volume of thoracic drainage in the SPJN group were all less than that in the WPJN group (p < 0.05). The overall hospital stay and post-operative hospital stay in the SPJN group were all shorter than that in WPJN group (p < 0.05). Moreover, the incidence of post-operative complications including anastomotic leakage, infection, and gastrointestinal reaction was remarkably lower in the SPJN group compared to the WPJN group (p < 0.05). Interesting, hospital expenditure in the PPN group was less than that in the SPJN and the WPJN groups (p < 0.001).

Conclusion: Patients may obtain benefits in improving protein level after receiving SPJN scheme at the early stage after esophagectomy. Meanwhile, patients may obtain benefits in improving post-operative complications and hospital stay after receiving SPJN or PPN compared to WPJN protocol. However, the difference between SPJN and PPN requires further study because no difference was detected in terms of clinical outcomes including complications and the length of hospitalization although PPN may achieve a possible decrease of medical expenditure.

Management of Postoperative Complications After Esophageal Resection

Newer surgical techniques have reduced complications and mortality following esophagectomy, but they nevertheless remain high. Data regarding complications are frequently inconsistent and, therefore, difficult to compare between groups. As a result, considerable energy is spent trying to identify best practices to minimize complications. This article reviews the rates of complications and attempts to give guidance regarding their management and outcomes.

Early postoperative feeding following surgery for upper gastrointestinal cancer: A systematic review

Nutrition post major upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer surgery is a significant consideration known to affect postoperative recovery and the ability to tolerate adjuvant treatment. This systematic review assessed the effect of early oral feeding (EOF), compared to traditional timing of oral feeding, following major surgery for UGI cancer on postoperative complications, postoperative length of hospital stay (LOS), nutritional status and quality of life (QOL). The literature was searched up to March 9th 2020 using CINHAL, PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science databases. Quality assessment was completed using the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics quality criteria checklist. Fifteen articles were included, consisting of seven randomised controlled trials, six cohort studies and two non-randomised trials, with a total of 2517 participants. The type and timing of EOF varied considerably across studies with limited reporting of energy and protein intakes from oral or enteral feeding. Fourteen studies assessed postoperative complications of which 13 reported no difference between EOF and standard care. Fourteen studies assessed postoperative LOS and of these, 13 reported a reduced length of stay in the EOF group. Four of 15 studies assessing nutritional status found no difference between groups. Three of 15 studies assessed QOL with inconsistent findings. This review found EOF reduced postoperative LOS and did not increase postoperative complications. However, the optimal timing for the introduction of EOF could not be established. Furthermore, the type of EOF varied considerably making comparison across studies challenging and demonstrates a need for internationally standardised definitions.

ACERTO PROJECT: IMPACT ON ASSISTANCE OF A PUBLIC EMERGENCY HOSPITAL

Background:

In Brazil, the goal-based approach was named Project ACERTO and has obtained good results when applied in elective surgeries with shorter hospitalization time, earlier return to activities without increased morbidity and mortality.

Aim:

To analyze the impact of ACERTO on emergency surgery care.

Methods:

An intervention study was performed at a trauma hospital. Were compared 452 patients undergoing emergency surgery and followed up by the general surgery service from October to December 2018 (pre-ACERTO, n=243) and from March to June 2019 (post-ACERTO, n=209). Dietary reintroduction, volume of infused postoperative venous hydration, duration of use of catheters, probes and drains, postoperative analgesia, prevention of postoperative vomiting, early mobilization and physiotherapy were evaluated.

Results:

After the ACERTO implantation there was earlier reintroduction of the diet, the earlier optimal caloric intake, earlier venous hydration withdrawal, higher postoperative analgesia prescription, postoperative vomiting prophylaxis and higher physiotherapy and mobilization prescription were achieved early in all (p<0.01); in the multivariate analysis there was no change in the complication rates observed before and after ACERTO (10.7% vs. 7.7% (p=0.268) and there was a decrease in the length of hospitalization after ACERTO (8,5 vs. 6,1 dias (p=0.008).

Conclusion:

The implementation of the ACERTO project decreased the length of hospital stay, improved medical care provided without increasing the rates of complications evaluated.

Is the placement of jejunostomy tubes in patients with esophageal cancer undergoing esophagectomy associated with increased inpatient healthcare utilization? An analysis of the National Readmissions Database

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing esophagectomy often receive jejunostomy tubes (j-tubes) for nutritional supplementation. We hypothesized that j-tubes are associated with increased post-esophagectomy readmissions.

STUDY DESIGN

We identified esophagectomies for malignancy with (EWJ) or without (EWOJ) j-tubes using the 2010-2015 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Outcomes include readmission, inpatient mortality, and complications. Outcomes were compared before and after propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

Of 22,429 patients undergoing esophagectomy, 16,829 (75.0%) received j-tubes. Patients were similar in age and gender but EWJ were more likely to receive chemotherapy (24.2% vs. 15.1%, p < 0.01). EWJ was associated with decreased 180-day inpatient mortality (HR 0.72 [0.52-0.99]) but not with higher readmissions at 30- (15.2% vs. 14.0%, p = 0.16; HR 0.9 [0.77-1.05]) or 180 days (25.2% vs. 24.3%, p = 0.37; HR 0.94 [0.79-1.10]) or increased complications (p = 0.37). These results were confirmed in the PSM cohort.

CONCLUSION

J-tubes placed in the setting of esophagectomy do not increase inpatient readmissions or mortality.

Direct Oral Feeding After a Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: A Single-Center Prospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this single-center cohort study was to compare direct oral feeding (DOF) to standard of care after a minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) performed in a center with a stable and acceptable postoperative complication rate.

BACKGROUND

A recent multicenter, international randomized controlled trial showed that DOF following a MIE is comparable to standard of care (nil-by-mouth). However, the effect of DOF was potentially influenced by postoperative complications.

METHODS

Patients in this single-center prospective cohort study received either DOF (intervention) or nil-by-mouth for 5 days postoperative and tube feeding (standard of care, control group) following a MIE with intrathoracic anastomosis. Primary outcome was time to functional recovery and length of hospital stay. Secondary outcomes included anastomotic leakage, pneumonia, and other surgical complications.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were similar in the intervention (n = 85) and control (n = 111) group. Median time to functional recovery was 7 and 9 days in the intervention and control group (P < 0.001), respectively. Length of hospital stay was 8 versus 10 days (P < 0.001), respectively. Thirty-day postoperative complication rate was significantly reduced in the intervention group (57.6% vs 73.0%, P = 0.024). Chyle leakage only occurred in the control group (18.9%, P < 0.001). Anastomotic leakage, pneumonia, and other postoperative complications did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSION

Direct oral feeding following a MIE results in a faster time to functional recovery and lower 30-day postoperative complication rate compared to patients that were orally fasted.

Impact on Short-Term Complications of Early Oral Feeding in Patients with Esophageal Cancer After Esophagectomy

To evaluate early oral feeding (EOF) in short-term outcomes of patients with esophageal cancer after esophagectomy. 179 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy between January 2016 and February 2018 were enrolled for this study. 87 patients with EOF without nasogastric tube or nasogastric tube was removed within 24 h, were selected as the experimental group, whereas 92 patients who received nasojejunal tube feeding were set as the control group. All laboratory testing, clinical features, and hospitalization expenses were compared between the two groups. No statistical significance was observed between the two groups in hemoglobin, albumin, and prealbumin levels after esophagectomy. Notably, there was no significant difference in the incidence of severe pneumonia and anastomotic leakage between the two groups. Admittance period, postoperative defecation time, and medical expenses were significantly decreased among patients with EOF (P < 0.001). Multivariate Cox multiple-factor regression analysis revealed that there was no correlation between EOF and the risk of anastomotic leakage. EOF might not be a risk factor for increasing the incidence of severe pneumonia and anastomotic leakage in patients with esophageal cancer after esophagectomy, and it could reduce the hospitalization period as well as control medical expenses.

The effect of early oral feeding after esophagectomy on the incidence of anastomotic leakage: an updated review

OBJECTIVE

Early oral feeding (EOF) is considered to be an important component of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS), but raises the concern of increased risk of anastomotic leakage (AL) in patients receiving esophagectomy. This review aimed to elucidate the correlation of EOF and the incidence of AL after esophageal resection.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar from their inception to February 2020 for published articles that compared AL after EOF (oral feeding initiated within postoperative day [POD] 3) vs. conventional feeding regimen (nil-by-mouth with enteral tube nutrition support, until oral feeding since POD 4 and beyond) following esophagectomy.

RESULTS

A total of 11 full articles were included in this review, including 5 registered randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 6 observational studies that compared EOF with conventional care after esophagectomy. Meta-analysis was not possible due to significant heterogeneity, bias, and small sample sizes. Among the 11 included studies, 9 (including the 5 RCTs) showed that EOF did not increase AL rate, whereas the other 2 retrospective studies indicated that delayed oral feeding resulted in fewer AL.

CONCLUSIONS

EOF after esophagectomy probably does not increase the incidence of AL, and it is a promising strategy in line with the essence of ERAS. However, more and better evidence from high-quality RCTs are still needed.

Comparison of Early Oral Feeding With Traditional Oral Feeding After Total Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Background: The present study aimed to compare the feasibility and safety of early oral feeding (EOF) with traditional oral feeding (TOF) after radical total gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

Methods: This retrospective study included consecutive patients who underwent total gastrectomy from April 2016 and November 2018. These patients were divided into two groups, according to their postoperative feeding protocol: EOF group (n = 314) and TOF group (n = 433). Propensity score matching was used to balance the potential confounders, and 276 patients were selected from each group. The EOF group received oral diet on postoperative day one, while the TOF group were started on oral feeding after the passage of flatus.

Results: No significant differences were found in the postoperative complications (P = 0.426) and tolerance to oral feeding (P > 0.056) between the two groups. The changes in perioperative nutritional markers were also similar between the two groups (P > 0.05). The time to first passage of flatus or defecation (47.19 ± 12.00 h vs. 58.19 ± 9.89 h, P < 0.0001) and length of postoperative hospital stay (6.84 ± 2.31 days vs. 7.72 ± 2.86 days, P < 0.0001) were significantly lower in the EOF group compared to the TOF group.

Conclusion: EOF may be safe and feasible after radical total gastrectomy with faster recovery and no increased risk of postoperative complications.

Nutrition in surgical patients: how soon is too soon?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Preoperative nutrition support has been extensively studied; however, data on the timing of postoperative nutrition initiation are scarce. The current review focuses on the importance of early nutritional support in surgical patients and their impact on outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Early nutrition support during the postoperative course may be the most important step that can be taken toward preventing subsequent malnutrition-related complications. European Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition guidelines recommends early nutrition to improve outcomes after surgery and accelerates the recovery. Moreover, nutritional support should be personalized, and disease process-based.

SUMMARY

Existing studies appear to focus mostly on abdominal and gastrointestinal surgery. Further prospective observational and randomized clinical trials across different surgical populations will aid surgeons to better understand how early feeds in either form can reduce morbidity, quality of life, and increase recovery rates.

Optimal timing and route of nutritional support after esophagectomy: A review of the literature

Some controversy surrounds the postoperative feeding regimen utilized in patients who undergo esophagectomy. Variation in practices during the perioperative period exists including the type of nutrition started, the delivery route, and its timing. Adequate nutrition is essential for this patient population as these patients often present with weight loss and have altered eating patterns after surgery, which can affect their ability to regain or maintain weight. Methods of feeding after an esophagectomy include total parenteral nutrition, nasoduodenal/nasojejunal tube feeding, jejunostomy tube feeding, and oral feeding. Recent evidence suggests that early oral feeding is associated with shorter LOS, faster return of bowel function, and improved quality of life. Enhanced recovery pathways after surgery pathways after esophagectomy with a component of early oral feeding also seem to be safe, feasible, and cost-effective, albeit with limited data. However, data on anastomotic leaks is mixed, and some studies suggest that the incidence of leaks may be higher with early oral feeding. This risk of anastomotic leak with early feeding may be heavily modulated by surgical approach. No definitive data is currently available to definitively answer this question, and further studies should look at how these early feeding regimens vary by surgical technique. This review aims to discuss the existing literature on the optimal route and timing of feeding after esophagectomy.

Early enteral nutrition within 24 hours of lower gastrointestinal surgery versus later commencement for length of hospital stay and postoperative complications

BACKGROUND

This is an update of the review last published in 2011. It focuses on early postoperative enteral nutrition after lower gastrointestinal surgery. Traditional management consisted of 'nil by mouth', where patients receive fluids followed by solids after bowel function has returned. Although several trials have reported lower incidence of infectious complications and faster wound healing upon early feeding, other trials have shown no effect. The immediate advantage of energy intake (carbohydrates, protein or fat) could enhance recovery with fewer complications, and this warrants a systematic evaluation.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate whether early commencement of postoperative enteral nutrition (within 24 hours), oral intake and any kind of tube feeding (gastric, duodenal or jejunal), compared with traditional management (delayed nutritional supply) is associated with a shorter length of hospital stay (LoS), fewer complications, mortality and adverse events in patients undergoing lower gastrointestinal surgery (distal to the ligament of Treitz).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, the Cochrane Library 2017, issue 10), Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to 15 November 2017), Ovid Embase (1974 to 15 November 2017). We also searched for ongoing trials in ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (15 November 2017). We handsearched reference lists of identified studies and previous systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing early commencement of enteral nutrition (within 24 hours) with no feeding in adult participants undergoing lower gastrointestinal surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study quality using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool tailored to this review and extracted data. Data analyses were conducted according to the Cochrane recommendations.We rated the quality of evidence according to GRADE.Primary outcomes were LoS and postoperative complications (wound infections, intraabdominal abscesses, anastomotic dehiscence, pneumonia).Secondary outcomes were: mortality, adverse events (nausea, vomiting), and quality of life (QoL).LoS was estimated using mean difference (MD (presented as mean +/- SD). For other outcomes we estimated the common risk ratio (RR) and calculated the associated 95% confidence intervals. For analysis, we used an inverse-variance random-effects model for the primary outcome (LoS) and Mantel-Haenszel random-effects models for the secondary outcomes. We also performed Trial Sequential Analyses (TSA).

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 17 RCTs with 1437 participants undergoing lower gastrointestinal surgery. Most studies were at high or unclear risk of bias in two or more domains. Six studies were judged as having low risk of selection bias for random sequence generation and insufficient details were provided for judgement on allocation concealment in all 17 studies. With regards to performance and deception bias; 14 studies reported no attempt to blind participants and blinding of personnel was not discussed either. Only one study was judged as low risk of bias for blinding of outcome assessor. With regards to incomplete outcome data, three studies were judged to be at high risk because they had more than 10% difference in missing data between groups. For selective reporting, nine studies were judged as unclear as protocols were not provided and eight studies had issues with either missing data or incomplete reporting of results.LOS was reported in 16 studies (1346 participants). The mean LoS ranged from four days to 16 days in the early feeding groups and from 6.6 days to 23.5 days in the control groups. Mean difference (MD) in LoS was 1.95 (95% CI, -2.99 to -0.91, P < 0.001) days shorter in the early feeding group. However, there was substantial heterogeneity between included studies (I² = 81, %, Chi² = 78.98, P < 0.00001), thus the overall quality of evidence for LoS is low. These results were confirmed by the TSA showing that the cumulative Z-curve crossed the trial sequential monitoring boundary for benefit.We found no differences in the incidence of postoperative complications: wound infection (12 studies, 1181 participants, RR 0.99, 95%CI 0.64 to 1.52, very low-quality evidence), intraabdominal abscesses (6 studies, 554 participants, RR 1.00, 95%CI 0.26 to 3.80, low-quality evidence), anastomotic leakage/dehiscence (13 studies, 1232 participants, RR 0.78, 95%CI 0.38 to 1.61, low-quality evidence; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) = 100), and pneumonia (10 studies, 954 participants, RR 0.88, 95%CI 0.32 to 2.42, low-quality evidence; NNTB = 333).Mortality was reported in 12 studies (1179 participants), and showed no between-group differences (RR = 0.56, 95%CI, 0.21 to 1.52, P = 0.26, I² = 0%, Chi² = 3.08, P = 0.96, low-quality evidence). The most commonly reported cause of death was anastomotic leakage, sepsis and acute myocardial infarction.Seven studies (613 participants) reported vomiting (RR 1.23, 95%CI, 0.96 to 1.58, P = 0.10, I² = 0%, Chi² = 4.98, P = 0.55, low-quality evidence; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) = 19), and two studies (118 participants) reported nausea (RR 0.95, 0.71 to 1.26, low-quality evidence). Four studies reported combined nausea and vomiting (RR 0.94, 95%CI 0.51 to 1.74, very low-quality evidence). One study reported QoL assessment; the scores did not differ between groups at 30 days after discharge on either QoL scale EORTC QLQ-C30 or EORTC QlQ-OV28 (very low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review suggests that early enteral feeding may lead to a reduced postoperative LoS, however cautious interpretation must be taken due to substantial heterogeneity and low-quality evidence. For all other outcomes (postoperative complications, mortality, adverse events, and QoL) the findings are inconclusive, and further trials are justified to enhance the understanding of early feeding for these. In this updated review, only a few additional studies have been included, and these were small and of poor quality.To improve the evidence, future trials should address quality issues and focus on clearly defining and measuring postoperative complications to allow for better comparison between studies. However due to the introduction of fast track protocols which already include an early feeding component, future trials may be challenging. A more feasible trial may be to investigate the effect of differing postoperative energy intake regimens on relevant outcomes.

Early oral feeding following esophagectomy

Nutritional support for patients with esophagectomy is very important especially for patients with malnutrition. But there is significant variation in nutritional support between different hospitals. Traditionally, 5 to 7 days of nil by mouth is required to allow healing of the anastomosis after esophagectomy; a feeding tube (usually jejunostomy tube) placed before or during the operation provides enteral access for patients with esophagectomy. However, there is no consensus of the timing of oral intake after esophagectomy. We reviewed the published data about early oral feeding (EOF) after esophagectomy. At present, there were only four studies, including two randomized studies, investigating the feasibility and safety of EOF for patients with esophagectomy. The results of the current studies show that EOF after esophagectomy do not increase postoperative complications and motility. However, evidence from large multicenter randomized controlled clinical trials is still lacking. In the future, the long-term outcomes, including body weight loss, quality of life (QOL), laboratory nutritional markers and survival, should be investigated in the field of EOF protocols. EOF after esophagectomy may require the application of the most recent knowledge and the perioperative practice of multi-disciplinary team medical care, according to the situation of each medical center.

Enteral Feeding Access Has an Impact on Outcomes for Patients with Esophageal Cancer Undergoing Esophagectomy: An Analysis of SEER-Medicare

BACKGROUND

Optimal nutrition after esophagectomy is challenging due to alterations in eating, both from the tumor and during surgical recovery. Enteral nutrition via feeding tube is commonly used. The impact of feeding tubes on post-esophagectomy outcomes was examined in a large national data set.

METHODS

Patients with esophageal cancer (1998-2013) undergoing esophagectomy were extracted from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare database. Chi-square and t tests were used to compare categorical and continuous variables. Time trend analyses were performed with Cochran-Armitage survival using log-rank and multivariable analysis with generalized linear modeling.

RESULTS

The study examined 2495 patients. The majority had enteral feeding access (71%, n = 1794) during the perioperative period. Mortality among the patients with feeding tubes was lower at 30 days (5.4% vs 8.4%), 60 days (9.0% vs 13.0%), and 90 days (12.2% vs 15.8%). In the multivariable analysis, the patients with feeding tubes had improved short-term survival at 30 days (odds ratio [OR], 0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46-0.93), 60 days (OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.49-0.85), and 90 days (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.54-0.90). The hospital stay was shorter for the patients undergoing enteral feeding tube placement (17.9 vs 19.5 days; p = 0.04). Discharge destination (home vs health care facility) showed no difference.

CONCLUSIONS

Feeding tubes in patients undergoing esophagectomy were associated with an increase in short-term survival up to 90 days after surgery. Feeding tube placement was not associated with higher rates of non-home discharges and did not prolong the hospital stay.

Early enteral nutrition within 24 hours of lower gastrointestinal surgery versus later commencement for length of hospital stay and postoperative complications

BACKGROUND

This is an update of the review last published in 2011. It focuses on early postoperative enteral nutrition after lower gastrointestinal surgery. Traditional management consisted of 'nil by mouth', where patients receive fluids followed by solids after bowel function has returned. Although several trials have reported lower incidence of infectious complications and faster wound healing upon early feeding, other trials have shown no effect. The immediate advantage of energy intake (carbohydrates, protein or fat) could enhance recovery with fewer complications, and this warrants a systematic evaluation.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate whether early commencement of postoperative enteral nutrition (within 24 hours), oral intake and any kind of tube feeding (gastric, duodenal or jejunal), compared with traditional management (delayed nutritional supply) is associated with a shorter length of hospital stay (LoS), fewer complications, mortality and adverse events in patients undergoing lower gastrointestinal surgery (distal to the ligament of Treitz).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, the Cochrane Library 2017, issue 10), Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to 15 November 2017), Ovid Embase (1974 to 15 November 2017). We also searched for ongoing trials in ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (15 November 2017). We handsearched reference lists of identified studies and previous systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing early commencement of enteral nutrition (within 24 hours) with no feeding in adult participants undergoing lower gastrointestinal surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study quality using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool tailored to this review and extracted data. Data analyses were conducted according to the Cochrane recommendations.We rated the quality of evidence according to GRADE.Primary outcomes were LoS and postoperative complications (wound infections, intraabdominal abscesses, anastomotic dehiscence, pneumonia).Secondary outcomes were: mortality, adverse events (nausea, vomiting), and quality of life (QoL).LoS was estimated using mean difference (MD (presented as mean +/- SD). For other outcomes we estimated the common risk ratio (RR) and calculated the associated 95% confidence intervals. For analysis, we used an inverse-variance random-effects model for the primary outcome (LoS) and Mantel-Haenszel random-effects models for the secondary outcomes. We also performed Trial Sequential Analyses (TSA).

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 17 RCTs with 1437 participants undergoing lower gastrointestinal surgery. Most studies were at high or unclear risk of bias in two or more domains. Six studies were judged as having low risk of selection bias for random sequence generation and insufficient details were provided for judgement on allocation concealment in all 17 studies. With regards to performance and deception bias; 14 studies reported no attempt to blind participants and blinding of personnel was not discussed either. Only one study was judged as low risk of bias for blinding of outcome assessor. With regards to incomplete outcome data, three studies were judged to be at high risk because they had more than 10% difference in missing data between groups. For selective reporting, nine studies were judged as unclear as protocols were not provided and eight studies had issues with either missing data or incomplete reporting of results.LOS was reported in 16 studies (1346 participants). The mean LoS ranged from four days to 16 days in the early feeding groups and from 6.6 days to 23.5 days in the control groups. Mean difference (MD) in LoS was 1.95 (95% CI, -2.99 to -0.91, P < 0.001) days shorter in the early feeding group. However, there was substantial heterogeneity between included studies (I² = 81, %, Chi² = 78.98, P < 0.00001), thus the overall quality of evidence for LoS is low. These results were confirmed by the TSA showing that the cumulative Z-curve crossed the trial sequential monitoring boundary for benefit.We found no differences in the incidence of postoperative complications: wound infection (12 studies, 1181 participants, RR 0.99, 95%CI 0.64 to 1.52, very low-quality evidence), intraabdominal abscesses (6 studies, 554 participants, RR 1.00, 95%CI 0.26 to 3.80, low-quality evidence), anastomotic leakage/dehiscence (13 studies, 1232 participants, RR 0.78, 95%CI 0.38 to 1.61, low-quality evidence; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) = 100), and pneumonia (10 studies, 954 participants, RR 0.88, 95%CI 0.32 to 2.42, low-quality evidence; NNTB = 333).Mortality was reported in 12 studies (1179 participants), and showed no between-group differences (RR = 0.56, 95%CI, 0.21 to 1.52, P = 0.26, I² = 0%, Chi² = 3.08, P = 0.96, low-quality evidence). The most commonly reported cause of death was anastomotic leakage, sepsis and acute myocardial infarction.Seven studies (613 participants) reported vomiting (RR 1.23, 95%CI, 0.96 to 1.58, P = 0.10, I² = 0%, Chi² = 4.98, P = 0.55, low-quality evidence; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) = 19), and two studies (118 participants) reported nausea (RR 0.95, 0.71 to 1.26, low-quality evidence). Four studies reported combined nausea and vomiting (RR 0.94, 95%CI 0.51 to 1.74, very low-quality evidence). One study reported QoL assessment; the scores did not differ between groups at 30 days after discharge on either QoL scale EORTC QLQ-C30 or EORTC QlQ-OV28 (very low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review suggests that early enteral feeding may lead to a reduced postoperative LoS, however cautious interpretation must be taken due to substantial heterogeneity and low-quality evidence. For all other outcomes (postoperative complications, mortality, adverse events, and QoL) the findings are inconclusive, and further trials are justified to enhance the understanding of early feeding for these. In this updated review, only a few additional studies have been included, and these were small and of poor quality.To improve the evidence, future trials should address quality issues and focus on clearly defining and measuring postoperative complications to allow for better comparison between studies. However due to the introduction of fast track protocols which already include an early feeding component, future trials may be challenging. A more feasible trial may be to investigate the effect of differing postoperative energy intake regimens on relevant outcomes.

Feeding Jejunostomy after esophagectomy cannot be routinely recommended. Analysis of nutritional benefits and catheter-related complications

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing esophagectomy for cancer usually deal with malnourishment which increases postoperative morbimortality. The objective of this paper is to analyze the nutritional benefits of feeding jejunostomy (FJ) for early postoperative enteral nutrition (EN) and directly-related complications.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective study of 100 patients undergoing esophagectomy for cancer between 2008 and 2016.

RESULTS

FJ was placed in 47 patients. 82.98% reached EN requirements in FJ group, with a median EN re-start of 1.9 days and median days to objective requirements of 5 days. 51.06% developed directly-related FJ complication, 91.66% of them mild ones (gastrointestinal or catheter-related). 2 patients (4.25%) required re-intervention. No significant differences were shown in total protein and albumin seric levels during first postoperative week and in anastomotic leak rate between both groups (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Feeding jejunostomies are associated with a great number of complications although most are not life-threatening. Since its nutritional benefit is not proven FJ cannot routinely recommended after esophagectomy. However, the optimal pathway for EN reintroduction, including direct oral intake, is still a matter of debate.

Early Postoperative Oral Feeding After Total Gastrectomy in Gastric Carcinoma Patients: A Retrospective Before-After Study Using Propensity Score Matching

BACKGROUND

Despite its clinical benefits, early oral nutrition after total gastrectomy is not widely implemented because of concerns about tolerability and safety. We investigated the feasibility and safety of early oral nutrition after total gastrectomy in gastric carcinoma patients.

METHODS

This is a retrospective before-after study. From 2008-2016, 301 patients received conventional oral feeding (COF) before May 2012, and 454 patients, early oral feeding (EOF) after May 2012. The EOF group received oral diet on postoperative day 1, and the COF group was maintained nil-by-mouth until patients demonstrated gas passage. After balancing potential confounders using propensity score matching, 203 patients were selected in each group.

RESULTS

Both matched groups demonstrated well-balanced baseline characteristics. The EOF group demonstrated significantly earlier first flatus time (2.9 vs 3.1 days, P = .013) and hospital discharge (8.9 vs 12.6 days, P < .001) than the COF group. No significant differences were observed for overall morbidity and mortality, but the EOF group demonstrated lower incidence of abdominal infection (3.0% vs 7.4%, P = .044) and anastomosis leakage (1.5% vs 4.9%, P = .048). Subgroup analyses by age, sex, operative approach, lymph node dissection, and tumor stage demonstrated no increased risk of morbidity, anastomosis leakage, and short hospital stay in the EOF group.

CONCLUSION

Early oral nutrition may be feasible and safe after total gastrectomy, with no increase in postoperative complications. Large, randomized, controlled trials are warranted to further investigate the clinical benefits of early oral nutrition after total gastrectomy.

EARLY ORAL FEEDING POST-UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL TRACT RESECTION AND PRIMARY ANASTOMOSIS IN ONCOLOGY

Background:

The practice of starving patients in the immediate period after upper gastrointestinal surgery is widespread. Early oral intake has been shown to be feasible and may result in faster recovery and decrease length of hospital.

Aim:

To evaluate the feasibility and safety of oral nutrition on postoperative early feeding after upper gastrointestinal surgeries.

Methods:

Observational cohort design study with convenience retrospective data in both genders, over 18 years, undergoing to total gastrectomy and/or elective esophagectomy. They have received oral or enteral nutrition in less than 48 h after surgery, and among those who started with enteral nutrition, the oral feeding up to seven days.

Results:

The study was performed in 161 patients, 24 (14.9%) submitted to esophagectomy, 132 (82%) to total gastrectomy and five (3.1%) to esophagogastrectomy. Was observed good dietary acceptance and low percentage (29%) of gastrointestinal intolerances, more pronounced among those with enteral diet. Most of the patients did not present postoperative complications, 11 (6.8%) were reopened, five (3.1%) had fistulas, three (1.9%) wound dehiscence, three (1.9%) fistula more wound dehiscence and six (3.7%) other non-infectious complications.

Conclusion:

Early oral diet is safe and viable for patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal surgery.

Early enteral nutrition and total parenteral nutrition on the nutritional status and blood glucose in patients with gastric cancer complicated with diabetes mellitus after radical gastrectomy

Effects of early enteral nutrition (EEN) or total parenteral nutrition (TPN) support on nutritional status and blood glucose in patients with gastric cancer complicated with diabetes mellitus after radical gastrectomy were investigated. One hundred and twenty-nine patients with gastric cancer complicated with diabetes mellitus type 2 admitted to the First People's Hospital of Jinan (Jinan, China), from June 2012 to June 2016 were selected into the study. According to different nutrition support pathways, these patients were randomly divided into the EEN group and the TPN group. The improvement of nutritional indexes, postoperative complications, gastrointestinal function recovery and perioperative blood glucose fluctuation were compared between the two groups. On the 4th day after operation, the improvement levels of total bilirubin (TBL), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate transaminase (AST), total protein (TP), prealbumin (PAB), hemoglobin (HGB) and weight (Wt) in the EEN group were significantly higher than those in the conventional group (P<0.05). There were no significant differences between the two groups on the 8th day after operation (P>0.05). No patients had complications in the EEN group, while a total of 29 patients in the TPN group suffered adverse reactions, indicating that the incidence rate of complications in the EEN group was significantly lower than that in the TPN group (P<0.05). The postoperative evacuation time was earlier, hospitalization time was shorter and cost of postoperative hospitalization was less in the EEN group than those in the TPN group, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). The blood glucose fluctuation values at fasting and 2 h after a meal in the TPN group were higher than those in the EEN group within 8 days after operation, and the differences were statistically significant (χ²=13.219, P=0.002; χ²=20.527, P<0.001). EEN support provides nutrition for patients with gastric cancer complicated with diabetes mellitus after radical gastrectomy, which is worthy of clinical promotion as it maintains good nutritional status, produces few postoperative complications and keeps the blood glucose level stable, by which the postoperative evacuation time is early, the hospitalization time is short and the cost is low.

The impact of fast track protocols in upper gastrointestinal surgery: A meta-analysis of observational studies

BACKGROUND

Fast track surgery has been implemented in colorectal procedures during the last decade and is accompanied by significant improvement in patient outcomes during the early postoperative period. However, to date, its adoption in upper gastrointestinal surgery remains a matter of debate. In this context, we aimed to summarize the existing evidence in the international literature.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched Medline, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov and Cochrane Central Register databases for published randomized controlled trials. The meta-analysis was performed with the RevMan 5.3.5 software.

MAIN FINDINGS

Thirty studies were finally included in the present meta-analysis. The post-operative morbidity was not influenced by the implementation of fast track surgery (FTS) (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.64-1.09). However, in cases treated with laparoscopic surgery fast track surgery seemed to reduce morbidity by 50% (p = .006). The overall mortality of patients was low in the majority of included studies and was not influenced by fast track surgery (OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.50-2.52). The duration of postoperative hospitalization was significantly reduced with the adoption of FTS (MD -2.24, 95% CI -2.63 to -1.85 days). Concurrently, the overall cost was significantly reduced in cases treated with FTS (MD -982.30, 95% CI -1367.68 to -596.91 U.S dollars).

CONCLUSION

According to the findings of our meta-analysis suggest that FTS seems to be safe in patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal surgery and reduce both the days of postoperative hospitalization and the overall cost. This observation should be taken into account in future recommendations to enhance the implementation of FTS protocols in current clinical practice.

The long-term effects of early oral feeding following minimal invasive esophagectomy

A nil-by-mouth regime with enteral nutrition via an artificial route is frequently applied following esophagectomy. However, early initiation of oral feeding could potentially improve recovery and has shown to be beneficial in many types of abdominal surgery. Although short-term nutritional safety of oral intake after an esophagectomy has been documented, long-term effects of this feeding regimen are unknown. In this cohort study, data from patients undergoing minimal invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy between 04-2012 and 09-2015 in three centers in Netherlands were collected. Patients in the oral feeding group were retrieved from a previous prospective study and compared with a cohort of patients with early enteral jejunostomy feeding but delayed oral intake. Body mass index (BMI) measurements, complications, and nutritional re-interventions (re- or start of artificial feeding, start of total parenteral nutrition) were gathered over the course of one year after surgery. One year after surgery the median BMI was 22.8 kg/m2 and weight loss was 7.0 kg (9.5%) in 114 patients. Patients in the early oral feeding group lost more weight during the first postoperative month (P = 0.004). However, in the months thereafter this difference was not observed anymore. In the early oral feeding group, 28 patients (56%) required a nutritional re-intervention, compared to 46 patients (72%) in the delayed oral feeding group (P = 0.078). During admission, more re-interventions were performed in the delayed oral feeding group (17 vs. 46 patients P < 0.001). Esophagectomy reduces BMI in the first year after surgery regardless of the feeding regimen. Direct start of oral intake following esophagectomy has no impact on early nutritional re-interventions and long-term weight loss.

Are postoperative intravenous fluids in patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy a necessity? A randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Intravenous (IV) fluid therapy should be individualized according to each patient's weight, disease, and comorbidities, as well as the type and duration of the operative procedure. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy represents one of the most common, short-duration operations; thus, the aim of this study was to assess the necessity of postoperative administration of IV fluids.

METHOD

A randomized clinical trial with patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy was performed. Patients were randomly assigned to control group (IV fluids at the surgeon's discretion) and study group (no IV fluids after the operation). Body weight and composition, total intravenous fluids, urinary output, creatinine levels, and the presence of thirst and hunger were assessed. Costs related to the administration of postoperative IV fluids were measured.

RESULTS

The study and control groups were similar with regard to sex distribution, age, and general characteristics. There was a significant difference in the amount of infused IV fluids (1,600 mL vs 3,000 mL), directly related to the amount offered postoperatively to the control group. Weight, extracellular water, and urinary output (1,257 ± 736 mL vs 888 ± 392 mL; P < .05) were increased in the control group, and this was positively correlated with the volume of infused fluids (r = 0.333). There were no differences in creatinine levels, thirst, hunger, and well-being features. An average of 10.7 minutes per patient of nursing time was required for IV administration. Cost related to IV fluids was increased in the control group.

CONCLUSION

Postoperative intravenous fluids are not necessary in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and their use is associated with increased nursing time and costs.

ACERTO guidelines of perioperative nutritional interventions in elective general surgery

ABSTRACT Objective: to present recommendations based on the ACERTO Project (Acceleration of Total Post-Operative Recovery) and supported by evidence related to perioperative nutritional care in General Surgery elective procedures. Methods: review of relevant literature from 2006 to 2016, based on a search conducted in the main databases, with the purpose of answering guiding questions previously formulated by specialists, within each theme of this guideline. We preferably used randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews and meta-analyzes but also selected some cohort studies. We contextualized each recommendation-guiding question to determine the quality of the evidence and the strength of this recommendation (GRADE). This material was sent to authors using an open online questionnaire. After receiving the answers, we formalized the consensus for each recommendation of this guideline. Results: the level of evidence and the degree of recommendation for each item is presented in text form, followed by a summary of the evidence found. Conclusion: this guideline reflects the recommendations of the group of specialists of the Brazilian College of Surgeons, the Brazilian Society of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition and the ACERTO Project for nutritional interventions in the perioperative period of Elective General Surgery. The prescription of these recommendations can accelerate the postoperative recovery of patients submitted to elective general surgery, with decrease in morbidity, length of stay and rehospitalization, and consequently, of costs.

The feeding route after esophagectomy: a review of literature

Enhanced recovery programs effectively optimize perioperative care and reduce postoperative morbidity. In esophagectomy, several components of the ERAS program are successfully introduced. However, timing and type of postoperative feeding remain a matter of debate. Adequate nutritional support is essential in patients undergoing an esophagectomy. These patients often present with weight loss and their eating pattern is strongly altered by the procedure and reconstruction. Total parenteral nutrition (TPN) is associated with severe septic complications and enteral nutrition (EN) does not increase major complications. Therefore, early EN after esophagectomy is favored over TPN. However, with enteral feeding tubes minor complications occur frequently (13-38%) and in some cases this can hamper recovery. Based on experience in other types of upper gastro-intestinal surgery, early start of oral feeding could improve time to functional recovery after surgery. The total length of stay was significantly shorter in four prospective studies (6-12 vs. 8-13 days). However, large randomized controlled trials are lacking and the potential benefit of early oral feeding after esophageal surgery remains elusive. EN is nowadays the optimal feeding route after esophagectomy. TPN should only be used in specific cases in which EN is contraindicated. Early initiation of oral intake is promising and could improve postoperative recovery. However, further research is needed to substantiate these results.

Stage-directed individualized therapy in esophageal cancer

Esophageal cancer is the eighth most common cancer worldwide, and the incidence of esophageal carcinoma is rapidly increasing. With the advent of new staging and treatment techniques, esophageal cancer can now be managed through various strategies. A good understanding of the advances and limitations of new staging techniques and how these can guide in individualizing treatment is important to improve outcomes for esophageal cancer patients. This paper outlines the recent progress in staging and treatment of esophageal cancer, with particularly attention to endoscopic techniques for early-stage esophageal cancer, multimodality treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer, assessment of response to neoadjuvant treatment, and the role of cervical lymph node dissection. Furthermore, advances in robot-assisted surgical techniques and postoperative recovery protocols that may further improve outcomes after esophagectomy are discussed.