Safety, feasibility, and effect of an enhanced nutritional support pathway including extended preoperative and home enteral nutrition in patients undergoing enhanced recovery after esophagectomy: a pilot randomized clinical trial

Effect of nutrition-based prehabilitation on the postoperative outcomes of patients with esophagogastric cancer undergoing surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Meta-analyses have primarily focused on the effects of exercise-based prehabilitation on postoperative outcomes and ignored the role of nutritional intervention. In this study, we filled this gap by investigating the effect of nutrition-based prehabilitation on the postoperative outcomes of patients who underwent esophagectomy and gastrectomy.

METHODS

Five electronic databases, namely, PubMed, the Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL, were searched. Adults diagnosed with esophagogastric cancer who were scheduled to undergo surgery and had undergone uni- or multimodal prehabilitation, with at least a week of mandatory nutritional intervention, were included. Forest plots were used to extract and visualize the data from the included studies. The occurrence of any postoperative complication was considered the primary endpoint.

RESULTS

Eight studies met the eligibility criteria, with five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and three cohort studies. In total, 661 patients were included. Any prehabilitation, that is, unimodal (only nutrition) and multimodal prehabilitation, collectively decreased the risk of any postoperative complication by 23% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.66-0.90). A similar effect was exclusively observed for multimodal prehabilitation (risk ratio [RR] = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.66-0.93); however, it was not significant for unimodal prehabilitation. Any prehabilitation significantly decreased the length of hospital stay (LOS) (weighted mean difference = -0.77, 95% CI = -1.46 to -0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

Nutrition-based prehabilitation, particularly multimodal prehabilitation, confers protective effects against postoperative complications after esophagectomy and gastrectomy. Our findings suggest that prehabilitation slightly decreases LOS; however, the finding is not clinically significant. Therefore, additional rigorous RCTs are warranted for further substantiation.

Correlation between sarcopenia and esophageal cancer: a narrative review

BACKGROUND

In recent years, the research on the relationship between sarcopenia before and after the treatment of esophageal cancer, as well as its impact on prognosis of esophageal cancer, has increased rapidly, which has aroused people's attention to the disease of patients with esophageal cancer complicated with sarcopenia. This review examines the prevalence of sarcopenia in patients with esophageal cancer, as well as the relationship between sarcopenia (before and after surgery or chemotherapy) and prognosis in patients with esophageal cancer. Moreover, we summarized the potential pathogenesis of sarcopenia and pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic therapies.

METHODS

A narrative review was performed in PubMed and Web of Science using the keywords ("esophageal cancer" or "esophageal neoplasm" or "neoplasm, esophageal" or "esophagus neoplasm" or "esophagus neoplasms" or "neoplasm, esophagus" or "neoplasms, esophagus" or "neoplasms, esophageal" or "cancer of esophagus" or "cancer of the esophagus" or "esophagus cancer" or "cancer, esophagus" or "cancers, esophagus" or "esophagus cancers" or "esophageal cancer" or "cancer, esophageal" or "cancers, esophageal" or "esophageal cancers") and ("sarcopenia" or "muscular atrophy" or "aging" or "senescence" or "biological aging" or "aging, biological" or "atrophies, muscular" or "atrophy, muscular" or "muscular atrophies" or "atrophy, muscle" or "atrophies, muscle" or "muscle atrophies"). Studies reporting relationship between sarcopenia and esophageal cancer were analyzed.

RESULTS

The results of the review suggest that the average prevalence of sarcopenia in esophageal cancer was 46.3% ± 19.6% ranging from 14.4 to 81% and sarcopenia can be an important predictor of poor prognosis in patients with esophageal cancer. Patients with esophageal cancer can suffer from sarcopenia due to their nutritional deficiencies, reduced physical activity, chemotherapy, and the effects of certain inflammatory factors and pathways. When classic diagnostic values for sarcopenia such as skeletal muscle index (SMI) are not available clinically, it is also feasible to predict esophageal cancer prognosis using simpler metrics, such as calf circumference (CC), five-count sit-up test (5-CST), and six-minute walk distance (6MWD).

CONCLUSIONS

Identifying the potential mechanism of sarcopenia in patients with esophageal cancer and implementing appropriate interventions may hold the key to improving the prognosis of these patients.

The impact of geriatric nutritional risk index on esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients with neoadjuvant therapy followed by esophagectomy

Background

The Geriatric Nutritional Index (GNRI) has been indicated as a nutritional index which is highly associated with complications and mortality in older hospitalized patients. Moreover, early studies had suggested that GNRI is a potential prognostic indicator for some malignances. However, the prognostic value of GNRI in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) patients underwent neoadjuvant therapy followed by esophagectomy remains elusive.

Materials and methods

This retrospective study incorporated 373 patients with ESCC who had underwent neoadjuvant therapy followed by radical esophagectomy at West China Hospital of Sichuan University between April 2011 and September 2021. The GNRI formula was: 1.489 × albumin (g/dl) + 41.7 × current weight/ideal weight. Patients were classified as GNRI-low (GNRI < 98.7) or GNRI high (GNRI ≥ 98.7). The association between GNRI and clinical survival status were assessed utilizing Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox regression analysis.

Results

Three hundred and seventy three patients were retrospectively included in this study. 80 (21.5%) and 293 (78.5%) patients had been divided into the GNRI-low and GNRI-high groups respectively. Pathological T stage and the rate of nodal metastasis were significantly higher in the GNRI low group than in the GNRI high group (P = 0.003 and P = 0.001, respectively) among the examined demographic parameters. Furthermore, GNRI was significantly correlated with postoperative complications, patients with lower GNRI had a higher postoperative complication rate as compared with GNRI high group [Odds ratio: 2.023; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.208–3.389; P = 0.007]. Univariate analysis of 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) found that the rate of survival was considerably lower in the GNRI-low group than in the GNRI-high group (P < 0.001). However, multivariate analysis demonstrated that GNRI was not an independent risk factor.

Conclusion

In patients with ESCC, low GNRI exhibited a poor nutritional indicator and related to postoperative complications after neoadjuvant therapy. Intensive follow-up after surgery should be performed for ESCC patients with low GNRI.

Home enteral nutrition for patients with esophageal cancer undergoing esophagectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

Home enteral nutrition (HEN) is a relatively new nutritional intervention that provides patients with EN support at home through jejunostomy or nasogastric feeding tubes. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the safety and effect of HEN compared with normal oral diet (NOD) in postoperative patients with esophageal cancer (EC).

Methods

EMBASE, Medline, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were used to search articles in English-language journals. The intervention effect was expressed using risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcome measures, with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). The chi-square test and I-square test were used to test heterogeneity among studies.

Results

Four studies were eventually included in this meta-analysis. Compared with NOD, HEN has a favorable impact on postoperative body mass index (BMI) (weighted mean difference [WMD] = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.09–1.30, P = 0.02), lean body mass (LBM) (WMD = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.04–1.48, P = 0.04), and appendicular skeletal muscle mass index (ASMI) (WMD = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.02–0.58, P = 0.03). Physical function (WMD = 9.26, 95% CI: 8.00–10.53, P < 0.001), role function (WMD = 9.96, 95% CI: 8.11–11.82, P < 0.001), and social function (WMD = 8.51, 95% CI: 3.48–13.54, P = 0.001) of the HEN group were better than those of the NOD group at 3 months, and HEN could reduce the fatigue of patients (WMD = −12.73, 95% CI: −14.8 to −10.66, P < 0.001) and the incidence of postoperative pneumonia (RR = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.34–0.81, P = 0.004). There was no significant difference in albumin between HEN and NOD groups (WMD = 0.05, 95% CI: −0.03 to 0.13, P = 0.20).

Conclusion

HEN improved nutritional status and quality of life (QOL) in postoperative patients with EC and reduced fatigue and the incidence of postoperative pneumonia. All in all, the results of our meta-analysis support the use of HEN after esophagectomy.

Effect of Home Enteral Nutritional Support Compared With Normal Oral Diet in Postoperative Subjects With Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Resection: A Meta-Analysis

Introduction

We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the influence of a home enteral nutritional support compared with a normal oral diet in postoperative subjects with upper gastrointestinal cancer resection.

Methods

A systematic literature search up to December 2021 was done and 23 studies included 3,010 subjects with upper gastrointestinal cancer resection at the start of the study; 1,556 of them were given home enteral nutritional support and 1,454 were normal oral diet. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) with 95% CIs to evaluate the influence of home enteral nutritional support compared with a normal oral diet in postoperative subjects with upper gastrointestinal cancer resection by the dichotomous or continuous methods with a random or fixed-influence model.

Results

Home enteral nutritional support had significantly higher quality of life (MD, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.50–2.67, p &lt; 0.001), better body weight change (MD, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.31–2.43, p &lt; 0.001), higher albumin (MD, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.72–1.82, p &lt; 0.001), and higher pre-albumin (MD, 30.79; 95% CI, 7.29–54.29, p = 0.01) compared to the normal oral diet in subjects with upper gastrointestinal cancer resection. However, home enteral nutritional support had no significant impact on the hemoglobin (MD, 4.64; 95% CI, −4.17 to 13.46, p = 0.30), and complications (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.76–1.40, p = 0.83) compared to the normal oral diet in subjects with upper gastrointestinal cancer resection.

Conclusions

Home enteral nutritional support had a significantly higher quality of life, better body weight change, higher albumin, and higher pre-albumin, and had no significant impact on the hemoglobin and complications compared to the normal oral diet in subjects with upper gastrointestinal cancer resection. Further studies are required.

Quality of Life of Cancer Patients Receiving Enteral Nutrition: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Most studies confirm the beneficial effects of enteral nutrition on the quality of life, but some studies indicate an inverse association and its detrimental impacts. However, there are insufficient data on the effects of enteral nutrition on the quality of life of cancer patients. This systematic review aimed to describe the influence of applied enteral nutrition on the quality of life of cancer patients, based on the results of randomized controlled trials. It was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42021261226) and conducted based on the PRISMA guidelines. The searching procedure was conducted using the PubMed and Web of Science databases, as well as Cochrane Library, and it included studies published until June 2021. It was conducted to select randomized controlled trials assessing the influence of enteral nutrition (compared with the other model of nutrition) on the quality of life of cancer patients. A general number of 761 records were screened and a final number of 16 studies were included in the systematic review. The studies were included and assessed by two independent researchers, while the risk of bias was analyzed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS). Studies compared patients treated with and without enteral nutrition, patients treated with various methods of enteral nutrition or with enteral diets of various content, as well as patients treated with enteral and parenteral nutrition. Within the included studies, the majority were conducted in patients with cancers located in various parts of the body, or diverse areas within the gastrointestinal system, while some studies were conducted in specific populations of patients with a defined cancer location—esophagus, stomach, or ovary. The duration of applied enteral nutrition within the included studies was diversified—from two weeks or less to half a year or even more. The vast majority of studies used well-known and validated tools to assess the quality of life, either developed for a specific group of head/neck, esophagus/stomach, and ovary cancer patients or developed for more general patient populations. Most studies concerning patients treated with and without enteral nutrition supported applying enteral nutrition, which was concluded in seven studies out of ten (including four studies with a low risk of bias). The other important observations to be emphasized—formulated based on the studies with a low risk of bias—presented the role of oral supportive nutrition guided by a dietitian, as well as the beneficial role of enteral and parenteral nutrition, combined. In spite of a relatively low number of randomized controlled trials assessing the influence of enteral nutrition on the quality of life of cancer patients, which should be considered as a limitation, the results were promising. Most studies supported the positive influence of enteral nutrition on the quality of life, either assessed based on the psychological measures of the quality of life or by considering the other potential determinants (e.g., malnutrition, complications, etc.). Taking this into account, enteral nutrition should be applied whenever possible, both to prevent and treat malnutrition in cancer patients. However, considering the limited number of studies conducted so far, further research conducted in homogenic populations of patients is necessary.

Risk stratification of anastomotic leakage using eGFR and FIB-4 index in patients undergoing esophageal cancer surgery

PURPOSE

Renal insufficiency and liver cirrhosis are identified as independent risk factors for anastomotic leakage (AL) after esophagectomy. However, research evaluating the incidence of AL using quantitative data to measure renal function and liver fibrosis remain to be limited. Therefore, this study was conducted to evaluate postoperative AL after esophagectomy using estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and fibrosis-4 (FIB-4) index.

METHODS

In total, 184 patients who underwent esophagectomy were included in this study; then, they were divided into the non-AL group (n = 161) and AL group (n = 23), after which their background data and intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were compared. In addition, risk factors for AL were evaluated using a logistic regression model.

RESULTS

Preoperative body mass index of ≥21.5 kg/m², hemoglobin A1c level of ≥7.3%, FIB-4 index of ≥1.44, and eGFR of <59 ml/min/1.73 m² were found to be significantly frequent in the AL group compared with the non-AL group. Multivariate analysis revealed FIB-4 index of ≥1.44 (p = 0.013; OR, 3.780; 95% CI, 1.320-10.800) and eGFR of <59 ml/min/1.73 m² (p = 0.018; OR, 3.110; 95% CI, 1.220-8.020) as the independent risk factors for AL. In addition, we stratified the patients into three groups based on the incidence of AL as follows: low risk (5.5%, low FIB-4 index), intermediate risk (13.0%, high FIB-4 index and eGFR), and high risk (37.5%, high FIB-4 index and low eGFR).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative eGFR and FIB-4 index were found to be useful markers to predict AL after esophagectomy.

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.

Home enteral nutrition after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Not only has the placement rate of enteral feeding tubes during operations for esophageal cancer increased, but also has number of patients who choose to continue enteral feeding at home instead of removing the feeding tube at discharge. The impacts of home enteral nutrition (HEN) after esophagectomy in esophageal cancer patients are analyzed.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA and Cochrane guidelines. English and Chinese databases, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, Scopus, CBM, CNKI, and Wan Fang were searched from inception to December 7, 2019. Randomized controlled trials evaluating the short-term outcomes of HEN following esophagectomy in cancer patients were included. The risk of bias of the included studies was appraised according to the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The summary of relative risk/weighted mean difference (WMD) estimates and corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were calculated using fixed- and random-effects models.

RESULTS

Nine randomized controlled trials involving 757 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with oral diet, HEN was associated with significantly increased body weight (WMD 3 kg, 95% CI 2.36-3.63, P < .001), body mass index (WMD 0.97 kg/m, 95% CI 0.74-1.21, P < .001), albumin (WMD 3.43 g/L, 95% CI 2.35-4.52, P < .001), hemoglobin (WMD 7.23 g/L, 95% CI 5.87-8.59, P < .001), and total protein (WMD 5.13 g/L, 95% CI 3.7-6.56, P < .001). No significant differences were observed in prealbumin and gastrointestinal adverse reactions. Physical (WMD 8.82, 95% CI 6.69-10.95, P < .001) and role function (WMD 12.23, 95% CI 2.72-21.74, P = .01) were also significantly better in the HEN group. The nausea/vomiting (WMD -5.43, 95% CI -8.29 to -2.57, P = .002) and fatigue symptoms (WMD -11.76, 95% CI -16.21 to -7.32, P < .001) were significantly reduced. Appetite loss (WMD -8.48, 95% CI -14.27 to -4.88, P = .001), diarrhea (WMD -3.9, 95% CI -7.37 to -0.43, P = .03), and sleep disturbance (WMD -7.64, 95% CI -12.79 to -2.5, P = .004) in the HEN group were also significantly less than the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

HEN improved nutrition status, physical and role function, and reduced nausea/vomiting, fatigue, appetite loss, diarrhea, and sleep disturbance compared with an oral diet in esophageal cancer patients postsurgery. HEN did not increase adverse reactions.

Esophageal cancer patients of heavier weight have more nutritional risk of inadequate calorie intake immediately after esophagectomy: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Perioperative malnutrition is common in patients undergoing esophagectomy, and nutritional support is critical for postoperative recovery in these patients. But few studies reported which characteristics of these patients were associated with post-esophagectomy inadequate calorie intake. This study aimed to explore which patients were more likely to have inadequate calories immediately after esophagectomy and the impact on clinical outcomes.

METHODS

From January 2018 to June 2019, patients undergoing esophagectomy were retrospectively divided into the "adequate calorie group" and the "inadequate calorie group" according to whether they met daily calorie requirements in a week after esophagectomy. Caloric requirements met rate and clinical outcomes were compared between patients with and without complications, and with weight > 70 kg or ≤ 70 kg.

RESULTS

Patients in the inadequate calorie group (n = 104) had significantly higher weight (p < 0.001), lean body mass (p = 0.028), and BMI (p = 0.001) than the adequate calorie group (n = 46). Weight loss after esophagectomy was reduced (p = 0.043) in the adequate calorie group. Patients with complications had lower rate of adequate calorie intake (72.8% vs. 63.8%). The caloric requirements met rate in patients with weigh ≤ 70 kg was significantly higher than those weight > 70 kg (80.2% vs. 43.2%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The weights of patients having inadequate calories in a week after esophagectomy were significantly heavier than those having adequate calories. Heavier patients after esophagectomy should attract more attention to their nutrition support.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial was registered ( ChiCTR1900025557 ).

Enteral immunonutrition versus enteral nutrition for patients undergoing oesophagectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

According to retrospective studies, oesophageal carcinoma is the second deadliest gastrointestinal cancer after gastric cancer. Enteral immunonutrition (EIN) has been increasingly used to enhance host immunity and relieve the inflammatory response of patients undergoing oesophagectomy; however, conclusions across studies remain unclear. We aimed to evaluate the effect of EIN on the clinical and immunological outcomes of patients undergoing oesophagectomy.

METHODS

Four electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library) were used to search articles in peer-reviewed, English-language journals. The mean difference, relative risk or standard mean difference with 95% confidence interval were calculated. Heterogeneity was assessed by the Cochran's Q test and I2 statistic combined with the corresponding P-value. The analysis was carried out with RevMan 5.3.

RESULTS

Six articles were finally included, with a total of 320 patients with oesophageal cancer. The meta-analysis results showed that EIN did not improve clinical outcomes (such as infectious complications, pneumonia, surgical site infection, anastomotic leak and postoperative hospital stay) or immune indices [referring to C-reactive protein, interleukin (IL)-6, IL-8, tumour necrosis factor-α]. Descriptive analysis suggested that EIN also increased the serum concentrations of IgG and the percentage of the B-cell fraction. Thus, its impact on IL-8 and IL-6 remains inconsistent.

CONCLUSIONS

The early-stage impact of EIN on immunological status in patients undergoing oesophagectomy is still unclear. According to the results of this meta-analysis, whether EIN could improve the clinical outcomes or biological status after oesophagectomy compared to standard enteral nutrition is uncertain. Since the impact of EIN is unclear, current guidelines that strongly advise the use of EIN should be changed, as the utility of EIN is very uncertain. More appropriately powered clinical studies are warranted to confirm its effectiveness.

Enhanced recovery pathways vs standard care pathways in esophageal cancer surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols vs standard care pathways after esophagectomy for malignancy have gained wide popularity among surgeons. However, the current literature is still lacking level-I evidence to show a clear superiority of one approach. The present study is a detailed systematic review and meta-analysis of the published trials. A systematic review of literature databases was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized, prospective, comparative studies between January 1990 and September 2019, comparing ERAS pathway group with standard care for esophageal resection for esophageal cancer. Mean difference (MD) for continuous variables and odds ratio (OR) or risk difference (RD) for dichotomous variables with 95% confidence interval (CI) were used. Between-study heterogeneity was evaluated. Eight studies with a total of 1133 patients were included. Hospital stay [Standard mean difference (Std. MD) = - 1.92, 95% CI - 2.78, - 1.06, P < 0.0001], overall morbidity (OR 0.68, CI 0.49, 0.96, P = 0.03), pulmonary complications (OR 0.45, CI 0.31, 0.65, P < 0.0001), anastomotic leak rate (OR 0.37, CI 0.18, 0.74, P = 0.005), time to first flatus and defecation (Std. MD = -5.01, CI - 9.53, - 0.49, P = 0.03), (Std. MD = - 1.36, CI - 1.78, - 0.94, P < 0.00001) and total hospital cost (Std. MD = - 1.62, CI - 2.24, - 1.01, P < 0.00001) favored the ERAS group. Patients who undergo ERAS have a clear benefit over the standard care protocol. However, existing protocols in different centers are followed by great variability, while the evaluated parameters suffer from significant heterogeneity. A well-formulated, standardized protocol should be standard-of-care at all centers.