Direct Oral Feeding Following Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy (NUTRIENT II trial): An International, Multicenter, Open-label Randomized Controlled Trial

Nutritional status of early oral feeding for gastric cancer patients after laparoscopic total gastrectomy: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

After Laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG), gastric cancer (GC) patients often face malnutrition. Early oral feeding (EOF) has emerged as a key strategy in enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols. However, the impact of EOF on post-LTG nutritional status requires further investigation. This study aimed to compare the nutritional status of EOF, nasogastric tube (NGT) and nasojejunal tube (NJT) to figure out the status of EOF.

METHODS

A retrospective comparative analysis of a single center (Second Hospital of Lanzhou University) of a total of 116 patients with LTG was performed. These included 40 NGT patients, 40 patients with NJT and 36 patients with EOF. Postoperative (7 days after surgery) nutritional status was examined as the primary endpoint, including weight, BMI, total protein, albumin, hemoglobin and total lymphocyte count (TLC). In addition, bowel sounds, abdominal distension and pain were evaluated as secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

The collective shows no significant differences between the three groups regarding various demographic and clinical information (All, p > 0.05). There was no significant difference in the patients' nutritional status and bowel sound recovery 7 days after surgery (All, p > 0.05). The rate of abdominal distension shows to be significantly reduced with EOF compared to NJT (mean difference = 0.342; p < 0.001). The incidence of abdominal pain was significantly different between EOF and NGT groups (mean difference = 0.228; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Among GC patients after LTG, EOF and traditional tube feeding had a similar risk of postoperative nutritional status. However, EOF was associated with a lower risk of abdominal distension.

Nutritional support via feeding jejunostomy in esophago-gastric cancers: proposal of a common working strategy based on the available evidence

Malnutrition is common in patients affected by esophago-gastric cancers and has a negative impact on both clinical and economic outcomes. Yet not all patients at risk of malnutrition are routinely assessed and receive appropriate support. Further, available research does not provide a mean for standardization of timing, route, and dosage for nutritional support, and this is particularly true for enteral nutrition via feeding jejunostomy. Herein, we provide an overview of the current evidence and use the gathered knowledge as a starting point for a consensus proposal. As a result, we aim to facilitate the development of appropriate and uniformed interventions, thus fulfilling the need for a multimodal therapeutic approach in these set of cancer patients.

Clinical implementation of minimally invasive esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery is becoming the method of choice for the resection of esophageal cancer worldwide.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected clinical data in a tertiary care center with a detailed description of the course of the program.

RESULTS

A total of 136 transthoracic esophageal resections were performed between 2010 and 2023. The study group included 116 operations, 69 of which were fully minimally invasive and 47 hybrid. 80.0% of the study group underwent surgery using a multimodality approach. The median operation time was 431 min (± 103). The R0 resection rate was 100%. Forty-two patients (36.2%) had no postoperative complications. The postoperative Clavien-Dindo > IIIb morbidity was 27%. The postoperative 90-d mortality rate was 1.7%. The average number of lymph nodes removed in the last quarter of cancer patients was 31. The anastomotic insufficiency rate for reoperation was 4% (Ivor-Lewis 4.2%, McKeown 5%).

CONCLUSIONS

With extensive expertise in high-end minimally invasive abdominal and thoracic surgery, implementation of a minimally invasive esophageal resection program with a clinical and oncologic outcome within generally accepted limits is feasible.

Enhanced Recovery Protocol Versus Conventional Care in Patients Undergoing Esophagectomy for Cancer: Advantages in Clinical and Patient-Reported Outcomes

BACKGROUND

This study was designed to compare the clinical and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) between the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol and conventional care in patients undergoing esophagectomy for cancer, which have not previously been compared.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective study included prospective PRO data from August 2019 to June 2021. Clinical outcomes included perioperative complications and postoperative length of stay (PLOS). Patient-reported outcomes were assessed by using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core-30 (QLQ-C30) and esophagus-specific module (QLQ-OES18) preoperatively to 6 months postoperatively. Mixed-effects models were used to longitudinally compare quality of life (QOL) scores between the two modes.

RESULTS

Patients undergoing conventional care and ERAS were analyzed (n = 348 and 109, respectively). The ERAS group had fewer overall complications, pneumonia, arrhythmia, and a shorter PLOS than the conventional group, and outperformed the conventional group in five functional QLQ-C30 domains and five symptom QLQ-OES18 domains, including less dysphagia (p < 0.0001), trouble talking (p = 0.0006), and better eating (p < 0.0001). These advantages persisted for 3 months postoperatively. For the cervical circular stapled anastomosis, the initial domains and duration of benefit were reduced in the ERAS group.

CONCLUSIONS

The ERAS protocol has significant advantages over conventional care in terms of clinical outcomes, lowering postoperative symptom burden, and improving functional QOL in patients who have undergone esophagectomy. Selection of the optimal technique for cervical anastomosis is a key operative component of ERAS that maintains the symptom domains and duration of the advantages of PROs.

Improved Pancreatic Cancer Detection and Localization on CT Scans: A Computer-Aided Detection Model Utilizing Secondary Features

The early detection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is essential for optimal treatment of pancreatic cancer patients. We propose a tumor detection framework to improve the detection of pancreatic head tumors on CT scans. In this retrospective research study, CT images of 99 patients with pancreatic head cancer and 98 control cases from the Catharina Hospital Eindhoven were collected. A multi-stage 3D U-Net-based approach was used for PDAC detection including clinically significant secondary features such as pancreatic duct and common bile duct dilation. The developed algorithm was evaluated using a local test set comprising 59 CT scans. The model was externally validated in 28 pancreatic cancer cases of a publicly available medical decathlon dataset. The tumor detection framework achieved a sensitivity of 0.97 and a specificity of 1.00, with an area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) of 0.99, in detecting pancreatic head cancer in the local test set. In the external test set, we obtained similar results, with a sensitivity of 1.00. The model provided the tumor location with acceptable accuracy obtaining a DICE Similarity Coefficient (DSC) of 0.37. This study shows that a tumor detection framework utilizing CT scans and secondary signs of pancreatic cancer can detect pancreatic tumors with high accuracy.

Postoperative nutrition in the setting of enhanced recovery programmes

Patients undergoing major surgery for gastrointestinal cancer are at high risk of developing or worsening malnutrition and sarcopenia. In malnourished patients, preoperative nutritional support may not be sufficient and so postoperative support is advised. This narrative review addresses several aspects of postoperative nutritional care in the setting of enhanced recovery programmes. Early oral feeding, therapeutic diet, oral nutritional supplements, immunonutrition, and probiotics are discussed. When postoperative intake is insufficient, nutritional support favouring the enteral route is recommended. Whether this approach should use a nasojejunal tube or jejunostomy is still a matter of debate. In the setting of enhanced recovery programmes with early discharge, nutritional follow-up and care should be continued beyond the short time in hospital. In enhanced recovery programmes, the main specific aspects of nutrition are patient education, early oral intake, and post-discharge care. The other aspects do not differ from conventional care.

ESPEN Guidelines on Clinical nutrition in surgery - Special issues to be revisited

The ESPEN Guidelines on Clinical nutrition in Surgery from 2017 has been also available as practical guideline with algorithms since 2021 (www.espen.org). An update will be perfomed in the near future. This review focuses on recent data with regard to special issues and topics to be revisited in the guidelines: These are nutritional assessment, sarcopenic obesity, prehabilitation, oral/enteral immunonutrition, postoperative oral supplementation in hospital and after discharge.

Chylous leakage after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Chylous leakage is a rare complication following esophagectomy; however, it can lead to mortality. We aimed to systematically evaluate the factors that may lead to increased chylous leakage after esophagectomy.

METHODS

Three databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library) were systematically searched for all studies investigating the occurrence of chylous leakage after esophagectomy.

RESULTS

A total of 32 studies were identified, including 26 randomized controlled trials and 3 cohort and case-control studies, each. The overall incidence of chylous leakage was 4.7% (278/5,971 cases). Analysis of preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative factors showed that most of the qualitative analysis results did not significantly increase the incidence of chylous leakage. In some quantitative analyses, the chylous leakage rate was significantly lower in the thoracic duct mass ligation group than in the conservative treatment group (relative risk [RR] = 0.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.13-0.83; I2 = 0.0%; P = 0.327). Direct oral feeding significantly reduced chylous leakage compared with jejunostomy (RR = 0.06; 95% CI 0.01-0.33; I2 = 0.0%; P = 0.335). However, preoperative inspiratory muscle training (RR = 1.66; 95% CI, 0.21-12.33; I2 = 55.5%; P = 0.134), preoperative chemoradiotherapy (RR = 0.99; 95% CI, 0.55-1.80; I2 = 0.0%; P = 0.943), and robotic assistance (RR = 1.62; 95% CI, 0.92-2.86; I2 = 0.0%; P = 0.814) did not significantly reduce the incidence of chylous leakage.

CONCLUSIONS

Ligation of the thoracic duct and direct oral feeding can reduce the incidence of chylous leakage after esophagectomy in patients with esophageal cancer. Other contributing factors remain unclear and require validation in further high-quality studies.

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.

An integrated strategy for reducing anastomotic leakage in patients undergoing McKeown esophagectomy

Objective

To describe our experience of reducing anastomotic leakage, a problem that has not been properly solved.

Methods

Starting in January 2020, we began implementing our integrated strategy (application of an esophageal diameter-approximated slender gastric tube, preservation of the fibrous tissue around the residual esophagus and thyroid inferior pole anastomosis) in consecutive patients undergoing esophagectomy without a nasogastric tube or a nasal-jejunum feeding tube. Additionally, the blood supply at the site of the anastomosis was evaluated with a near-infrared fluorescence thoracoscope after the completion of esophagogastric anastomosis in the integrated strategy group.

Results

Of 570 patients who were reviewed, 119 (20.9%) underwent the integrated strategy, and 451 (79.1%) underwent the conventional strategy. The rate of anastomotic leakage was 2.5% in the integrated strategy group and 10.2% in the conventional strategy group (p = 0.008). In the integrated strategy group, the site of most of the anastomotic blood supply was the residual esophagus dominant (82.4%), followed by the gastroesophageal dual-dominant (12.6%) and the gastric tube dominant (5.0%). The reconstruction route was more likely to be orthotopic in the integrated strategy group than in the conventional strategy group (89.9% vs. 38.6%, p = 0.004). Gastric dilation was identified in 3.4% of the patients in the integrated strategy group and in 21.1% in the conventional strategy group.

Conclusions

Patients who underwent our proposed integrated strategy (Zhengzhou Strategy) during McKeown esophagectomy without a nasogastric tube or a nasal-jejunum feeding tube had a strikingly lower rate of anastomotic leakage and a relatively lower rate of postoperative complications, such as gastric tube dilation and delayed gastric emptying.

The impact of hospital experience in bariatric surgery on short-term outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy: a nationwide analysis

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is a technically challenging procedure with a substantial learning curve. Composite volume of upper gastrointestinal (upper GI) procedures for cancer has been previously linked to postoperative outcomes. This study aimed to investigate an association between hospital experience in bariatric surgery and short-term outcomes in MIE.

METHOD

Data on esophagectomy patients between 2016 and 2020 were collected from the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit, a mandatory nationwide registry. Hospitals were categorized as bariatric or non-bariatric. Multivariable logistic regression investigated short-term postoperative outcomes, adjusting for case mix.

RESULTS

Of 3371 patients undergoing esophagectomy in sixteen hospitals, 2450 (72.7%) underwent MIE. Bariatric hospitals (N = 6) accounted for 1057 (43.1%) MIE. Annual volume of bariatric procedures was median 523 and esophagectomies 42. In non-bariatric hospitals, volume of esophagectomies was median 52 (P = 0.145). Overall postoperative complication rate was lower in bariatric hospitals (59.2% vs. 65.9%, P < 0.001). Bariatric hospitals were associated with a reduced risk of overall complications (aOR 0.76 [95% CI 0.62-0.92]), length of hospital (aOR 0.79 [95% CI 0.65-0.95]), and ICU stay (aOR 0.81 [95% CI 0.67-0.98]) after MIE. Surgical radicality (R0) did not differ. Lymph node yield (≥ 15) was lower in bariatric hospitals (90.0% vs. 94.7%, P < 0.001). Over the years, several short-term outcomes improved in bariatric hospitals compared to non-bariatric hospitals.

CONCLUSION

In this nationwide analysis, there was an association between bariatric hospitals and improved short-term outcomes after MIE. Characteristics of bariatric hospitals that could explain this phenomenon and whether this translates to other upper GI procedures may be warranted to identify.

Epidural versus patient-controlled intravenous analgesia on pain relief and recovery after laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Epidural analgesia (EDA) is a main modality for postoperative pain relief in major open abdominal surgery within the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocol. However, it remains unclear whether EDA is an imperative modality in laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG). This study examined non-inferiority of patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) to EDA in terms of postoperative pain and recovery in patients who underwent LG.

METHODS

In this open-label, non-inferiority, parallel, individually randomized clinical trial, patients who underwent elective LG for gastric cancer were randomized 1:1 to receive either EDA or PCIA after surgery. The primary endpoint was pain score using the Numerical Rating Scale at rest 24 h after surgery, analysed both according to the intention-to-treat (ITT) principle and per protocol. The non-inferiority margin for pain score was set at 1. Secondary outcomes were postoperative parameters related to recovery and adverse events related to analgesia.

RESULTS

Between 3 July 2017 and 29 September 2020, 132 patients were randomized to receive either EDA (n = 66) or PCIA (n = 66). After exclusions, 64 patients were included in the EDA group and 65 patients in the PCIA group for the ITT analysis. Pain score at rest 24 h after surgery was 1.94 (s.d. 2.07) in the EDA group and 2.63 (s.d. 1.76) in the PCIA group (P = 0.043). PCIA was not non-inferior to EDA for the primary endpoint (difference 0.69, one side 95% c.i. 1.25, P = 0.184) in ITT analysis. Postoperative parameters related to recovery were similar between groups. More EDA patients (21 (32.8%) versus 1 (1.5%), P < 0.001) developed postoperative hypotension as an adverse event.

CONCLUSIONS

PCIA was not non-inferior to EDA in terms of early-phase pain relief after LG.Registration number: UMIN000027643 (https://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr/index-j.htm).

Effect of Early Versus Late Oral Feeding on Postoperative Complications and Recovery Outcomes for Patients with Esophageal Cancer: A Systematic Evaluation and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to systematically evaluate the effect of early oral feeding (EOF) versus late oral feeding (LOF) on postoperative complications and rehabilitation outcomes for patients with esophageal cancer.

METHODS

This study searched relevant literature published up to March 2023 by computer retrieval of PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. A meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4 software to compare the effects of EOF and LOF on postoperative complications and recovery outcomes of patients with esophageal cancer.

RESULTS

The study included 14 articles, including 9 retrospective studies, 4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and 1 prospective study. The 2555 patients included in the study comprised 1321 patients who received EOF and 1234 patients who received LOF. The results of the meta-analysis showed that compared with the LOF group, the EOF group has a shorter time to the first flatus postoperatively (mean difference [MD],  -  1.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], (-  1.25 to -  1.00; P < 0.00001), a shorter time to the first defecation postoperatively (MD, -  1.31; 95% CI, -  1.67 to -   0.95;, P < 0.00001], and a shorter hospital stay postoperatively (MD, -  2.87; 95% CI, -  3.84 to -  1.90; P < 0.00001). The two groups did not differ significantly statistically in terms of postoperative anastomotic leakage rate (P = 0.10), postoperative chyle leakage rate (P = 0.10), or postoperative pneumonia rate (P = 0.15).

CONCLUSION

Early oral feeding after esophageal cancer surgery can shorten the time to the first flatus and the first defecation postoperatively, shorten the hospital stay, and promote the recovery of patients. Moreover, it has no significant effect on the incidence of postoperative complications.

Feeding Jejunostomy Tube in Patients Undergoing Esophagectomy: Utilization and Outcomes in a Nationwide Cohort

BACKGROUND

Feeding jejunostomy (JT) tubes are often utilized as an adjunct to optimize nutrition for successful esophagectomy; however, their utility has come into question. The aim of this study was to evaluate utilization and outcomes associated with JTs in a nationwide cohort of patients undergoing esophagectomy.

METHODS

The NSQIP database was queried for patients who underwent elective esophagectomy. JT utilization was assessed between 2010 and 2019. Post-operative outcomes were compared between those with and without a JT on patients with esophagectomy-specific outcomes (2016-2019), with results validated using a propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis based on key clinicopathologic factors, including tumor stage.

RESULTS

Of the 10,117 patients who underwent elective esophagectomy over the past decade, 53.0% had a JT placed concurrently and 47.0% did not. Utilization of JTs decreased over time, accounting for 60.0% of cases in 2010 compared to 41.7% in 2019 (m = - 2.14 95%CI: [- 1.49]-[- 2.80], p < 0.01). Patients who underwent JT had more composite wound complications (17.0% vs. 14.1%, p = 0.02) and a higher rate of all-cause morbidity (40.4% vs. 35.5%, p = 0.01). Following PSM, 1007 pairs were identified. Analysis of perioperative outcomes demonstrated a higher rate of superficial skin infections (6.1% vs. 3.5%, p = 0.01) in the JT group. However, length of stay, reoperation, readmission, anastomotic leak, composite wound complications, all-cause morbidity, and mortality rates were similar between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients undergoing elective esophagectomy, feeding jejunostomy tubes were utilized less frequently over the past decade. Similar perioperative outcomes among matched patients support the safety of esophagectomy without an adjunct feeding jejunostomy tube.

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.

Perioperative nutritional assessment and support in visceral surgery

Malnutrition in visceral surgery is frequent; it calls for screening prior to an operation, and its postoperative occurrence should be sought out and prevented, if possible. Organization of an individualized nutritional support strategy is based on systematic nutritional assessment and adapted to the type of surgery, the objectives being to forestall malnutrition and to reduce induced morbidity (immunosuppression, delayed wound healing, anastomotic fistulas…). Nutritional support is part and parcel of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS), and has shown effectiveness in the field of visceral surgery. Oral feeding should always be privileged to the greatest possible extent, complemented if necessary by nutritional supplements. If nutritional support is required, enteral nutrition should be favored over parenteral nutrition. As for the role of pharmaco-nutrition or immuno-nutrition, it remains ill-defined. Lastly, each type of visceral surgery entails specific modifications of the anatomy of the digestive system and is liable to have specific functional consequences, which should be known and taken into account in view of effectively tailoring nutritional support.

Optimizing Nutritional Status of Patients Prior to Major Surgical Intervention

In patients undergoing elective cardiovascular and thoracic surgery, malnutrition and the deterioration of nutritional status are associated with negative outcomes. Recognition of the contributory factors and the complications stemming from surgical stress is important for the prevention and management of these patients. We have reviewed the literature available and focused on the nutritional and metabolic aspects affecting surgical patients, with emphasis on the recommendations of enhanced recovery protocols. The implementation of enhanced recovery protocols and nutritional support guidelines focusing on the surgical patient as part of a multidisciplinary approach would improve the nutritional status of surgical patients at risk for negative outcomes.

Gastro-Intestinal Disorders and Micronutrient Deficiencies following Oncologic Esophagectomy and Gastrectomy

Primary surgical indications for the esophagus and stomach mainly involve cancer surgeries. In recent years, significant progress has been made in the field of esogastric surgery, driven by advancements in surgical techniques and improvements in perioperative care. The rate of resectability has increased, and surgical strategies have evolved to encompass a broader patient population. However, despite a reduction in postoperative mortality and morbidity, malnutrition remains a significant challenge after surgery, leading to weight loss, muscle mass reduction, and deficiencies in essential nutrients due to digestive complications. Malnutrition worsens quality of life and increases the risk of tumor recurrence, significantly affecting prognosis. Nevertheless, the nutritional consequences following surgery are frequently overlooked, mainly due to a lack of awareness regarding their long-term effects on patients who have undergone digestive surgery, extending beyond six months. Micronutrient deficiencies are frequently observed following both partial and total gastrectomy, as anticipated. Surprisingly, these deficiencies appear to be similarly prevalent in patients who have undergone esophagectomy with iron, vitamins A, B1, B12, D, and E deficiencies commonly observed in up to 78.3% of the patients. Recognizing the distinct consequences associated with each type of intervention underscores the importance of implementing preventive measures, early detection, and prompt management.

The association between postoperative complications and long-term survival after esophagectomy: a multicenter cohort study

Conflicting results are reported on the association between post-esophagectomy complications and long-term survival. This multicenter study assesses the association between complications after an esophagectomy and long-term overall survival. Five Dutch high-volume centers collected data from consecutive patients undergoing esophagectomy between 2010 and 2016 and merged these with long-term survival data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Exclusion criteria were non-curative resections and 90-day mortality, among others. Primary outcome was overall survival related to the presence of a postoperative complication in general. Secondary outcomes analyzed the presence of anastomotic leakage and cardiopulmonary complications. Propensity score matching was performed and the outcomes were analyzed via Log-Rank test and Kaplan Meier analysis. Among the 1225 patients included, a complicated course occurred in 719 patients (59.0%). After matching for baseline characteristics, 455 pairs were successfully balanced. Patients with an uncomplicated postoperative course had a 5-year overall survival of 51.7% versus 44.4% in patients with complications (P = 0.011). Anastomotic leakage occurred in 18.4% (n = 226), and in 208 matched pairs, it was shown that the 5-year overall survival was 57.2% in patients without anastomotic leakage versus 44.0% in patients with anastomotic leakage (P = 0.005). Overall cardiopulmonary complication rate was 37.1% (n = 454), and in 363 matched pairs, the 5-year overall survival was 52.1% in patients without cardiopulmonary complications versus 45.3% in patients with cardiopulmonary complications (P = 0.019). Overall postoperative complication rate, anastomotic leakage, and cardiopulmonary complications were associated with a decreased long-term survival after an esophagectomy. Efforts to reduce complications might further improve the overall survival for patients treated for esophageal carcinoma.

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.

The fragility of significant results from randomized controlled trials in esophageal surgeries

While randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are regarded as one of the highest forms of clinical research, the robustness of their P values can be difficult to ascertain. Defined as the minimum number of patients in a study arm that would need to be changed from a non-event to event for the findings to lose significance, the Fragility Index is a method for evaluating results from these trials. This study aims to calculate the Fragility Index for trials evaluating perioperative esophagectomy-related interventions to determine the strength of RCTs in this field. MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched for RCTs related to esophagectomy that reported a significant dichotomous outcome. Two reviewers independently screened articles and performed the data extractions with risk of bias assessment. The Fragility Index was calculated using a two-tailed Fisher's exact test. Bivariate correlation was conducted to evaluate associations between the Fragility Index and study characteristics. 41 RCTs were included, and the median sample size was 80 patients [Interquartile range (IQR) 60-161]. Of the included outcomes, 29 (71%) were primary, and 12 (29%) were secondary. The median Fragility Index was 1 (IQR 1-3), meaning that by changing one patient from a non-event to event, the results would become non-significant. Fragility Index was correlated with P value, number of events, and journal impact factor. The RCTs related to esophagectomy did not prove to be robust, as the significance of their results could be changed by altering the outcome status of a handful of patients in one study arm.

Perioperative nutrition for gastrointestinal surgery: On the cutting edge

Evidence on perioperative nutrition interventions in gastrointestinal surgery is rapidly evolving. We conducted a narrative review of various aspects of nutrition support, including formula choice and route of administration, as well as duration and timing of nutrition support therapy. Studies have demonstrated that nutrition support is associated with improved clinical outcomes in malnourished patients and those at nutrition risk, emphasizing the importance of nutrition assessment, for which several validated nutrition risk assessment tools exist. The assessment of serum albumin levels has fallen out of favor, as it is an unreliable marker of nutrition status, whereas imaging evidence of sarcopenia has prognostic value and may emerge as a standard component of nutrition assessment. Preoperatively, evidence supports limiting fasting to reduce insulin resistance and improve oral tolerance. Benefits to preoperative carbohydrate loading remain unclear, whereas literature suggests preoperative parenteral nutrition (PN) may reduce postoperative complications in high-risk patients with malnutrition or sarcopenia. Postoperatively, early oral feeding is safe with benefits in time to return of bowel function and reduced hospital stay. There is a signal for potential benefit to early postoperative PN in critically ill patients, though evidence is sparse. There has also been a recent emergence in randomized studies evaluating the use of ω-3 fatty acids, amino acids, and immunonutrition. Meta-analyses have reported favorable outcomes for these supplements, though individual studies are small and with significant methodological limitations and risk of bias, emphasizing the need for high-quality randomized studies to guide clinical practice.

State of the art of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols in esophagogastric cancer surgery: the Western experience

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs provide a framework to standardize care processes and improve outcomes. The results of this multimodal and multidisciplinary approach based on actions focused on reducing physiological surgical stress in the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative periods are beneficial in reducing morbidity and hospital stay, without increasing readmissions across different surgical settings. The implementation of ERAS in resection procedures of esophageal and gastric cancer has been challenging due to the complexity of these surgical techniques and the high risk of complications. Despite the limited evidence of ERAS in esophagectomy operations, systematic reviews and meta-analysis have confirmed a reduction of pulmonary complications and hospital stay without increasing readmissions. In gastrectomy operations, the implementation of ERAS reduces the use of nasogastric tubes and intraabdominal drains, facilitates early diet, and reduces the length of hospital stay, without increasing complications. There is, however, wide heterogeneity and absence of standardization in the number and definition of the ERAS components. The development of ERAS consensus guidelines including procedure-specific components may reduce this variability. Regardless growing evidence of the effectiveness of ERAS, the adherence rate is still low. The commitment of the multidisciplinary team and leadership is critical in the application and refinement of ERAS protocols in parallel with periodic audits. Pre- and post-habilitation methods are emerging concepts to be incorporated in ERAS protocols.

Hospital Variation in Feeding Jejunostomy Policy for Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: A Nationwide Cohort Study

The purpose of this study was to investigate hospital variation in the placement, surgical techniques, and safety of feeding jejunostomies (FJ) during minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) in the Netherlands. This nationwide cohort study analyzed patients registered in the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit (DUCA) that underwent MIE for cancer. Hospital variation in FJ placement rates were investigated using case-mix corrected funnel plots. Short-term outcomes were compared between patients with and without FJ using multilevel multivariable logistic regression analysis. The incidence of FJ-related complications was described and compared between hospitals performing routine and non-routine placement (≥90%−<90% of patients). Between 2018−2020, an FJ was placed in 1481/1811 (81.8%) patients. Rates ranged from 11−100% among hospitals. More patients were discharged within 10 days (median hospital stay) without FJ compared to patients with FJ (64.5% vs. 50.4%; OR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.42−0.90). FJ-related complications occurred in 45 (3%) patients, of whom 23 (1.6%) experienced severe complications (≥Clavien−Dindo IIIa). The FJ-related complication rate was 13.7% in hospitals not routinely placing FJs vs. 1.7% in hospitals performing routine FJ placement (p < 0.001). Significant hospital variation in the use of FJs after MIE exists in the Netherlands. No effect of FJs on complications was observed. FJs can be placed safely, with lower FJ-related complication rates, in centers performing routine placement.

Splenic arterial neurovascular bundle stimulation in esophagectomy: A feasibility and safety prospective cohort study

Introduction

The autonomic nervous system is a key regulator of inflammation. Electrical stimulation of the vagus nerve has been shown to have some preclinical efficacy. However, only a few clinical studies have been reported to treat inflammatory diseases. The present study evaluates, for the first time, neuromodulation of the splenic arterial neurovascular bundle (SpA NVB) in patients undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE), in which the SpA NVB is exposed as part of the procedure.

Methods

This single-center, single-arm study enrolled 13 patients undergoing MIE. During the abdominal phase of the MIE, a novel cuff was placed around the SpA NVB, and stimulation was applied. The primary endpoint was the feasibility and safety of cuff application and removal. A secondary endpoint included the impact of stimulation on SpA blood flow changes during the stimulation, and an exploratory point was C-reactive protein (CRP) levels on postoperative day (POD) 2 and 3.

Results

All patients successfully underwent placement, stimulation, and removal of the cuff on the SpA NVB with no adverse events related to the investigational procedure. Stimulation was associated with an overall reduction in splenic arterial blood flow but not with changes in blood pressure or heart rate. When compared to historic Propensity Score Matched (PSM) controls, CRP levels on POD2 (124 vs. 197 mg/ml, p = 0.032) and POD3 (151 vs. 221 mg/ml, p = 0.033) were lower in patients receiving stimulation.

Conclusion

This first-in-human study demonstrated for the first time that applying a cuff around the SpA NVB and subsequent stimulation is safe, feasible, and may have an effect on the postoperative inflammatory response following MIE. These findings suggest that SpA NVB stimulation may offer a new method for immunomodulatory therapy in acute or chronic inflammatory conditions.

Feasibility research of enhanced recovery after surgery implemented in esophageal cancer patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy

Background

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is a perioperative management protocol to accelerate patient recovery. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of ERAS protocols implemented in patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) before minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy.

Methods

This retrospective study compared the short-term clinical outcomes in esophagectomy patients from June 2018 to June 2021. Subjects were divided into two categories: those who underwent NACT (NACT group) and the non-NACT group.

Results

There was no significant difference in total postoperative complication morbidity between the NACT and non-NACT groups (21.2% vs. 20.7%, P=0.936). In addition, the hospital length of stay post-surgery (7.90 vs. 7.71 days, P=0.424) was not significantly longer when compared to the non-NACT group. The time to chest tube removal (5.37 vs. 5.13 days, P=0.238) and first bowel movement (2.92 vs. 3.01 days, P=0.560) was also similar between the two groups.

Conclusions

There was no significant difference in postoperative complications rate, postoperative hospital length of stay, and readmission rate between the two group. This study proved that ERAS protocols seemed to be safe and feasible for patients who received NACT before esophagectomy.

The effect of enhanced recovery after minimally invasive esophagectomy: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this randomized controlled trial was to determine if enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) would improve outcomes for three-stage minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE).

METHODS

Patients with esophageal cancer undergoing MIE between March 2016 and August 2018 were consecutively enrolled, and were randomly divided into 2 groups: ERAS+group that received a guideline-based ERAS protocol, and ERAS- group that received standard care. The primary endpoint was morbidity after MIE. The secondary endpoints were the length of stay (LOS) and time to ambulation after the surgery. The perioperative results including the Surgical Apgar Score (SAS) and Visualized Analgesia Score (VAS) were also collected and compared.

RESULTS

A total of 60 patients in the ERAS+ group and 58 patients in the ERAS- group were included. Postoperatively, lower morbidity and pulmonary complication rate were recorded in the ERAS+ group (33.3% vs. 51.7%; p = 0.04, 16.7% vs. 32.8%; p = 0.04), while the incidence of anastomotic leakage remained comparable (11.7% vs. 15.5%; p = 0.54). There was an earlier ambulation (3 [2-3] days vs. 3 [3-4] days, p = 0.001), but comparable LOS (10 [9-11.25] days vs. 10 [9-13] days; p = 0.165) recorded in ERAS+ group. The ERAS protocol led to close scores in both SAS (7.80 ± 1.03 vs. 8.07 ± 0.89, p = 0.21) and VAS (1.74 ± 0.85 vs. 1.78 ± 1.06, p = 0.84).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of an ERAS protocol for patients undergoing MIE resulted in earlier ambulation and lower pulmonary complications, without a change in anastomotic leakage or length of hospital stay. Further studies on minimizing leakage should be addressed in ERAS for MIE.

Nutrition Care in Cancer Surgery Patients: A Narrative Review of Nutritional Screening and Assessment Methods and Nutritional Considerations

Malignancy is a catabolic state, which is precipitated with surgical intervention. Malnutrition is one of the main risk factors for poor outcomes of cancer surgery. We need to screen oncological patients for malnutrition using standardized screening tools, by which patients found to be at nutritional risk are then referred to a registered dietitian for further management. A detailed assessment is required in such patients, which helps in categorizing the patients based on the severity and rendering proper care. Preoperative nutrition care is often overlooked because of the urgency of operating on a cancer patient. Still, studies have shown preoperative nutritional building gives better surgical outcomes and good postoperative quality of life. Preoperative nutrition care includes both early and late preoperative care. For efficient preoperative nutrition care publishing, standard operating procedures at every healthcare center are recommended. Postoperative nutrition care is given to build the patient tackle the surgical trauma, and their diet mainly includes protein to minimize catabolism. Regardless of the route of nutrition delivery, providing appropriate nutrition care in the postoperative period improves cancer patients' condition drastically. Early postoperative nutrition is studied in different cancer surgeries and is considered ideal in cancer surgical patients. There is a need for consensus on the composition of postoperative nutrition. The diet of a cancer patient should include micronutrients like vitamins D and B and minerals along with the usual nutrition care. The use of special diets like branched-chain amino acids and immune nutrition is to be considered on a case-by-case basis and introducing them into the routine care of a patient needs to be studied extensively.

Implementation of the Esophagectomy Complication Consensus Group definitions: the benefits of speaking the same language

In 2015 the Esophagectomy Complication Consensus Group (ECCG) reported consensus definitions for complications after esophagectomy. This aimed to reduce variation in complication reporting, attributed to heterogeneous definitions. This systematic review aimed to describe the implementation of this definition set, including the effect on complication frequency and variation. A systematic literature review was performed, identifying all observational and randomized studies reporting complication frequencies after esophagectomy since the ECCG publication. Recruitment periods before and subsequent to the index ECCG publication date were included. Coefficients of variance were calculated to assess outcome heterogeneity. Of 144 studies which met inclusion criteria, 70 (48.6%) used ECCG definitions. The median number of separately reported complication types was five per study; only one study reported all ECCG complications. The coefficients of variance of the reported frequencies of eight of the 10 most common complications were reduced in studies which used the ECCG definitions compared with those that did not (P = 0.036). Among ECCG studies, the frequencies of postoperative pneumothorax, reintubation, and pulmonary emboli were significantly reduced in 2020-2021, compared with 2015-2019 (P = 0.006, 0.034, and 0.037 respectively). The ECCG definition set has reduced variation in esophagectomy morbidity reporting. This adds greater confidence to the observed gradual improvement in outcomes with time, and its ongoing use and wider dissemination should be encouraged. However, only a handful of outcomes are widely reported, and only rarely is it used in its entirety.

Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery of Great Britain and Ireland (AUGIS)/Perioperative Quality Initiative (POQI) consensus statement on intraoperative and postoperative interventions to reduce pulmonary complications after oesophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Pulmonary complications are the most common morbidity after oesophagectomy, contributing to mortality and prolonged postoperative recovery, and have a negative impact on health-related quality of life. A variety of single or bundled interventions in the perioperative setting have been developed to reduce the incidence of pulmonary complications. Significant variation in practice exists across the UK. The aim of this modified Delphi consensus was to deliver clear evidence-based consensus recommendations regarding intraoperative and postoperative care that may reduce pulmonary complications after oesophagectomy.

METHODS

With input from a multidisciplinary group of 23 experts in the perioperative management of patients undergoing surgery for oesophageal cancer, a modified Delphi method was employed. Following an initial systematic review of relevant literature, a range of anaesthetic, surgical, and postoperative care interventions were identified. These were then discussed during a two-part virtual conference. Recommendation statements were drafted, refined, and agreed by all attendees. The level of evidence supporting each statement was considered.

RESULTS

Consensus was reached on 12 statements on topics including operative approach, pyloric drainage strategies, intraoperative fluid and ventilation strategies, perioperative analgesia, postoperative feeding plans, and physiotherapy interventions. Seven additional questions concerning the perioperative management of patients undergoing oesophagectomy were highlighted to guide future research.

CONCLUSION

Clear consensus recommendations regarding intraoperative and postoperative interventions that may reduce pulmonary complications after oesophagectomy are presented.

Role of intraoperative feeding jejunostomy in esophageal cancer surgery

Background

Feeding jejunostomy was routinely placed during esophagectomy to ensure postoperative enteral feeding. Improved anastomosis technique and early oral feeding strategy after esophagectomy has led to question the need for the routine placement of feeding jejunostomy. The aim of this study is to evaluate role of feeding jejunostomy during Ivor Lewis operation.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 414 patients who underwent the Ivor Lewis operations from January 2015 to December 2018.

Results

61 patients (14.7%) received jejunostomy insertion. The most common indication for jejunostomy was neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiation therapy (CCRT). 48 patients (79%) had jejunostomy removed within 60 days after the surgery and the longest duration of jejunostomy inserted state was 121 days. About two-third of the patients with jejunostomy had never prescribed with an enteral feeding product. Among 353 patients without intraoperative feeding jejunostomy, 11(3.1%) received delayed jejunostomy insertion. Graft-related problems (6 patients), cancer progression (3 patients), acute lung injury (1 patient), and swallowing difficulty (1 patient) were reasons for delayed feeding jejunostomy insertion. Complication rate was relatively high as 24 patients (33.3%) out of 72 patients with jejunostomy insertion had complications and 7 patients (9.7%) visited ER more than twice with jejunostomy-related complications.

Conclusion

Only 3.6% patients who underwent the Ivor Lewis operation during 4-year span had anastomosis leakage. Although one-third of the patients with jejunostomy were benefited with alternative method of feeding after discharge, high complication rate regarding jejunostomy should be also considered. We believe feeding jejunostomy should not be applied routinely with prophylactic measures and should be reserved to very carefully selected patients with multiple high-risk factors.

Effect of a multimodal prehabilitation program on postoperative recovery and morbidity in patients undergoing a totally minimally invasive esophagectomy

Postoperative morbidity following esophagectomy remains substantial. Studies in major abdominal surgery have shown that prehabilitation can improve postoperative outcomes. This single-center study investigated the influence of prehabilitation on postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy (MIE-IL). Data were collected on patients that underwent a MIE-IL and received a fully standardized enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program, between October 2015 and February 2020. The intervention group comprised patients enrolled in the PREPARE prehabilitation program. The control group comprised a retrospective cohort with similar ERAS care, prior to implementation of PREPARE. Postoperative outcomes included (functional) recovery, length of hospital stay (LOHS), cardiopulmonary complications (CPC) and other predefined outcomes. The PREPARE group comprised 52 and control group 43 patients. Median time to functional recovery was 6 vs. 7 days (P = 0.074) and LOHS 7 vs. 8 days (P = 0.039) in PREPARE and control patients, respectively. Hospital readmission rate was 9.6 vs. 14.3% (P = 0.484). A 17% reduction in thirty-day overall postoperative complication rate was observed in PREPARE patients, but this was not statistically significant (P = 0.106). Similarly, a clinically relevant reduction of 14% in CPC rate was observed (P = 0.190). Anastomotic leakage rate was similar (9.6 vs 14.0%; P = 0.511). Despite no difference in severity (Clavien-Dindo) of complications (P = 0.311), ICU readmission rate was lower in PREPARE patients (3.8 vs. 16.3%, P = 0.039). Prehabilitation prior to MIE-IL led to a shorter LOHS and reduced ICU readmission rate. Additionally, a clinically relevant improvement in postoperative recovery and reduced morbidity rate was observed in prehabilitated patient.

Unresolved issues in perioperative nutrition: A narrative review

Surgical patients are at an increased risk of negative outcomes if they are malnourished or at risk of malnutrition preoperatively. Optimisation of nutritional status should be a focus throughout the perioperative continuum to promote improved surgical outcomes. Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) protocols are increasingly applied in the surgical setting but are not yet widespread. This narrative review focused on areas of perioperative nutrition that are perceived as controversial or are lacking in agreement. A search for available literature was conducted on 1 March 2022 and relevant high-quality articles published since 2015 were considered for inclusion. Most malnutrition screening tools are not specific to the surgical population except for the Perioperative Nutrition Screen (PONS) although more large-scale initiatives are needed to improve the prevalence of preoperative nutrition screening. Poor muscle health is common in patients with malnutrition and further exacerbates negative health outcomes indicating that prevention, detection and treatment is of high importance in this population. Although a lack of consensus remains for who should receive preoperative nutritional therapy, evidence suggests a positive impact on muscle health. Additionally, postoperative nutritional support benefits surgical outcomes, with some patients requiring enteral and/or parenteral feeding routes and showing benefit from immunonutrition. The importance of nutrition extends beyond the time in hospital and should remain a priority post-discharge. The impact of individual or personalised nutrition based on select patient characteristics remains to be further investigated. Overall, the importance of perioperative nutrition is evident in the literature despite select ongoing areas of contention.

Effects of pre-operative enteral immunonutrition for esophageal cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial (point trial, pre-operative immunonutrition therapy)

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by esophagectomy has been established as the first-line treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer. Postoperative enteral nutrition has been widely used to improve perioperative outcomes. However, whether to implement preoperative nutritional intervention during neoadjuvant therapy is yet to be verified by prospective studies.

METHODS

POINT trial is a multicenter, open-labeled, randomized controlled trial. A total of 244 patients with surgically resectable esophageal cancer are randomly assigned to nutritional therapy group (arm A) or control group (arm B) with a 2:1 ratio. Both groups receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy with concurrent radiotherapy based on the CROSS regimen followed by minimally invasive esophagectomy. The primary endpoint is the rate of nutrition and immune-related complications after surgery. Secondary endpoints include completion rate of neoadjuvant chemoradiation and related adverse events, rate of pathological complete response, perioperative outcomes, nutritional status, overall survival, progression-free survival and quality of life.

DISCUSSION

This trial aims to verify whether immunonutrition during neoadjuvant chemoradiation can reduce the rate of complications and improve perioperative outcomes. Frequent communication and monitoring are essential for a multicenter investigator-initiated trial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04513418. The trial was prospectively registered on 14 August 2020, https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/ct2/show/NCT04513418 .

Nasogastric tube drainage and pyloric intervention after oesophageal resection: UK practice variation and effect on outcomes

BACKGROUND

Over 1500 patients with oesophageal cancer undergo a resection in the UK each year. At surgery, patients commonly have a nasogastric tube (NGT) placed and may undergo a pyloric intervention. There is conflicting evidence on the use of both NGTs and pyloric interventions during oesophageal resections. We performed a national survey of oesophageal centres and assessed practice variation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An electronic survey was distributed to all resection centres in England, Wales and Scotland. Variations in practice regarding NGTs and pyloric intervention were assessed, and compared to nationally reported centre volumes and length-of-stay data.

RESULTS

Most centres (31/39, 79%) responded to the survey. All centres reported routine NGT use. The majority of centres (19/31, 61%) did not perform pyloric interventions. When used, surgical pyloroplasty was the most frequent strategy (8/31, 26%). Routine post-operative radiological assessment was utilised in 9/31 (29%) of centres. Criteria for NGT removal and dietary progression was highly variable, with every centre reporting different protocols. There were no significant differences in practice between high and low volume centres. There were also no trends seen when comparing centres above vs at-or-below the median length-of-stay. The majority (68%) of centres were willing to take part in a trial assessing NGT use and pyloric interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Pyloric intervention use varies widely, with no clear link to outcomes. NGT use remains standard practice despite evidence for safe omission. Surgeons require and recognise the need for a trial to assess requirement for NGTs and pyloric intervention after oesophageal resection.

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.

Rates of Anastomotic Complications and Their Management Following Esophagectomy: Results of the Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA)

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to characterize rates and management of anastomotic leak (AL) and conduit necrosis (CN) after esophagectomy in an international cohort.

BACKGROUND

Outcomes in patients with anastomotic complications of esophagectomy are currently uncertain. Optimum strategies to manage AL/CN are unknown, and have not been assessed in an international cohort.

METHODS

This prospective multicenter cohort study included patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer between April 2018 and December 2018 (with 90 days of follow-up). The primary outcomes were AL and CN, as defined by the Esophageal Complications Consensus Group. The secondary outcomes included 90-day mortality and successful AL/CN management, defined as patients being alive at 90 day postoperatively, and requiring no further AL/CN treatment.

RESULTS

This study included 2247 esophagectomies across 137 hospitals in 41 countries. The AL rate was 14.2% (n = 319) and CN rate was 2.7% (n = 60). The overall 90-day mortality rate for patients with AL was 11.3%, and increased significantly with severity of AL (Type 1: 3.2% vs. Type 2: 13.2% vs. Type 3: 24.7%, P < 0.001); a similar trend was observed for CN. Of the 329 patients with AL/CN, primary management was successful in 69.6% of cases. Subsequent rounds of management lead to an increase in the rate of successful treatment, with cumulative success rates of 85.4% and 88.1% after secondary and tertiary management, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Patient outcomes worsen significantly with increasing AL and CN severity. Reintervention after failed primary anastomotic complication management can be successful, hence surgeons should not be deterred from trying alternative management strategies.

Early versus the traditional start of oral intake following esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Nil by mouth is considered the standard of care during the first days following esophagectomy. However, with the routine implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery, early oral intake is more likely to be the preferred mode of nutrition following esophagectomy. The present study aims to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of early oral intake following esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

METHODS

Comprehensive literature searches were conducted using PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Weighted mean differences (WMD) and odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated as the effect sizes for continuous and dichotomous variables, respectively.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies with a total of 1947 patients were included. Length of hospital stay (WMD =  - 3.94, CI: - 4.98 to - 2.90; P < 0.001), the time to first flatus (WMD =  - 1.13, CI: - 1.25 to - 1.01; P < 0.001) and defecation (WMD =  - 1.26, CI: - 1.82 to - 0.71; P < 0.001) favored the early oral intake group. There was no statistically significant difference in mortality (OR = 1.23, CI: 0.45 to 3.36; P = 0.69). Early oral intake also did not increase the risk of pneumonia and overall postoperative complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence indicates early oral intake following esophagectomy seems to be safe and effective. It may be the preferred mode of nutrition following esophagectomy. However, more high-quality studies are still needed to further validate this conclusion.

Comparison of Two Circular-Stapled Techniques for Esophageal Cancer: A Propensity-Matched Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The optimal technique for the thoracoscopic construction of an intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis continues to be a subject of controversy. The aim of this study was to compare the perioperative outcomes of circular-stapled anastomosis using a transorally inserted anvil (Orvil™) with those of circular-stapled anastomosis using a transthoracically placed anvil (non-Orvil™) in totally minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (Ivor Lewis TMIE).

METHODS

The data of 272 patients who underwent Ivor Lewis TMIE for esophageal cancer at multiple centers were collected from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2017. After propensity score matching (1:1) for patient baseline characteristics, 65 paired cases were selected for statistical analysis. Logistic regression analysis was performed to investigate the significant factors of anastomotic leakage.

RESULTS

In the propensity score-matched analysis, compared with the non-Orvil™ group, the Orvil™ group was associated with a significantly shorter operation time (p=0.031), less intraoperative hemorrhage (p<0.001), lower need for intraoperative transfusions (p=0.009), earlier postoperative oral feeding time (p=0.010), longer chest tube duration (p<0.001), shorter postoperative hospital stays (p=0.001), lower total hospitalization costs (p<0.001) and a lower postoperative anastomotic leakage rate (p=0.033). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that anastomotic technique and pulmonary infection were independent factors for the development of postoperative anastomotic leakage (p< 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Orvil™ anastomosis exhibited better perioperative effects than non-Orvil™ anastomosis after the propensity score-matched analysis. Remarkably, the Orvil™ technique contributed to a lower postoperative anastomotic leakage rate than the non-Orvil™ technique.

Is it necessary to routinely perform feeding jejunostomy at the time of esophagectomy? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Feeding jejunostomy (FJ) is a routine procedure at the time of esophagectomy in some centers. With the widespread popularization of enhanced recovery after surgery, the necessity of FJ has been increasingly questioned. This study aims to analyze the differences in safety and effectiveness between with (FJ group) or without (no-FJ group) performing FJ at the time of esophagectomy. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were comprehensively searched for relevant studies, including randomized controlled trials and cohort studies. The primary outcome was the length of hospital stay (LOS). Secondary outcomes were overall postoperative complications, postoperative pneumonia, intestinal obstruction, and weight loss at 3 and 6 months after esophagectomy. Weighted mean differences (WMD) and odds ratios (OR) were calculated for statistical analysis. About 12 studies comprising 2,173 patients were included. The FJ group had a longer LOS (WMD = 2.05, P = 0.01) and a higher incidence of intestinal obstruction (OR = 11.67, P < 0.001) than the no-FJ group. The incidence of overall postoperative complications (OR = 1.24, P = 0.31) and postoperative pneumonia (OR = 1.43, P = 0.13) were not significantly different, nor the weight loss at 3 months (WMD = 0.58, P = 0.24) and 6 months (P > 0.05) after esophagectomy. Current evidence suggests that routinely performing FJ at the time of esophagectomy appears not to generate better postoperative outcomes. FJ may need to be performed selectively rather than routinely. More studies are required to further verify.

Risk Factors for Failure of Direct Oral Feeding Following a Totally Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy

Recently, it has been shown that directly starting oral feeding (DOF) from postoperative day one (POD1) after a totally minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy (MIE-IL) can further improve postoperative outcomes. However, in some patients, tube feeding by a preemptively placed jejunostomy is necessary. This single-center cohort study investigated risk factors associated with failure of DOF in patients that underwent a MIE-IL between October 2015 and April 2021. A total of 165 patients underwent a MIE-IL, in which DOF was implemented in the enhanced recovery after surgery program. Of these, 70.3% (n = 116) successfully followed the nutritional protocol. In patients in which tube feeding was needed (29.7%; n = 49), female sex (compared to male) (OR 3.5 (95% CI 1.5–8.1)) and higher ASA scores (III + IV versus II) (OR 2.2 (95% CI 1.0–4.8)) were independently associated with failure of DOF for any cause. In case of failure, this was either due to a postoperative complication (n = 31, 18.8%) or insufficient caloric intake on POD5 (n = 18, 10.9%). In the subgroup of patients with complications, higher ASA scores (OR 2.8 (95% CI 1.2–6.8)) and histological subtypes (squamous-cell carcinoma versus adenocarcinoma and undifferentiated) (OR 5.2 (95% CI 1.8–15.1)) were identified as independent risk factors. In the subgroup of patients with insufficient caloric intake, female sex was identified as a risk factor (OR 5.8 (95% CI 2.0–16.8)). Jejunostomy-related complications occurred in 17 patients (10.3%). In patients with preoperative risk factors, preemptively placing a jejunostomy may be considered to ensure that nutritional goals are met.

Imaging of postoperative complications following Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy

Postoperative imaging plays a key role in the identification of complications after Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy (ILE). Careful analysis of imaging examinations can help identify the cause of the presenting symptoms and the mechanism of the complication. The complex surgical procedure used in ILE results in anatomical changes that make imaging interpretation challenging for many radiologists. The purpose of this review was to make radiologists more familiar with the imaging findings of normal anatomical changes and those of complications following ILE to enable accurate evaluation of patients with an altered postoperative course. Anastomotic leak, gastric conduit necrosis and pleuropulmonary complications are the most serious complications after ILE. Computed tomography used in conjunction with oral administration of contrast material is the preferred diagnostic tool, although it conveys limited sensitivity for the diagnosis of anastomotic fistula. In combination with early endoscopic assessment, it can also help early recognition of complications and appropriate therapeutic management.

Timing of oral intake after esophagectomy: A narrative review of the literature and case report

Esophagectomy, a treatment modality for esophageal cancer, is associated with high rates of morbidity, the most common being anastomotic leaks and pulmonary complications. The current standard of care for nutrition support after esophagectomy includes a period of nothing by mouth with enteral nutrition support via jejunostomy tube owing to the concern of increasing the risk of anastomotic leak as a result of early postoperative oral intake. However, the optimal timing of oral diet initiation remains controversial. This narrative review presents a patient who incurred an anastomotic leak following esophagectomy after initiation of oral intake on postoperative day 5 and evaluates the current literature on the timing of oral diet initiation after esophagectomy. A systematic literature search was performed to assess current evidence evaluating early oral diet (EOD) initiation after esophagectomy. Over the past 5 years, 11 studies have evaluated the impact of EOD initiation after esophagectomy in comparison with a conventional feeding regimen, including a period of nothing by mouth with enteral or parenteral nutrition support. The available evidence suggests that EOD initiation does not increase rates of complications after esophagectomy. However, the evidence is limited by the lack of a standardized definition of what constitutes EOD initiation, patient selection bias, variations in nutrition support provided in the studies, and lack of statistical analyses evaluating the impact of potential confounding variables. Additional research with larger, high-quality randomized controlled trials is needed to determine the optimal timing of diet initiation after esophagectomy.

Reconstruction of upper mediastinal pleura reduces postoperative complications in enhanced recovery surgery system after esophagectomy: A propensity score matching study

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to explore the effect of suturing upper mediastinum pleura on postoperative complications, surgery-related mortality, and hospital stay.

METHODS

Four hundred and thirty-eight patients with esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy were identified. Patients were divided into two groups: those in the test group who received reconstruction of upper mediastinal pleura, those in the conventional group who did not. The incidence of postoperative complications, surgery-related mortality, and hospital stay were compared. To reduce the impact of confounding factors, a propensity score matching (PSM) method was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 273 patients were treated with suturing upper mediastinal pleura and 165 were not. After PSM, compared with the conventional group, the incidence of atelectasis (7.2% vs. 1.4%, p = 0.035), anastomotic leakage (5.8% vs. 0.7%, p = 0.036), and delayed gastric emptying (10.8% vs. 3.6%, p = 0.034) were significantly lower in the test group. And suturing the upper mediastinal pleura could reduce the severity of leakage (p = 0.045), consistent with the results before PSM. Moreover, there were no significant differences in the incidence of other complications, postoperative hospital stay, and 30-day mortality (all p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, suturing the upper mediastinal pleura can reduce the incidence of atelectasis, anastomotic leakage, and delayed gastric emptying, and the severity of leakage, without increasing the incidence of other complications, surgery-related death, and postoperative hospital stay.