Effect of Early vs Late Start of Oral Intake on Anastomotic Leakage Following Elective Lower Intestinal Surgery: A Systematic Review

Bowel endometriosis: Surgical customization is demanding

Bowel endometriosis is the most common form of severe deep endometriosis. Surgery is an option in case of infertility and/or chronic pain or in the presence of a stenotic lesion. Clinical examination and preoperative imaging must provide an identity card of the lesion so that customized surgery can be proposed. The primary objective of this tailor-made surgery will always be to preserve the organ. The surgeon then has three options: shaving, discoid resection and segmental resection. The more extensive the resection, the greater the risk of severe short- and long-term complications. Surgery must therefore be adapted to the patient's specific situation and needs. Moreover, personalized care must extend beyond surgery. It must begin before the operation, preparing the patient for the operation like an athlete before a race, and continue afterwards by adapting the follow-up to the surgery performed.

Tolerance to and Postoperative Outcomes With Early Oral Feeding Following Elective Bowel Surgery: A Systematic Review

Although practice guidelines recommend resuming oral feeding immediately after gastrointestinal surgery, many practitioners remain reluctant to order early oral feeding (EOF). Therefore, this review aimed to clarify the tolerance to and postoperative outcomes with EOF among patients undergoing bowel surgery. A systematic review of the literature published between January 1990 and July 2022 with the time of oral intake (early or delayed until resolution of ileus) as the exposure variable was conducted using PubMed and Scopus databases. Outcomes of interest included tolerance to EOF and postoperative adverse effects or complications. After screening 1,667 research articles, 18 randomized control trials, six prospective case series, and four cohort studies met our inclusion criteria, collectively representing data from 2,647 patients in eleven countries. These studies indicate that while most patients tolerate EOF, 5-25% may not tolerate EOF until the fourth postoperative day (POD). Moreover, EOF, at best, has no advantage over delayed feeding in terms of vomiting, nausea, nasogastric tube requirement, or other postoperative complications. In addition, early return of bowel function, lower risk of diarrhea, and lower pain score with EOF are inconsistently reported, and shorter hospitalization with EOF may be limited to those who tolerate oral feeding on POD 0 or 1. Nevertheless, shorter hospitalization with EOF could reduce the cost of hospitalization. A substantial number of patients may not be able to tolerate oral feeding after bowel surgery until POD 4, and in patients who tolerate EOF, the only clear benefit is a shorter length of hospitalization.

Optimized perioperative management (fast-track, ERAS) to enhance postoperative recovery in elective colorectal surgery

Aim

This manuscript provides information on the history, principles, and clinical results of Fast-track or ERAS concepts to optimize perioperative management (OPM).

Methods

With the focus on elective colorectal surgery description of the OPM concept and its elements for with special attention to the prevention of infectious complications and clinical results compared to traditional care will be given using recent systematic literature reviews. Additionally, clinical results for other major abdominal procedures are given.

Results

An optimized perioperative management protocol for elective colorectal resections will currently consist of 25 perioperative elements. These elements include the time from before hospital admission (patient education, screening, and treatment of possible risk factors like anemia, malnutrition, cessation of nicotine or alcohol abuse, optimization of concurrent systemic disease, physical prehabilitation, carbohydrate loading, adequate bowel preparation) to the preoperative period (shortened fasting, non-sedative premedication, prophylaxis of PONV and thromboembolic complications), intraoperative measures (systemic antibiotic prophylaxis, standardized anesthesia, normothermia and normovolemia, minimally invasive surgery, avoidance of drains and tubes) as well as postoperative actions (early oral feeding, enforced mobilization, early removal of a urinary catheter, stimulation of intestinal propulsion, control of hyperglycemia). Most of these elements are based on high-level evidence and will also have effects on the incidence of postoperative infectious complications.

Conclusion

Optimized perioperative management should be mandatory for elective surgery today as it enhances postoperative patient recovery, reduces morbidity and infectious complications.

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.

Early oral protein-containing diets following elective lower gastrointestinal tract surgery in adults: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Background

Although current guidelines make consensus recommendations for the early resumption of oral intake after surgery, a recent comprehensive meta-analysis failed to identify any patient-centered benefits. We hypothesized this finding was attributable to pooling studies providing effective protein-containing diets with ineffective non-protein liquid diets. Therefore, the aim of this paper was to investigate the safety and efficacy of early oral protein-containing diets versus later (traditional) feeding after elective lower gastrointestinal tract surgery in adults.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched from inception until 1 August 2019. Reference lists of retrieved studies were hand searched to identify randomized clinical trials reporting mortality. No language restrictions were applied. Study selection, risk of bias appraisal and data abstraction were undertaken independently by two authors. Disagreements were settled by obtaining an opinion of a third author. Majority decisions prevailed. After assessment of underlying assumptions, a fixed-effects method was used for analysis. The primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes included surgical site infections, postoperative nausea and vomiting, serious postoperative complications and other key measures of safety and efficacy.

Results

Eight randomized clinical trials recruiting 657 patients were included. Compared with later (traditional) feeding, commencing an early oral protein-containing diet resulted in a statistically significant reduction in mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.31, P = 0.02, I² = 0%). An early oral protein-containing diet also significantly reduced surgical site infections (OR 0.39, P = 0.002, I² = 32%), postoperative nausea and vomiting (OR 0.62, P = 0.04, I² = 37%), serious postoperative complications (OR 0.60, P = 0.01, I² = 25%), and significantly improved other major outcomes. No harms attributable to an early oral protein-containing diet were identified.

Conclusions

The results of this systematic review can be used to upgrade current guideline statements to a grade A recommendation supporting an oral protein-containing diet commenced before the end of postoperative day 1 after elective lower gastrointestinal surgery in adults.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13741-021-00179-3.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Ordering a Normal Diet at the End of Surgery-Justified or Overhasty?

Early re-alimentation is advocated by enhanced recovery pathways (ERP). This study aimed to assess compliance to ERP-set early re-alimentation policy and to compare outcomes of early fed patients and patients in whom early feeding was withhold due to the independent decision making of the surgeon. For this purpose, demographic, surgical and outcome data of all consecutive elective colorectal surgical procedures (2011–2016) were retrieved from a prospectively maintained institutional ERP database. The primary endpoint was postoperative ileus (POI). Surgical 30-day outcome and length of stay were compared between patients undergoing the pathway-intended early re-alimentation pattern and patients in whom early re-alimentation was not compliant. Out of the 7103 patients included, 1241 (17.4%) were not compliant with ERP re-alimentation. Patients with delayed re-alimentation presented with more postoperative complications (37 vs. 21%, p < 0.001) and a prolonged length of hospital stay (8 ± 7 vs. 5 ± 4 days, p < 0.001). While male gender (odds ratio (OR) 1.24; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04–1.32), fluid overload (OR 1.38; 95% CI 1.16–1.65) and high American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) score (OR 1.51; 95% CI 1.27–1.8) were independent risk factors for POI, laparoscopy (OR 0.51; 95% CI 0.38–0.68) and ERP compliant diet (OR 0.46; 95% CI 0.36–0.6) were both protective. Hence, this study provides further evidence of the beneficial effect of early oral feeding after colorectal surgery.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Perioperative lipid-enriched enteral nutrition versus standard care in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery (SANICS II): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Postoperative ileus and anastomotic leakage severely impair recovery after colorectal resection. We investigated the effect of perioperative lipid-enriched enteral nutrition versus standard care on the risk of postoperative ileus, anastomotic leakage, and other clinical outcomes.

METHODS

We did an international, multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled trial of patients (≥18 years) undergoing elective colorectal surgery with primary anastomosis at six clinical centres in the Netherlands and Denmark. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), stratified by location (colonic and rectal) and type of surgery (laparoscopic and open), via online randomisation software, with block sizes of six, to receive either continuous lipid-enriched enteral tube feeding from 3 h before until 6 h after surgery (intervention) or no perioperative nutrition (control). Surgeons, patients, and researchers were masked to treatment allocation for the entire study period. The primary outcome was postoperative ileus. Secondary outcomes included anastomotic leakage, pneumonia, preoperative gastric volumes, time to functional recovery, length of hospital stay, the need for additional interventions, intensive care unit admission, postoperative inflammatory response, and surgical complications. Analyses were by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02175979, and trialregister.nl, number NTR4670.

FINDINGS

Between July 28, 2014, and February 20, 2017, 280 patients were randomly assigned, 15 of whom were excluded after random allocation because they fulfilled one or more exclusion criteria. 265 patients received perioperative nutrition (n=132) or standard care (n=133) and were included in the analyses. A postoperative ileus occurred in 37 (28%) patients in the intervention group versus 29 (22%) in the control group (risk ratio [RR] 1·09, 95% CI 0·95-1·25; p=0·24). Anastomotic leakage occurred in 12 (9%) patients in the intervention group versus 11 (8%) in the control group (RR 1·01, 95% CI 0·94-1·09; p=0·81). Pneumonia occurred in ten (8%) patients in the intervention group versus three (2%) in the control group (RR 1·06, 95% CI 1·00-1·12; p=0·051). All other secondary outcomes were similar between groups (all p>0·05).

INTERPRETATION

Perioperative lipid-enriched enteral nutrition in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery has no advantage over standard care in terms of postoperative complications.

FUNDING

Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development (ZonMW), Fonds NutsOhra, and Danone Research.

Normal Diet within Two Postoperative Days-Realistic or Too Ambitious?

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols advocate early postoperative resumption of normal diet to decrease surgical stress and prevent excessive catabolism. The aim of the present study was to identify reasons for delayed tolerance of normal postoperative diet. This was a retrospective analysis including all consecutive colorectal surgical procedures since May 2011 until May 2017. Data was prospectively recorded by an institutional data manager in a dedicated database. Uni- and multivariate risk factors associated with delayed diet (beyond POD 2) were identified by multiple logistic regression among demographic, surgery- and modifiable pre- and intraoperative ERAS-related items. In a second step, univariate analysis was performed to compare surgical outcomes for patients with early vs. delayed oral intake. The study cohort consisted of 1301 consecutive colorectal ERAS patients. Herein, 691 patients (53%) were able to resume normal diet within two days of surgery according to ERAS protocol, while in 610 patients (47%), a delay in tolerance of normal diet was observed. Male gender was independently correlated to early tolerance (Odds Ratio (OR) 0.66; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.46–0.84, p = 0.002), while ASA score ≥ 3 (OR 1.60; 95% CI 1.12–2.28, p = 0.010), abdominal drains (OR 1.80; 95% CI 1.10–2.49, p = 0.020), right colectomy (OR 1.64; 95% CI 1.08–2.49, p = 0.020) and Hartmann reversal (OR 2.61; 95% CI 1.32–5.18, p = 0.006) constituted risk factors for delayed tolerance of normal diet. Patients with delayed resumption of normal diet experienced more overall (Clavien grade I–V) (47% vs. 21%, p < 0.001) and major (Clavien grade IIIb–V) (11% vs. 4%, p < 0.001) complications and had a longer length of stay (9 ± 5 vs. 5 ± 4 days, p < 0.001). Over half of patients could not tolerate early enteral realimentation and were at higher risk for postoperative complications. Prophylactic drain placement was the only independent modifiable risk factor for delayed oral intake.