Analysis of the Effect of Early Versus Conventional Nasogastric Tube Removal on Postoperative Complications After Transthoracic Esophagectomy: A Single-Center, Randomized Controlled Trial

Impact of nasogastric tube exclusion after minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a single-center retrospective study in India

Purpose

This study examines the impacts of omitting nasogastric tube (NGT) placement following cervical esophagogastric anastomosis (CEGA) in Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols, comparing outcomes to those from early NGT removal.

Methods

In a retrospective cohort of esophagectomy patients treated for esophageal cancer, participants were divided into two groups: group 1 had the NGT inserted post-CEGA and removed by postoperative day 3, while group 2 underwent the procedure without NGT placement. We primarily investigated anastomotic leak rates, also analyzing hospital stay duration, pulmonary complications, and NGT reinsertion.

Results

Among 50 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients, 30 in group I were compared with 20 in group II. The baseline demographic and tumor characteristics were similar between both groups. The overall incidence of anastomotic leak was 14.0%, comparable in both groups (16.7% vs. 10.0%, p = 0.63). The postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the no NGT group (median of 7 days vs. 6 days, p = 0.03) with similar major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥IIIa; 13.3% vs. 5.0%, p = 0.63). There was no 30-day mortality, and one patient in each group had reinsertion of NGT for conduit dilatation.

Conclusion

The exclusion of an NGT across CEGA after esophagectomy did not influence the anastomotic leak rate with comparable complications and a shorter hospital stay.

Patient-Family Caregiver Concordance of Symptom Assessment for Esophageal Cancer Patients Undergoing Esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Esophageal cancer patients suffer from multiple and severe symptoms during the postoperative recovery period. Family caregivers play a vital role in assisting patients to cope with their symptoms.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the concordance of esophageal cancer patients and their caregivers on assessing patients' symptoms after surgery and identify predictors associated with the symptom concordance.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, 213 patient-caregiver dyads completed general information questionnaires, the Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale, the Depression Subscale of Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, the Mutuality Scale, and the Zarit Burden Interview (for caregivers). Data were analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficients, paired t tests, and binary logistic regression.

RESULTS

At the dyad level, agreement of patients' and caregivers' reported symptoms ranged from poor to fair. At the group level, patients reported significantly higher scores than caregivers in most symptoms. Of the 213 dyads, 119 (55.9%) were identified as concordant on symptom assessment. Patients' nasogastric tube, perceived mutuality, caregivers' educational background, and dyad's communication frequency with each other could predict their concordance of symptom assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

There were relatively low agreements between esophageal cancer patients and caregivers on assessing patients' symptoms, and caregivers tended to underestimate patients' symptoms. The dyad's symptom concordance was influenced by patient-, caregiver-, and dyad-related factors.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Having an awareness of the incongruence on assessing symptoms between esophageal cancer patients and caregivers may help healthcare professionals to comprehensively interpret patients' symptoms and develop targeted dyadic interventions to improve their concordance, contributing to optimal symptom management and health outcomes.

Cochrane Gut Group, Kinoshita H, Shimoike N, Nishizaki D, Hida K, Tsunoda S, Obama K, Watanabe N. Routine decompression by nasogastric tube after oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows:

To evaluate the effects of routine nasogastric decompression as compared to no nasogastric decompression after oesophagectomy. In the case of routine decompression, we will also aim to assess the effects of early versus late removal of the nasogastric tube.

Contrast-Enhanced Radiologic Evaluation of Gastric Conduit Emptying After Esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Interventions targeting postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) in patients undergoing esophageal cancer surgery: a systematic review of randomized clinical trials and narrative discussion

Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) represent the most common complications after esophageal cancer surgery. The lack of a uniform reporting nomenclature and a severity classification has hampered consistency of research in this area, including the study of interventions targeting prevention and treatment of PPCs. This systematic review focused on RCTs of clinical interventions used to minimize the impact of PPCs. Searches were conducted up to 08/02/2021 on MEDLINE (OVID), CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science, and the COCHRANE library for RCTs and reported in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. A total of 339 citations, with a pooled dataset of 1,369 patients and 14 RCTs, were included. Heterogeneity of study design and outcomes prevented meta-analysis. PPCs are multi-faceted and not fully understood with respect to etiology. The review highlights the paucity of high-quality evidence for best practice in the management of PPCs. Further research in the area of intraoperative interventions and early postoperative ERAS standards is required. A consistent uniform for definition of pneumonia after esophagectomy and the development of a severity scale appears warranted to inform further RCTs and guidelines.

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.

ERAS guidelines-driven upper gastrointestinal contrast study after esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Early nasogastric tube (NGT) removal is a component of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol for esophagectomy. The aim of this study is to assess a protocol-driven application of UGI contrast study to facilitate early NGT removal and direct a standardized therapeutic response in patients with evidence for delayed gastric conduit emptying (DGCE).

METHODS

All patients undergoing esophagectomy between January 2017 and October 2019 were prospectively enrolled. Esophageal resections were performed through different surgical approaches involving gastric conduit reconstruction. A standardized clinical protocol (SCP) was systematically applied, which targeted a UGI contrast study on POD 2-3 to allow immediate NGT removal or initiate DGCE protocols.

RESULTS

This study enrolled 50 patients undergoing open Ivor Lewis (42%), left thoracoabdominal (46%), and three-field procedure (12%) with gastric conduit reconstruction and either upper thoracic (66%) or cervical (34%) anastomosis. Jejunostomy was routinely placed while pyloric procedures were not performed. Patients achieving targeted contrast study (86%) demonstrated significantly earlier NGT removal (p-value 0.010), oral protocol initiation (0.001), and decreased length of hospital stay (6 vs 10 days, 0.024). Four patients (8%) presented with radiology signs of DCGE and underwent protocoled treatment, eventually achieving discharge similar to the overall study population (7 vs 8.5 days).

CONCLUSIONS

Protocol-driven UGI contrast study can effectively provide objective data facilitating early NGT removal and discharge. Patients with DGCE can successfully undergo intervention to improve conduit emptying and adhere to ERAS discharge goals.

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.

Functional syndromes and symptom-orientated aftercare after esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Surgery is the cornerstone of esophageal cancer treatment but remains burdened with significant postoperative changes of gastrointestinal function and quality of life.

PURPOSE

The aim of this narrative review is to assess and summarize the current knowledge on postoperative functional syndromes and quality of life after esophagectomy for cancer, and to provide orientation for the reader in the challenging field of functional aftercare.

CONCLUSIONS

Post-esophagectomy syndromes include various conditions such as dysphagia, reflux, delayed gastric emptying, dumping syndrome, weight loss, and chronic diarrhea. Clinical pictures and individual expressions are highly variable and may be extremely distressing for those affected. Therefore, in addition to a mostly well-coordinated oncological follow-up, we strongly emphasize the need for regular monitoring of physical well-being and gastrointestinal function. The prerequisite for an effective functional aftercare covering the whole spectrum of postoperative syndromes is a comprehensive knowledge of the pathophysiological background. As functional conditions often require a complex diagnostic workup and long-term therapy, close interdisciplinary cooperation with radiologists, gastroenterologists, oncologists, and specialized nutritional counseling is imperative for successful management.

"Tubeless" esophagectomy: Less is more

The esophageal cancer surgery is a complex procedure with elevated rates of both morbidity and mortality, which is why, in order to achieve adequate results, it should be performed in high volume centers, where complete multidisciplinary support is available and recent clinical guidelines are applied. We describe the initial experience and the technique of "tubeless" esophagectomy where esophageal resection and mediastinal lymphadenectomy are performed and no drains nor tubes of any kind are placed, with the aim to decrease the level of surgical aggression, enhance the postoperative comfort and accelerate the patient́s recovery.

Nasogastric decompression after intestinal surgery in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Postoperative nasogastric decompression has been routinely used after intestinal surgery. However, the role of nasogastric decompression in preventing postoperative complications and promoting the recovery of bowel function in children remains controversial. This systematic review aimed to assess whether routine nasogastric decompression is necessary after intestinal surgery in children.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA guideline. Literature search was performed in electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and Web of science. Studies comparing outcomes between children who underwent intestinal surgery with postoperative nasogastric tube (NGT) placement (NGT group) and without postoperative NGT placement (no NGT group) were included.

RESULTS

Six studies were eligible for inclusion criteria including two randomized controlled trials (RCT) and four comparative observational studies. The overall rate of postoperative anastomotic leak was 0.6% (1/179) in NGT group and 0.9% (2/223) in no NGT group. The overall rate of wound dehiscence was 2.4% (4/169) in NGT group and 1.6% (4/245) in no NGT group. Meta-analysis of two RCTs in children undergoing elective intestinal surgery showed significant increase of mild vomiting in no NGT group compared with NGT group (OR 3.54 95% CI 1.04, 11.99) but no significant difference in persistent vomiting requiring NGT reinsertion (OR 3.11 95% CI 0.47, 20.54), abdominal distension (OR 2.36 95% CI 0.34, 16.59), NGT reinsertion (OR 3.11 95% CI 0.47, 20.54), wound infection (OR 1.63 95% CI 0.49, 5.48) and time to return of bowel movement (MD - 0.14 95% CI - 0.45, 0.17). There was no incidence of anastomotic leak in these 2 RCTs. However, there was an incidence of NGT-related discomfort in NGT group, which ranged from 30 to 100% of children studied.

CONCLUSION

Routine postoperative nasogastric decompression can be omitted in children undergoing intestinal surgery due to no benefit in preventing postoperative complications while increasing patient discomfort.

Interventions to prevent anastomotic leak after esophageal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Anastomotic leakage (AL) is a common and serious complication following esophagectomy. We aimed to provide an up-to-date review and critical appraisal of the efficacy and safety of all previous interventions aiming to reduce AL risk.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE and Embase from 1946 to January 2019 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating interventions to minimize esophagogastric AL. Pooled risk ratios (RR) for AL were obtained using a random effects model.

Results

Two reviewers screened 441 abstracts and identified 17 RCTs eligible for inclusion; 11 studies were meta-analyzed. Omentoplasty significantly reduced the risk of AL by 78% [RR: 0.22; 95% CI: 0.10, 0.50] compared to conventional anastomosis (3 studies, n = 611 patients). Early removal of NG tube significantly reduced the risk of AL by 62% [RR: 0.38; 95% CI: 0.02, 0.65] compared to prolonged NG tube removal (2 studies, n = 293 patients); Stapled anastomosis did not significantly reduce the risk of AL [RR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.45, 1.87] compared to hand-sewn anastomosis (6 studies, n = 1454 patients). The quality of evidence was high for omentoplasty (vs. conventional anastomosis), moderate for early NG tube removal (vs. prolonged NG tube removal), and very low for stapled anastomosis (vs. hand-sewn anastomosis).

Conclusions

This is the first meta-analysis to summarize the graded quality of evidence for all RCT interventions designed to reduce the risk of AL following esophagectomy. Our findings demonstrated that omentoplasty significantly reduced the risk of AL with a high quality of evidence. Although early NG tube removal significantly reduced AL risk, there is a need for further research to strengthen the quality of evidence for this finding. Evidence profiles presented in our review may help inform the development of future clinical practice recommendations.

Systematic review registration: CRD42019127181.

"Tubeless" esophagectomy: Less is more

The esophageal cancer surgery is a complex procedure with elevated rates of both morbidity and mortality, which is why, in order to achieve adequate results, it should be performed in high volume centers, where complete multidisciplinary support is available and recent clinical guidelines are applied. We describe the initial experience and the technique of "tubeless" esophagectomy where esophageal resection and mediastinal lymphadenectomy are performed and no drains nor tubes of any kind are placed, with the aim to decrease the level of surgical aggression, enhance the postoperative comfort and accelerate the patient́s recovery.

Nasogastric tube utilization after esophagectomy: an unnecessary gesture?

INTRODUCTION

Nasogastric decompressive tube utilization has been accepted as one of the basic perioperative care measures after esophageal resection surgery. However, with the development of multimodal rehabilitation programs and without clear evidence to support their use, the systematic indication of this measure may be controversial.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective, descriptive and comparative study of patients who had undergone Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy in our center -from January 2015 to December 2018- with placement (Group S), or without placement (Group N) of a decompressive tube in gastroplasty during postoperative period. Epidemiological variables and differences between groups in post-surgical morbidity and mortality, hospital stay, onset of oral tolerance and the need for nasogastric tube placement were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 43 patients were included in this study, with a median age of 61 years, being 86% male. 46.5% were hypertensive, 25.5% had lung disease and 16.3% had diabetes mellitus. The median length of hospital stay was 9 days in group S versus 11.5 days in group N, with no differences in the onset of oral tolerance. Anastomotic dehiscence rate was 5% and 0% respectively. The overall mortality was 2.3% in the first 90 days, without differences between the groups. Placement of nasogastric tube during postoperative period was required only in 1 patient (4.3%) of the group N.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-use of nasogastric tube during postoperative period of an Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy is a safe measure, as it is not associated with a higher rate of complications or hospital stay. This fact may be able to improve patients' comfort and postoperative recovery.

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

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

Risk factors and outcomes associated with anastomotic leaks following esophagectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Anastomotic leaks (AL) are a major complication after esophagectomy. This meta-analysis aimed to determine identify risks factors for AL (preoperative, intra-operative, and post-operative factors) and assess the consequences to outcome on patients who developed an AL. This systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines, and eligible studies were identified through a search of PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases up to 31 December 2018. A meta-analysis was conducted with the use of random-effects modeling and prospectively registered with the PROSPERO database (Registration CRD42018130732). This review identified 174 studies reporting outcomes of 74,226 patients undergoing esophagectomy. The overall pooled AL rates were 11%, ranging from 0 to 49% in individual studies. Majority of studies were from Asia (n = 79). In pooled analyses, 23 factors were associated with AL (17 preoperative and six intraoperative). AL were associated with adverse outcomes including pulmonary (OR: 4.54, CI95%: 2.99-6.89, P < 0.001) and cardiac complications (OR: 2.44, CI95%: 1.77-3.37, P < 0.001), prolonged hospital stay (mean difference: 15 days, CI95%: 10-21 days, P < 0.001), and in-hospital mortality (OR: 5.91, CI95%: 1.41-24.79, P = 0.015). AL are a major complication following esophagectomy accounting for major morbidity and mortality. This meta-analysis identified modifiable risk factors for AL, which can be a target for interventions to reduce AL rates. Furthermore, identification of both modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors will facilitate risk stratification and prediction of AL enabling better perioperative planning, patient counseling, and informed consent.

Determination of the optimal surgical procedure by identifying risk factors for pneumonia after transthoracic esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Esophagectomy is associated with a high risk of postoperative complications, and the respiratory complications are the most common. Therefore, stratification of patients based on preoperative risk factors is essential. This study aimed to identify the risk of postoperative pneumonia (POP) based on the preoperative factors and determine the optimal perioperative surgical management strategy.

METHODS

This retrospective study involved 207 patients who underwent esophagectomy. The patients were divided into two groups, namely, with POP and without POP. To identify the risk factors for POP, the pre- and perioperative characteristics were analyzed. A receiver operating characteristics curve was used to determine a cutoff value of 2.40 L for the forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1.0) and the cohort was divided into a high- and low-FEV1.0 group. A second analysis was then performed to determine the optimal surgical management for patients at a high risk for POP.

RESULTS

POP occurred in 45 (21.7%) patients. A multiple logistic regression analysis showed that FEV1.0 was significantly lower in the POP (+) group (P = 0.020); thus, a low FEV1.0 was found to be a risk factor for POP. Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that open thoracotomy was a significant risk factor for POP in low FEV1.0 patients (P = 0.013).

CONCLUSIONS

A low FEV1.0 and an open thoracotomy are risk factors for POP. Therefore, patients with low FEV1.0 should be managed carefully and video-assisted thoracic surgery should be considered.