Complications of Feeding Jejunostomy Tubes in Patients with Gastroesophageal Cancer

Safety of Percutaneous Endoscopic Jejunostomy Placement Compared With Surgical and Radiologic Jejunostomy Placement: A Nationwide Inpatient Assessment

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

We compared the safety and outcomes of percutaneous jejunostomy tubes placed endoscopically (PEJ), fluoroscopically by interventional radiology (IR-jejunostomy), and open jejunostomy placed surgically (surgical jejunostomy).

METHODS

Using the Nationwide Readmissions Database, we identified hospitalized patients who underwent a jejunostomy from 2016 to 2019. Selected patients were divided into 3 cohorts: PEJ, IR-jejunostomy, and surgical jejunostomy. Adjusted odds ratios (OR) for adverse events were calculated using multivariable logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 6022 (65.2±9.8 y) surgical jejunostomy patients, 3715 (63.6±11.0 y) endoscopic jejunostomy patients, and 14,912 (64.8±11.6 y) IR-jejunostomy patients were identified. Compared with surgery, PEJ patients were 32% less likely to experience postprocedure complications (OR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.58-0.79, P <0.001) while IR-jejunostomy patients were 17% less likely to experience complications (OR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.73-0.94, P <0.001); test of proportion showed that endoscopy had significantly fewer total adverse events compared with IR ( P <0.001). For individual complications, compared with surgery, the odds of intestinal perforation using PEJ and IR, respectively, were 0.26 (95% CI: 0.14-0.49, P <0.001) and 0.31 (95% CI: 0.21-0.47, P <0.001), for postprocedure infection 0.32 (95% CI: 0.20-0.50; P <0.001) and 0.61 (95% CI: 0.45-0.83; P =0.001); and for hemorrhage requiring blood transfusion 0.71 (95% CI: 0.56-0.91; P =0.005) and 0.75 (95% CI: 0.61-0.91; P =0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic placement of percutaneous jejunostomy tubes (PEJ) in inpatients is associated with significantly lower risks of adverse events and mortality compared with IR and surgical jejunostomy.

Single-Center Randomized Trial Comparing Feeding Jejunostomy with Nasojejunal Tube Placement in Patients Undergoing Transhiatal Esophagectomy Post-Neoadjuvant Therapy for Esophageal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Enteral nutrition is the preferred mode of nutrition following esophagectomy. However, the preferred mode of enteral nutrition (feeding jejunostomy (FJ) vs. nasojejunal (NJ) tube) remains contentious. In this randomized controlled trial (RCT), we compared FJ with NJ tube feeding in terms of safety, feasibility, efficacy, and quality-of-life (QOL) parameters in Indian patients undergoing trans-hiatal esophagectomy (THE) for carcinoma esophagus.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This single-center, two-armed (FJ and NJ tube), non-inferiority RCT was conducted from March 2020 to January 2024. Forty-eight patients underwent THE with posterior-mediastinal-gastric pull-up and were randomized to NJ and FJ arms (24 in each group). The postoperative complications, catheter efficacy, and QOL parameters were compared between the two groups till the 6-week follow-up.

RESULTS

In this RCT, we found no significant difference in the occurrence of catheter-related complications, postoperative complication rate, catheter efficacy, and visual analog pain scores between patients with NJ tube and FJ, following THE for esophageal cancer. There was a significantly better self-reported physical domain QOL score noted in the NJ group, both at the time of discharge (44.7 ± 6.2 vs 39.8 + 5.6; p value, 0.005) and at the 6-week follow-up (55.4 ± 5.2 vs 48.6 ± 4.5; p value, < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Based on the findings of our RCT, we conclude that both enteral access methods (NJ vs. FJ) exhibit comparable incidences of catheter-related complications. The use of NJ tube is a viable alternative to a surgical FJ, has the benefit of early removal, and saves the distress associated with a tube per abdomen.

Safety and efficacy of direct percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy tube placement compared with surgical jejunostomy: a tertiary care analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Jejunostomy tube placements provides enteral access for feeding in eligible patients who cannot meet their nutritional needs by mouth. They can be surgically placed laparoscopically (lap-J) or with the use of a conventional open laparotomy approach (open-J). Recently, direct percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy (DPEJ) has emerged as an alternative owing to its low cost and shorter recovery times. We sought to retrospectively compare the procedural success rates and adverse events of these methods.

METHODS

Patients were identified by querying our health system patient database and the departmental database of patients who underwent DPEJ. The patients were divided into 3 cohorts based on the procedure: DPEJ, lap-J, or open-J. Patient age and body mass index, procedural success rate, and adverse event rate were compared among the 3 groups.

RESULTS

A total of 201 patients met inclusion criteria (65 DPEJ, 111 lap-J, and 25 open-J). Procedural success rates were similar among the 3 groups (DPEJ 96.9%, lap-J 99.1%, open-J 100%; P = .702). Rates of infection and bleeding were also similar among the 3 groups. There were no cases of GI perforation. Tube dysfunction for any reason that required complete removal or replacement within 90 days occurred more often in the surgical groups than in the DPEJ group (DPEJ 0%, lap-J 35.1%, open-J 40.0%; P < .001). This was driven largely by increased rates of tube clogging and tube dislodgement in the surgical groups.

CONCLUSIONS

DPEJ is a safe and effective alternative to surgical jejunostomy in eligible patients and may be associated with decreased adverse event rates at 90 days.

Benefit of a laparoscopic jejunostomy feeding catheter insertion to prevent bowel obstruction associated with feeding jejunostomy after esophagectomy

The placement of a jejunostomy catheter during esophagectomy may cause postoperative bowel obstruction. The proximity of the jejunostomy site to the midline might be associated with bowel obstruction, and we have introduced laparoscopic jejunostomy (Lap-J) to reduce jejunostomy's left lateral gap. We evaluated 92 patients who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer between February 2013 and August 2022 to clarify the benefits of Lap-J compared to other methods. The patients were classified into two groups according to the method of feeding catheter insertion: jejunostomy via small laparotomy (J group, n = 75), and laparoscopic jejunostomy (Lap-J group, n = 17). Surgery for bowel obstruction associated with the feeding jejunostomy catheter (BOFJ) was performed on 11 in the J group. Comparing the J and Lap-J groups, the distance between the jejunostomy and midline was significantly longer in the Lap-J group (50 mm vs. 102 mm; P < 0.001). Regarding surgery for BOFJ, the distance between the jejunostomy and midline was significantly shorter in the surgery group than in the non-surgery group (43 mm vs. 52 mm; P = 0.049). During esophagectomy, Lap-J can prevent BOFJ by placing the jejunostomy site at the left lateral position to the midline and reducing the left lateral gap of the jejunostomy.

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.

Feeding via duodenostomy can reduce intestinal obstruction after radical resection of esophageal cancer better than jejunostomy

Background

Enteral nutrition (EN) is superior to parenteral nutrition (PN) in improving the nutritional status of esophageal cancer (EC) patients and accelerating postoperative recovery. Therefore, feeding via jejunostomy (FJ) is currently placed during esophagectomy to maintain the postoperative nutrition supply. However, FJ have some serve complications. The aim of this study was to explore the value of feeding via duodenostomy (FD) in reducing the complications associated with FJ.

Methods

In this retrospective cohort study, the clinical data of 154 patients with EC who underwent surgical treatment in our center from January 1, 2020, to June 30, 2020 were collected. A concurrent, nonrandomized control group of 154 patients underwent thoraco-laparoscopic esophagectomy (TLE) was enrolled consisting of 82 males and 72 females. These patients were randomly divided into two groups according to the different ostomy method applied, including 80 cases in the FD group and 74 cases in the FJ group. The ostomy-related complications during the 180-day follow-up and indicators including perioperative nutritional markers, length of stay (LoS), and operative time were recorded.

Results

After 1 week, the albumin level in the FD group was noninferior to that in the FJ group (36.8 vs. 36.3 g/L; P=0.792), and the prealbumin level also showed no significant difference (178 vs. 176 g/L; P=0.347). Four weeks later, there was significant difference in levels of albumin (42 vs. 41 g/L; P=0.018) but no significant difference prealbumin (225 vs. 222.89 g/L; P=0.493). The LoS was similar between the 2 groups (7 vs. 7.21 days; P=0.697). In terms of the time of stoma creation, it was significantly longer in the FD group than in the FJ group (20 vs. 12 minutes; P<0.001); however, it did not bring a significant impact on the overall procedure length (240 vs. 230.69 minutes; P=0.057). The incidence of postoperative complications (e.g., intestinal obstruction) was significantly lower in the FD group than in the FJ group (P=0.017).

Conclusions

The method of FD is safe, effective and acceptable. It is worthwhile to use in clinic practice.

An extremely rare case of feeding jejunostomy proceeding to intussusception

Key Clinical Message

Feeding jejunostomy (FJ) is one of the frequently performed surgical procedures for enteral nutrition, but intussusception a very rare complication with quite challenging clinical outcome. It symbolizes a surgical emergency requiring prompt diagnosis.

Abstract

Feeding jejunostomy (FJ) is a minor surgical intervention, which might lead to consequences that are potentially fatal. Mechanical issues such as infection, tube dislocation or migration, electrolyte and fluid imbalances, as well as complaints of gastrointestinal tract, are the most frequent consequences. A 76-year-old female, who is a known case of carcinoma (CA) esophagus: Stage 4 with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Class 3 presented with complaints of difficulty in swallowing and vomiting. As a part of palliative treatment, FJ is done and patient was discharged on postoperative day (POD) 2. Patient again presented to emergency department after 2 months with complaints of pain abdomen, unable to pass flatus and stools for 2 days. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography was done, which revealed intussusception of jejunum with lead point as tip of feeding tube. Intussusception of jejunal loops is noted 20 centimeters distal to the site of insertion of FJ tube with tip of feeding tube as lead point. Reduction of bowel loops was achieved by gentle compression of distal part and are found to be viable. FJ tube was then removed and repositioned after which the obstruction got relieved. Intussusception is an extremely rare complication of FJ, where the clinical presentation can be likely to the various causes of small bowel obstruction. The fatal complications like intussusception in FJ can be prevented by remembering some technical considerations, such as attaching a 4-5 cm segment of the jejunum to the abdominal wall rather than a single-point fixation and maintaining a minimum distance of 15 cm between the duodenojejunal (DJ) flexure and the FJ site.

Comparisons of nutritional status and complications between patients with and without postoperative feeding jejunostomy tube in gastric cancer: a retrospective study

Background

Feeding jejunostomy tube (FJT) enables early postoperative nutritional supply for gastric cancer patients undergoing surgery. However, the nutritional benefit of FJT may be accompanied by potential risk of increased complications, so both the nutritional improvement and the complication rates associated with FJT should be assessed.

Methods

From January 2009 to December 2014, 715 consecutive patients underwent gastric cancer resection at the Peking Union Medical College Hospital in China. The perioperative nutritional index and incidence of complications in patients with FJT placement were retrospectively compared to those in patients without FJT placement. Nutritional data including albumin, prealbumin, hemoglobin, and high sensitivity C-reactive protein, the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and Onodera's prognostic nutrition index (OPNI) were recorded at the following 3 timepoints: preoperatively, 1-week postoperatively, and 1-month postoperatively. Postoperative complications including surgical site infection, intra-abdominal infections, anastomotic leaks and gastroparesis were assessed. Multivariate logistic regression was used to study the association between FJT and complications.

Results

A total of 715 patients were included in the study. The mean age was 60.4 years and 72.2% were male. The overall characteristics between FJT and no-FJT groups were comparable. Of the 247 total gastrectomy cases, 98 (39.7%) had a FJT placed. Compared to the total gastrectomy patients without a FJT, the 98 patients with a FJT had a lower hemoglobin level (P=0.048) and NLR (P=0.030) preoperatively, and higher albumin (P=0.005), prealbumin (P<0.001), and hemoglobin (P=0.014) levels, a higher OPNI (P=0.027), and a lower NLR (P=0.005) 1-month postoperatively. Of the 468 subtotal gastrectomy cases, 87 (18.6%) had a FJT placed. Compared to the subtotal gastrectomy patients without a FJT, these 87 patients had a lower NLR (P=0.006) 1-week postoperatively, and a higher albumin level (P=0.009) 1-month postoperatively. In the multivariate analysis, FJT placement was not associated with postoperative adverse outcomes, including surgical site infection [odds ratio (OR) =1.21, P=0.79], intra-abdominal infection (OR =0.38, P=0.11), anastomotic leak (OR =0.58, P=0.53), reoperation (OR =0.22, P=0.23), gastroparesis (OR =6.35, P=0.08), or hospitalization for more than 30 days (OR =0.58, P=0.32).

Conclusions

Early enteral nutritional support by FJT after gastrectomy tended to improve the nutritional status of patients, while it did not appear to increase the incidence rate of postoperative complications.

Laparoscopic vs. open feeding jejunostomy: a systemic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Feeding jejunostomy is a solid way for patients to maintain enteral nutrition. However, debate over the superiority of the laparoscopic vs. laparotomic method has raised concerns in recent years. This systemic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the postoperative outcomes between these two approaches.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and Scopus from the date of inception to April 2022 for studies comparing laparoscopic and open feeding jejunostomy. Study characteristics and outcomes were extracted from the included articles. The primary outcome was the relative risk (RR) of postoperative complications in each group. We also analyzed the major/minor complication rates and operations, excluding major concomitant procedures. The risk of bias of included studies were assessed using the ROBINS-I tool. The certainty of evidence was rated by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).

RESULTS

A total of seven retrospective studies with 1195 patients in total were included in this systemic review and meta-analysis. Laparoscopic feeding jejunostomy carried a significantly lower postoperative complication rate (RR: 0.62; 95% CI, 0.42-0.91, p = 0.02, low certainty of evidence) compared with laparotomy, and the heterogeneity was moderate (I² = 34%, p = 0.18). After excluding major concomitant procedures, the RR between the laparoscopic and open group was 0.48 (95% CI, 0.33-0.70, p < 0.001, low certainty of evidence), suggesting that the laparoscopic approach was superior in terms of postoperative complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that laparoscopic feeding jejunostomy might reduce the postoperative overall complication rate compared with open feeding jejunostomy.

Risk factors for refractory enterocutaneous fistula following button jejunostomy removal and its treatment using a novel extraperitoneal approach in patients with oesophageal cancer: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Enterocutaneous fistula after removal of the jejunostomy tube leads to multiple problems, such as cosmetic problems, decreased quality of life, electrolyte imbalances, infectious complications, and increased medical costs. However, the risk factors for refractory enterocutaneous fistula (REF) after button jejunostomy removal remain unclear. Therefore, in this study, we assessed the risk factors for REF after button jejunostomy removal in patients with oesophageal cancer and reported the surgical outcomes of the novel extraperitoneal approach (EPA) for REF closure.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included 47 patients who underwent button jejunostomy removal after oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer. We assessed the risk factors for REF in these patients and reported the surgical outcomes of the novel EPA for REF closure at the International University of Health and Welfare Hospital between March 2013 and October 2021. The primary endpoint was defined as the occurrence of REF after removal of the button jejunostomy, which was assessed using a maintained database. The risk factors and outcomes of the EPA for REF closure were retrospectively analysed.

RESULTS

REFs occurred in 15 (31.9%) patients. In the univariate analysis, REF was significantly more common in patients with albumin level < 4.0 g/dL (p = 0.026), duration > 12 months for button jejunostomy removal (p = 0.003), and with a fistula < 15.0 mm (p = 0.002). The multivariate analysis revealed that a duration > 12 months for button jejunostomy removal (odds ratio [OR]: 7.15; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.38-36.8; p = 0.019) and fistula < 15.0 mm (OR: 8.08; 95% CI: 1.50-43.6; p = 0.002) were independent risk factors for REF. EPA for REF closure was performed in 15 patients. The technical success rate of EPA was 88.2%. Of the 15 EPA procedures, fistula closure was achieved in 12 (80.0%). The complications of EPA (11.7%) were major leakages (n = 3) and for two of them, EPA procedure was re-performed, and closure of the fistula was finally achieved.

CONCLUSION

This study suggested that duration > 12 months for button jejunostomy removal and fistula < 15.0 mm are the independent risk factors for REF after button jejunostomy removal. EPA for REF closure is a novel, simple, and useful surgical option for patients with REF after oesophagectomy.

Point-of-Care Ultrasonography as an Extension of the Physical Examination for Abdominal Pain in the Emergency Department: The Diagnosis of Small-Bowel Volvulus as a Rare Complication after Changing the Feeding Jejunostomy Tube

Point-of-care ultrasonography (POCUS) has become the most popular modality of testing for physicians in recent years and is used for improving the quality of care and increasing patient safety. However, POCUS is not always acceptable to all physicians. To address the benefits and importance of POCUS, numerous studies have examined the use of POCUS in clinical practice and even medical education. This article aims to highlight the effects of POCUS as an extension of the physical examination, and we present a case to address the reasons it should be performed. For a man experiencing abdominal pain immediately after his feeding jejunostomy tube was changed, there was high suspicion of small-bowel volvulus after a “whirlpool sign” was observed during the POCUS, whereby mesenteric vessels presented in a whirling or spiral shape. This impression was subsequently confirmed by computed tomography. Small-bowel volvulus is a rare complication of changing a feeding jejunostomy tube. The images submitted here add to the sparse evidence from the literature on the use of POCUS as an extension of the physical examination for evaluating abdominal pain. POCUS can be used after taking the patient’s history and conducting a physical examination. The observation of a whirlpool sign may indicate the presence of a volvulus that is life-threatening.

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

Introduction

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Can we predict the need for nutritional support following pancreatoduodenectomy?

BACKGROUND

The practice of routine placement of a tube jejunostomy at the time of pancreatoduodenectomy has given way to a more selective approach. However, the indications of establishing enteral access at the time of surgery remain poorly defined. This study aimed to assess the preoperative and intraoperative factors associated with the need for nutritional support after pancreatoduodenectomy, to guide decision-making for the establishment of intraoperative feeding access.

METHODS

Retrospective study, analyzing the data of 562 consecutive patients, who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy between March 2013 to December 2020. Univariate and multiple logistic regression analysis was carried out to ascertain the factors associated with the initiation of and need for nutritional support for more than 7 days postop. The utility of tube jejunostomy was studied in patients in whom it was performed.

RESULTS

Of 562 patients, 105 (18.7%) needed nutritional support. A tube jejunostomy was performed in 46 (8.2%) patients, parenteral nutrition was used in 83 (14.8%), and nasojejunal tube placed in 28 (4.9%) patients. On logistic regression analysis, age, serum albumin <3.0 gm/dl and operative blood loss were independently associated with the initiation of supportive nutrition, while preoperative gastric outlet obstruction (OR 3.105, 95% CI1.201-8.032, p = 0.019) and serum albumin <3.0 gm/dl (OR 2.669, 95% CI 1.131-6.300, p = 0.025) were associated with the need for prolonged nutritional support. The maximal benefit of tube jejunostomy was in patients with mental health disorders (83.3%).

CONCLUSION

Tube jejunostomy for nutritional support after pancreatoduodenectomy can be considered in patients with preoperative gastric outlet obstruction, serum albumin <3.0 gm/dl and mental health disorders.

Comparison of laparoscopy versus mini-laparotomy for jejunostomy placement in patients with gastric adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Optimal nutrition is challenging for patients with gastric and gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma and often requires feeding tube placement prior to preoperative therapy. Feeding jejunostomy (FJ) placement via mini-laparotomy is technically easier to perform than laparoscopic FJ. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes in patients with gastric adenocarcinoma undergoing laparoscopic versus mini-laparotomy FJ placement.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed of patients with gastric adenocarcinoma receiving laparoscopic versus mini-laparotomy FJ at a single tertiary referral center from 2000 to 2018. 30-day outcomes included complications, conversion to laparotomy, reoperation, length of stay, and readmission.

RESULTS

A total of 656 patients met the inclusion criteria and were studied. The majority of patients were male (68.1%) with a mean age of 60.6 years. The difference in surgical approach remained relatively stable over time. Overall, 82 (12.5%) patients experienced complications, and three (0.5%) patients died postoperatively. While readmission and conversion to open laparotomy did not differ between groups, overall complications (10.5% vs. 20.8%, p = 0.002), Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3 complications (4.0% vs. 8.9%, p = 0.021), length of stay (4.1 vs. 5.6 days, p < 0.001), and reoperation (0.9% vs. 4.0%, p = 0.002) favored the laparoscopic over mini-laparotomy group.

CONCLUSION

The current study helps clarify the risk of FJ placement in patients with gastric adenocarcinoma requiring nutritional support. Laparoscopic FJ placement has lower overall morbidity and length of stay compared to mini-laparotomy. However, caution is needed in preventing and identifying the rare causes of postoperative mortality that may be associated with laparoscopic FJ placement.

Nutritional Support Indications in Gastroesophageal Cancer Patients: From Perioperative to Palliative Systemic Therapy. A Comprehensive Review of the Last Decade

Gastric cancer treatments are rapidly evolving, leading to significant survival benefit. Recent evidence provided by clinical trials strongly encouraged the use of perioperative chemotherapy as standard treatment for the localized disease, whereas in the advanced disease setting, molecular characterization has improved patients’ selection for tailored therapeutic approaches, including molecular targeted therapy and immunotherapy. The role of nutritional therapy is widely recognized, with oncologic treatment’s tolerance and response being better in well-nourished patients. In this review, literature data on strategies or nutritional interventions will be critically examined, with particular regard to different treatment phases (perioperative, metastatic, and palliative settings), with the aim to draw practical indications for an adequate nutritional support of gastric cancer patients and provide an insight on future directions in nutritional strategies. We extensively analyzed the last 10 years of literature, in order to provide evidence that may fit current clinical practice both in terms of nutritional interventions and oncological treatment. Overall, 137 works were selected: 34 Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs), 12 meta-analysis, 9 reviews, and the most relevant prospective, retrospective and cross-sectional studies in this setting. Eleven ongoing trials have been selected from clinicaltrial.gov as representative of current research. One limitation of our work lies in the heterogeneity of the described studies, in terms of sample size, study procedures, and both nutritional and clinical outcomes. Indeed, to date, there are no specific evidence-based guidelines in this fields, therefore we proposed a clinical algorithm with the aim to indicate an appropriate nutritional strategy for gastric cancer patients.

Artificial Nutrition in Patients with Advanced Malignancy

Cancer is a progressive disease that can lead to malnutrition and cachexia. Artificial nutrition is a medical therapy used to combat malnutrition in these patients. In this article, the authors discuss factors affecting the decision to use artificial nutrition, including the patient's mental and physical health, technical factors of the procedures used to deliver artificial nutrition, and the oncologic factors affecting treatment. Through this review, the authors provide guidelines on who is and is not likely to benefit from therapy, available routes of administration, and necessary factors to consider for appropriate decision-making for palliative patients and those with advanced cancers."

Oligomeric Formulas in Surgery: A Delphi and Consensus Study

Nutritional management of patients with intestinal failure often includes the use of oligomeric formulas. Implementing the use of oligomeric formulas in surgical patients with maldigestion or malabsorption could be a nutritional strategy to be included in clinical protocols. We aim to generate knowledge from a survey focused on the effectiveness of nutritional therapy with oligomeric formulas with Delphi methodology. Each statement that reached an agreement consensus among participants was defined as a median consensus score ≥7 and as an interquartile range ≤3. The use of oligomeric formulas in surgical patients, starting enteral nutrition in the post-operative phase in short bowel syndrome and in nonspecific diarrhea after surgical procedures, could improve nutritional therapy implementation. Stakeholders agreed that early jejunal enteral nutrition with oligomeric formula is more effective compared to intravenous fluid therapy and it is useful in patients undergoing upper gastro-intestinal tract major surgery when malabsorption or maldigestion is suspected. Finally, oligomeric formulas may be useful when a feeding tube is placed distally to the duodenum. This study shows a practical approach to the use of oligomeric formulas in surgical patients with intestinal disorders and malabsorption, and it helps clinicians in the decision-making process.

Utility of feeding jejunostomy in patients with esophageal cancer undergoing esophagectomy with a high risk of anastomotic leakage

BACKGROUND

Feeding jejunostomy is widely used for enteral nutrition (EN) after esophagectomy; however, its risks and benefits are still controversial. We aimed to evaluate the short-term and long-term outcomes of feeding jejunal tube (FJT) in patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) who were deemed high-risk for anastomotic leakage.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 716 patients who underwent esophagectomy with (FJT group, n=68) or without (control group, n=648) intraoperative placement of FJT. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used for the adjustment of confounding factors. Risk level for anastomotic leakage was determined for every patient after PSM.

RESULTS

Patients in the FJT group were at higher risk of anastomotic leakage (14.9% vs. 11.3%), and had a statistically non-significant increase of postoperative complications [31.3% vs. 21.8%, odds ratio (OR) =1.139, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.947-1.370, P=0.141] after PSM. Medical expenditure, length of postoperative hospital stay, and short-term mortality were similar between the FJT and control groups. Placement of FJT appeared to accelerate the recovery of anastomotic leakage (27.2 vs. 37.4 d, P=0.073). Patients in FJT group achieved comparable overall survival (OS) both before [hazard ratio (HR) =0.850, P=0.390] and after (HR =0.797, P=0.292) PSM.

CONCLUSIONS

FJT showed acceptable safety profile along with potential benefits for ESCC patients with a high presumed risk of anastomotic leakage. While FJT does not impact OS, placement of FJT should be considered in esophagectomy patients and tailored to individual patients based on their leak-risk profile.

Acute Massive Gastric Dilatation and Gastric Perforation as a Result of Closed-Loop Obstruction of the Stomach

Acute massive gastric dilatation is a rare event that is usually underdiagnosed. It can occur due to multiple etiologies, including medical and surgical, or as a postoperative complication. Acute massive gastric dilatation can lead to life-threatening fatal complications, including perforation, bleeding, or shock. We report a rare case of acute massive gastric dilatation with perforation of the stomach due to closed-loop obstruction of the stomach, which occurred in a patient with cricopharyngeal carcinoma due to a kink at the feeding jejunostomy site. Early diagnosis and treatment are essential, as acute massive gastric dilatation with perforation carries high morbidity and mortality.

Antegrade Jejunojejunal Intussusception: An Unusual Complication Following Feeding Jejunostomy

Feeding jejunostomy (FJ) is a simple surgical procedure for enteral nutrition. But it can develop complications that may require re-exploration and can be life-threatening. Common complications include mechanical ones such as tube migration or dislocation, infection, gastrointestinal symptoms and fluid and electrolyte imbalances. However, intussusception is a rare complication of FJ. A 54-year-old gentleman underwent a D2 subtotal gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y gastrojejunostomy with FJ. On the sixth postoperative day, he developed severe colicky pain associated with abdominal distension and bilious vomiting. Ultrasonography and computed tomography revealed a 10-cm long jejunojejunal intussusception with the FJ tube at the center of the intussusception with proximal jejunal loops' distension. The patient was taken up for a re-exploratory laparotomy with manual reduction of the intussusception and a new FJ insertion distal to the previous enterotomy site. The patient had an uneventful postoperative recovery.

Jejuno-jejunal intussusception: A surgical quandary arising from feeding jejunostomy

Feeding jejunostomy is a simple and common procedure done for providing enteral nutrition. Though generally safe, complications like dislodgement, clogging and leaking are commonly reported with an incidence as high as 44%. Intussusception is however a much rarer complication which may have catastrophic results and often needs urgent surgical intervention. We describe a case of a patient who underwent robot-assisted minimal invasive oesophagectomy but developed an intestinal obstruction in the follow-up period.

Video-Assisted Jejunostomy Tube Placement With Two Portals: Surgical Technique in Ten Steps

Objectives. Endoscopic gastrostomy occasionally presents limitations such as costs, availability of equipment and special materials, and difficult access to the gastric cavity in the setting of obstructive esophageal tumors. Open jejunostomies present high rates of postoperative complications and limited capacity for abdominal evaluation due to reduced incision size. Thus, to reduce procedure-related complications and overall costs and provide a thorough intraoperative evaluation of the peritoneal cavity, we present the following simplified technique. Methods. Video-assisted jejunostomy in ten steps. Results. The use of this Video-assisted laparoscopic technique proves to be a safe, viable alternative, with cost reduction, decreased use of disposable materials, shortened operative time, and accelerated recovery, in addition to increased technical ease and wide applicability across a variety of hospital settings.

Home enteral nutrition and oral nutritional supplements in postoperative patients with upper gastrointestinal malignancy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The safety and potential benefits of home enteral route nutrition (HERN), referring specifically to home enteral nutrition (HEN) and oral nutritional supplements (ONS) in this article, after upper gastrointestinal (GI) resection are inconsistent.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of HERN on nutritional status, complications, and quality of life (QOL) after upper GI resection.

METHODS

This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA statement. Nine databases were searched from inception to October 2019. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the impact of HERN after upper gastrointestinal resection were included. Relative risk/weighted mean difference/standardized mean difference (RR/WMD/SMD) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated using fixed- or random-effects models.

RESULTS

Overall, 15 RCTs involving 1059 patients were included. Compared with normal oral diet, HERN significantly prevented weight loss (-3.95 vs -5.82 kg; SMD: 1.98 kg; 95% CI: 1.24-2.73); improved added-level of albumin (3.48 vs 2.41 g/L; SMD: 1.36 g/L; 95% CI: 0.81-1.91), hemoglobin (6.54 vs -1.29 g/L; WMD: 7.45 g/L; 95% CI: 5.05-9.86), pre-albumin (37.59 vs 7.35 mg/L; WMD: 21.6 mg/L; 95% CI: 5.96-37.24), and transferrin (63.08 vs 50.45 mg/L; WMD: 16.44 mg/L; 95% CI: 13.51-19.38); and reduced the incidence of malnutrition or latent malnutrition (RR = 0.54; P < 0.01). Subgroup analysis based on the approach of HERN showed that weight loss in the HEN subgroup was significantly lower than that of the control group (WMD = 2.69, P < 0.01), while there was no significant difference between the ONS subgroup and the control group (P = 0.1). The same results were found in albumin. Physical function (WMD: 5.29; 95% CI: 1.86-8.73) and fatigue (WMD: -8.59; 95% CI: -12.61, -4.58) dimensions in QOL were significantly better in the HERN group. No significant differences in gastrointestinal and tube-related complications.

CONCLUSION

HERN improved nutritional status and some dimensions of QOL in upper GI malignancy patients after surgery, without increasing complications. Subgroup analysis showed that HEN experienced more benefits than ONS.

Vertical distance from navel as a risk factor for bowel obstruction associated with feeding jejunostomy after esophagectomy: a retrospective cohort study

Background

Placement of feeding jejunostomy (PFJ) during esophagectomy is an effective method to maintain adequate nutrition, but is associated with serious complications such as bowel obstruction and jejunal torsion. The purpose of the current study was to analyze the incidence, clinical features, and risk factors of bowel obstruction associated with feeding jejunostomy (BOFJ) after PFJ.

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort study of 70 patients who underwent esophagectomy with three-field lymph node dissection for esophageal cancer and treated with PFJ between March 2013 and December 2019 in our hospital. Abdominal dissection was performed under hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) from March 2013 to March 2015, and was changed to complete laparoscopic surgery in April 2015. We compared patients with and without BOFJ, and the incidence of BOFJ was evaluated. The primary endpoint was incidence of BOFJ after PFJ.

Results

Six patients (8.5%) were diagnosed with BOFJ, all of whom were symptomatic and in the HALS group. In addition, 3 cases displayed histories of recurrent BOFJ (3, 3, and 5 times). Laparotomy was performed in all cases. Subgroup analysis of the HALS group showed a significant difference only in straight-line distance between the jejunostomy and navel as a significant pre- and perioperative factor (117 mm [101–130 mm] vs. 89 mm [51–150 mm], p < 0.001). Furthermore, dividing straight-line distance between the jejunostomy and navel into VD and HD, only VD differed significantly (107 mm [93–120 mm] vs. 79 mm [28–135 mm], p = 0.010), not HD (48 mm [40–59 mm] vs. 46 mm [22–60 mm], p = 0.199).

Conclusions

VD between the jejunostomy and navel was associated with BOFJ after PFJ with HALS esophagectomy. PFJ < 9 cm above the navel during HALS esophagectomy might effectively prevent BOFJ.

Impact of Clinical Markers of Nutritional Status and Feeding Jejunostomy Use on Outcomes in Esophageal Cancer Patients Undergoing Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy

Background: Patients with esophageal cancer (EC) have high rates of malnutrition due to tumor location and treatment-related toxicity. Various strategies are used to improve nutritional status in patients with EC including oral and enteral support. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis to determine the impact of malnutrition and prophylactic feeding jejunostomy tube (FJT) placement on toxicity and outcomes in patients with localized EC who were treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (nCRT) followed by esophagectomy. Results: We identified 125 patients who were treated with nCRT between 2002 and 2014. Weight loss and hypoalbuminemia occurred frequently during nCRT and were associated with multiple adverse toxicity outcomes including hematologic toxicity, nonhematologic toxicity, grade ≥3 toxicity, and hospitalizations. After adjusting for relevant covariates including the specific nCRT chemotherapy regimen received and the onset of toxicity, there were no significant associations between hypoalbuminemia, weight loss, or FJT placement and relapse-free survival (RFS) or overall survival (OS). FJT placement was associated with less weight loss during nCRT (p = 0.003) but was not associated with reduced toxicity or improved survival. Conclusions: Weight and albumin loss during nCRT for EC are important factors relating to treatment toxicity but not RFS or OS. While pretreatment FJT placement may reduce weight loss, it may not impact treatment tolerance or survival.

A Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Jejunostomy and Nasogastric Feeding in Minimally Invasive McKeown Esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Early postoperative enteral nutrition is recommended for patients undergoing esophagectomy; however, the optimum method of tube feeding remains controversial. Thus, the aim of this study is to assess two common enteral nutrition methods after minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy.

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial was performed with 120 patients who underwent minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy from January 2017 to December 2018. The patients were randomly divided so that 58 patients were in the jejunostomy feeding (JF) group and 62 patients were in the nasogastric feeding (NF) group. The postoperative outcomes, including complications, nutritional status, quality of life, and survival rate, were studied and used as the main parameters to compare the abovementioned tube feeding methods.

RESULTS

The incidence of overall complications was equivalent between the two groups (P = 0.625), except for bowel obstruction (which occurred 4 times in the JF group but did not occur in the NF group). In the first month after surgery (postoperative month 1, POM1), a significantly higher body mass index (BMI) was observed in the JF group (23.6 ± 3.2) than in the NF group (20.9 ± 3.5, P = 0.032). The global quality-of-life scores were better in the JF group than in the NF group (P < 0.001). In addition, there were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of disease-free survival (DFS) (P = 0.816) and overall survival (OS) (P = 0.564).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with NF, JF provides more safety, efficacy, and utility as nutritional support for minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy patients who have a high incidence of anastomotic leakage. However, the higher risk of intestinal obstruction after JF requires attention.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Acute massive gastric dilatation as a result of closed-loop obstruction of stomach: an unusual and rare phenomenon

Acute massive gastric dilatation (AMGD) is a rare event which is usually underdiagnosed. It can occur due to multiple etiologies, including medical and surgical, or as a postoperative complication. We report a rare case of AMGD as a result of closed-loop obstruction of the stomach following feeding jejunostomy in a patient with carcinoma oesophagus. A high index of suspicion, early diagnosis and prompt management is the key to the successful treatment. To the best of our knowledge, this is the second case report of a closed-loop obstruction of the stomach leading to AMGD in published literature.

Endoscopic and Surgical Treatments for Gastroparesis: What to Do and Whom to Treat?

Gastroparesis is a complex chronic debilitating condition of gastric motility resulting in the delayed gastric emptying and multiple severe symptoms, which may lead to malnutrition and dehydration. Initial management of patients with gastroparesis focuses on the diet, lifestyle modification and medical therapy. Various endoscopic and surgical interventions are reserved for refractory cases of gastroparesis, not responding to conservative therapy. Pyloric interventions, enteral access tubes, gastric electrical stimulator and gastrectomy have been described in the care of patients with gastroparesis. In this article, the authors review current management, indications, and contraindications to these procedures.

Feeding jejunostomy in upper gastrointestinal resections: a UK-wide survey

INTRODUCTION

The usage of a feeding jejunostomy has been a well-established practice in maintaining nutrition in patients undergoing resections for upper gastrointestinal cancer. As surgical technique has evolved, together with the adoption of enhanced recovery after surgery pathways, the routine insertion of feeding jejunostomy tubes appears to be changing.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A survey was constructed using Google Forms. The link was distributed to consultant upper gastrointestinal surgeons via the Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons' membership database. Results were collated and analysed using Microsoft Excel.

RESULTS

A total of 55 responses were received from 28 units across the UK; 27 respondents (49.1%) no longer routinely use feeding jejunostomy in upper gastrointestinal resections, oesophagectomy or gastrectomy. The most common primary feeding modality used by these respondents was oral diet 17 (65.4%), with total parenteral nutrition (19.2%) and nasojejunal (11.5%) routes also being used. Respondents who used feeding jejunostomies inserted them primarily for oesophagectomy (n = 27; 96.4%), with fewer surgeons using them in extended total gastrectomy (n = 12; 42.9%) and total gastrectomy (n = 11; 39.3%). Of the total, 20 surgeons (71.4%) would insert the jejunostomy using an open approach, with 19 (67.9%) employing a Witzel tunnel. Eleven respondents (39.3%) would continue feeding via the jejunostomy after discharge. Some 24 responders thought that feeding jejunostomies did not facilitate the enhanced recovery after surgery pathway (strongly and slightly disagree), whereas 17 considered that they did (strongly and slightly agree); 13 responders did not have strong views either way.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a split in current practice regarding the usage of feeding jejunostomies. There is also a division of opinion on the role of feeding jejunostomy in enhanced recovery after surgery.

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

BACKGROUND

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

STUDY DESIGN

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

The Optimal Feeding Enterostomy Creation During Esophagectomy to Reduce the Long-Term Risk of Small Bowel Obstruction

BACKGROUND

Although feeding jejunostomy (FJ) is commonly created during esophagectomy for postoperative enteral nutrition, it can be a cause of postoperative small bowel obstruction (SBO). We introduced a technique of feeding enterostomy using the round ligament of the liver (FERL) to reduce SBO. In this study, we aimed to clarify the efficacy of FERL in reducing the postoperative SBO compared with FJ.

METHODS

We assessed 400 consecutive patients who underwent esophagectomy with gastric tube reconstruction between 2011 and 2016, before and after the introduction of FERL (FJ, n = 200; FERL, n = 200). The cumulative incidences of postoperative SBO and SBO associated with feeding enterostomy were compared between the FJ and the FERL groups.

RESULTS

Thoracoscopic and laparoscopic surgery was more frequent in the FERL group than in the FJ group (p < 0.001). The cumulative incidences of postoperative SBO and SBO associated with feeding enterostomy in the FERL group were significantly less frequent than those in the FJ group (p < 0.001 and p = 0.006, respectively). When stratifying by the abdominal surgical approach, the cumulative incidences of postoperative SBO and SBO associated with feeding enterostomy in a laparoscopic approach were less frequent in the FERL group than those in the FJ group (both p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The FERL technique can reduce the incidences of postoperative SBO and SBO associated with feeding enterostomy in patients undergoing esophagectomy.

Complications of feeding jejunostomy placement: a single-institution experience

BACKGROUND

Feeding jejunostomy is an alternative route of enteral nutrition in patients undergoing major gastrointestinal operations when a feeding gastrostomy is not suitable.

METHODS

A single institution review of patients who underwent open or laparoscopic jejunostomy tube (JT) placement between 2009 and 2019 was performed. Data collected included demographics, preoperative serum albumin, surgery indication, concomitancy of procedure, size of JT tube and time to its removal. JT complications were analyzed in the early postoperative period (< 30 days) and in a long-term follow-up (> 30 days). The Chi-square test was used to compare rates of complications according to tube size.

RESULTS

Seventy-three patients underwent JT placement, and gastroesophageal cancer (n = 48, 65.7%) was the most common indication. The JT was most frequently placed concomitantly (n = 56, 76.7%) to the primary operation and through a laparoscopic approach (n = 66, 90.4%). A total of 14 patients (19.1%) had early complications and 15 had late complications (20.5%). The reasons for early complications were clogged JT (n = 8, 10.9%), JT dislodgement (n = 3, 4.1%), leakage (n = 2, 2.7%), small bowel obstruction adjacent to the site of the jejunostomy tube (n = 2, 2.7%), JT site infection (n = 1, 1.3%), and intraperitoneal JT displacement (n = 1, 1.3%). The reasons for late complications were clogged JT (n = 6, 8.2%), JT dislodgement (n = 6, 8.2%), JT site infection (n = 3, 4.1%), and JT leakage (n = 1, 1.3%). There was no procedure-related mortality in this series. However, 12 patients (16.4%) died due to their baseline disease. The mean time to tube removal was 83.4 ± 93.6 days. The most frequently used JT size was 14 French (n = 39, 53.4%) but in nine patients the tube size was not reported. No statistical significance (p = 0.75) was found when comparing the two most commonly used sizes to rates of complications.

CONCLUSION

The rate of JT complications in our study is comparable to other published reports in literature. As an alternative route for nutritional status optimization, the procedure appears to be safe despite the number of complications.

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

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

Bowel obstruction associated with a feeding jejunostomy and its association to weight loss after thoracoscopic esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Our aim was to clarify the incidence of bowel obstruction associated with a feeding jejunostomy (BOFJ) after thoracoscopic esophagectomy and its association to characteristics and postoperative change in body weight.

METHODS

We reviewed 100 consecutive patients who underwent thoracoscopic esophagectomy with gastric tube reconstruction and placement of a jejunostomy feeding catheter for esophageal cancer. The incidence of BOFJ was evaluated and the change in body weight after surgery was compared between patients with and without BOFJ.

RESULTS

BOFJ developed in 17 patients. Compared to patients without BOFJ, those with BOFJ had a higher preoperative body mass index (23.3 kg/m2 versus 20.9 kg/m2, P = 0.022), and greater postoperative body weight loss rate: 3 month, decrease to 84.2% of initial body weight versus 89.3% (P = 0.002). Patients with BOFJ had shorter distance between the jejunostomy and midline (40 mm versus 48 mm, P = 0.011) compared to patients without BOFJ. On multivariate analysis, higher preoperative body mass index (odds ratio (OR) = 9.248; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.344-63.609; p = 0.024), higher postoperative weight loss at 3 months (OR = 8.490; 95% CI = 1.765-40.837, p = 0.008), and shorter distance between the jejunostomy and midline (OR = 8.160; 95% CI = 1.675-39.747, p = 0.009) were independently associated with BOFJ.

CONCLUSION

Patients of BOFJ had greater preoperative body mass, shorter distance between jejunostomy and midline, and greater postoperative weight loss.

A selective placement strategy for surgical feeding tubes benefits trauma patients

BACKGROUND

The indications for surgical feeding tube (SFT) placement in trauma patients are poorly defined. Patient selection is critical as complications from SFTs have been reported in up to 70% of patients. A previous analysis by our group determined that 25% of the SFTs we placed were unnecessary and that older patients, patients with head and spinal cord injuries, and patients who needed a tracheostomy were more likely to require long-term SFTs. Following this study, we modified our institutional guidelines for SFT placement. We hypothesized that a more selective placement strategy would result in fewer unnecessary SFTs.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all adult patients from 2012 to 2016 with an intensive care unit length of stay longer than 4 days and an SFT placed during admission was conducted. This group was compared to data collected prior to our change in practice (2007-2010). Data from 2011 were excluded as a washout period. "Necessary" SFT use was defined per established guidelines as either daily use of the SFT through discharge or for 28 days or longer and "unnecessary" SFT use as all others.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-seven SFTs were placed from 2007 to 2010 and 244 from 2012 to 2016. Following implementation of our selective SFT placement strategy, unnecessary SFT placement decreased from 25% in 2007 to 2010 to 8% in 2012 to 2016 (p < 0.0001). Significant predictors of necessary SFT placement by univariate regression were as follows: increasing age (odds ratio [OR] 1.03/year; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.04), head injury (OR, 2.80; 95% CI, 1.71-4.60), cervical spinal cord injury (OR, 4.42; 95% CI, 1.34-14.50), and need for tracheostomy (OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 2.21-7.67). The overall complication rate was 11% (9% in the selective group vs. 13% in the preselective group, p = 0.2574) and was highest following open SFT placement (22%).

CONCLUSION

A selective placement strategy for SFTs in our trauma population resulted in fewer unnecessary SFTs and a trend toward fewer complications. Surgical feeding tubes should be placed through a percutaneous approach whenever possible.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic study, level IV.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Uncommon complication of feeding jejunostomy: A case report

Feeding jejunostomy is a common surgical procedure performed for patients who cannot take oral feeds. Although a minor procedure, it is not without complications. However, distal migration of the tube into the bowel is extremely rare. A 50‐year‐old woman with corrosive stricture of the esophagus because of feeding jejunostomy feeds presented with internal dislodgement of the feeding tube. Abdominal X‐ray and ultrasonogram could not locate the tube. On computed tomography, the feeding tube was found in the descending colon. She was managed conservatively, and the tube was expelled after three days. Internal dislodgement of tube usually does not produce any symptom. Computed tomography (CT) scan is diagnostic.

Outcomes after prophylactic gastrectomy for hereditary diffuse gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Patients with hereditary diffuse gastric cancer and a CDH1 mutation have a 60-80 per cent lifetime risk of developing diffuse gastric cancer. Total prophylactic gastrectomy eliminates this risk, but is associated with considerable morbidity. The effectiveness (removal of all gastric mucosa) and outcomes of this procedure were evaluated retrospectively.

METHODS

All consecutive individuals undergoing a prophylactic gastrectomy for a CDH1 mutation or gastric signet ring cell foci at the authors' institute between 2005 and 2017 were included.

RESULTS

In 25 of 26 patients, intraoperative frozen-section examination (proximal resection margin) was used to verify complete removal of gastric mucosa. All definitive resection margins were free of gastric mucosa, but only after the proximal margin had been reresected in nine patients. In the first year after surgery, five of the 26 patients underwent a relaparotomy for adhesiolysis (2 patients) or jejunostomy-related complications (3 patients). Six patients were readmitted to the hospital within 1 year for nutritional and/or psychosocial support (4 patients) or surgical reintervention (2 patients). Mean weight loss after 1 year was 15 (95 per cent c.i. 12 to 18) per cent. For the 25 patients with a follow-up at 1 year or more, functional complaints were reported more frequently at 1 year than at 3 months after the operation: bile reflux (15 versus 11 patients respectively) and dumping (11 versus 7 patients). The majority of patients who worked or studied before surgery (15 of 19) had returned fully to these activities within 1 year.

CONCLUSION

The considerable morbidity and functional consequences of gastrectomy should be considered when counselling individuals with an inherited predisposition to diffuse gastric cancer. Intraoperative frozen-section examination is recommended to remove all risk-bearing gastric mucosa.

Enteral nutrition and quality of life in patients undergoing chemoradiotherapy for esophageal carcinoma: a comparison of nasogastric tube, esophageal stent, and ostomy tube feeding

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

This study prospectively recruited esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients who received esophageal stent, nasogastric tube (NGT), or jejunostomy/gastrostomy feeding to compare the changes in nutritional status and quality of life during chemoradiation therapy (CRT).

METHODS

In total, 81 patients were analyzed (stent, 7; surgical ostomy, 26; NGT, 19; oral intake, 29). An NGT was inserted when, despite medication, dysphagia or pain worsened with oral feeding during CRT. Serial body weight and daily narcotic demand were recorded. Changes in serum albumin level and quality of life were also assessed. In subgroup analysis comparing NGT and prophylactic surgical ostomy feeding, 5 patients with total occlusion in the ostomy group were excluded.

RESULTS

Patients in all groups had similar decreases in mean body weight with an overall change of -6.41% ± 5.21% at the end of CRT. The stent group had significantly worse pain, decreased albumin (-1.03 ± .9 mg/dL), and decreased quality of life across CRT compared with the other groups. In subgroup analysis the stent group had significantly higher weight loss, whereas the NGT group had higher narcotic demand and slightly worse quality of life. Two patients (7.7%) had ileus days after jejunostomy creation. Five patients (23.8%) among those received prophylactic ostomy creation and scarcely used it.

CONCLUSIONS

These preliminary results raise concerns that use of esophageal stents may be less suitable in patients undergoing CRT. Tube feeding by means of transnasal or percutaneous routes appear to be comparably effective during CRT, but both have advantages and disadvantages. We suggest a careful endoscopic evaluation to select the population more appropriate for NGT feeding on an as-needed basis during CRT.

Postoperative complications and weight loss following jejunostomy tube feeding after total gastrectomy for advanced adenocarcinomas

OBJECTIVE

Patients undergoing total gastrectomy for cancer are at risk of malnourishment. The aim of this self-controlled study was to examine the effect of jejunostomy tube feeding (JTF) and other factors on postoperative weight and the incidence of jejunostomy-related complications in patients undergoing total gastrectomy for cancer.

METHODS

All consecutive patients who underwent total gastrectomy for gastric cancer with jejunostomy placement were included from a prospective single-center database (2003-2014). Jejunostomy-related complications and postoperative weight changes were evaluated up to 12 months after surgery. Multivariable linear regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with weight loss 12 months after gastrectomy.

RESULTS

Of 113 patients operated in the study period, 65 received JTF after total gastrectomy for a median duration of 18 d [interquartile range (IQR), 10-55 d]. Jejunostomy-related complications occurred in 11 (17%) patients, including skin leakage (n=3) and peritoneal leakage (n=2), luxation (n=3), occlusion (n=2), infection (n=1) and torsion (n=1). In 2 (3%) patients, a reoperation was needed due to jejunostomy-related complications. The mean preoperative weight of patients was 71.8 kg (100%), and remained stable during JTF (73.9 kg, 103%, P=0.331). After JTF was stopped, the mean weight of patients decreased to 64.9 kg (90%) at 12 months after surgery (P<0.001). A high preoperative body mass index (BMI) (≥25 kg/m²) was associated with high postoperative weight loss compared to patients with a low BMI (<25 kg/m²) (16.3% vs. 8.6%, P=0.016).

CONCLUSIONS

JTF can prevent weight loss in the early postoperative phase. However, this is at the prize of possible complications. As weight loss in the long term is not prevented, routine JTF should be re-evaluated and balanced against the selected use in preoperatively malnourished patients. Special attention should be paid to patients with a high preoperative BMI, who are at risk of more postoperative weight loss.