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

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.

The impact of jejunostomy feeding on nutritional outcomes after oesophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Nutritional status is compromised long-term following oesophagectomy. Controversy surrounds the optimal route for nutrition support postoperatively and there is wide variation in the use of feeding jejunostomy tubes.

METHODS

A retrospective service evaluation was conducted for all consecutive adults who underwent oesophagectomy for a cancer diagnosis within a specialist centre between April 2016 and July 2019 (n = 165). Nutritional and clinical outcomes were compared for patients who received jejunostomy feeding (n = 24), versus those who did not (n = 141).

RESULTS

Patients with feeding jejunostomy lost significantly less weight at both 6 and 12 months postoperatively compared to those without jejunostomy (p ≤ 0.001 and p = 0.001, respectively). This remained statistically significant in multiple regression, controlling for age, gender, preoperative tumour staging and adjuvant treatment (p ≤ 0.001 and p = 0.03, respectively). Median length of home enteral feeding was 10 weeks after discharge in the jejunostomy group. We observed minor jejunostomy tube-related complications in four patients (16.7%). Of those readmitted within 90 days of surgery in the non-jejunostomy group, nutritional failure was a factor in 43.2% of these readmissions. "Rescue tube feeding" was required by 8.5% of the non-jejunostomy group within the first postoperative year, including 6.4% within 90 days of surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of short-term supplementary jejunal feeding in addition to oral intake after hospital discharge is beneficial for maintaining weight after oesophagectomy. We suggest a future randomised-controlled trial to confirm these findings.

A clinical nomogram for predicting small bowel obstruction after extubation after radical resection of esophageal cancer and jejunostomy

BACKGROUND

Small bowel obstruction after extubation is among the most serious complications of radical esophageal cancer and jejunostomy resection. This study aimed to explore the risk factors and treatment methods for small bowel obstruction after extubation and construct a predictive model to guide its clinical management.

METHODS

Clinical data for 514 patients who underwent esophagectomy with jejunostomy for esophageal cancer were collected. A nomogram was constructed using the independent risk factors for small bowel obstruction after extubation determined on multivariable logistic regression analysis, and a subgroup analysis was performed of the treatment methods for the 61 patients with small bowel obstruction after extubation.

RESULTS

The nomogram incorporated the independent risk factors for small bowel obstruction after extubation (gastrointestinal function recovery [P < .001], postoperative albumin reduction ratio [P = .009], and serious postoperative complications [P < .001]) in the multivariable logistic regression analysis. The final model had an area under the curve of 0.829 (95% confidence interval, 0.775-0.883). The calibration plots demonstrated high concordance between the predicted and actual probabilities. The model demonstrated excellent discriminatory power for internal and time validation, with adjusted C-statistics of 0.821 and 0.810 (95% confidence interval, 0.686-0.933), respectively. In the subgroup analysis, an abnormal anion gap (P = .016) and low serum albumin level (P = .005) were associated with recurrent small bowel obstruction. The model's area under the curve was 0.815 (95% confidence interval, 0.683-0.948). The probability of recurrence among patients with small bowel obstruction after extubation was 78.3% when the 2 risk factors were present.

CONCLUSION

The clinical nomogram based on small bowel obstruction after extubation predictors recommends aggressive surgical intervention for patients with small bowel obstruction after extubation and an abnormal anion gap and low serum albumin level at admission.

Perioperative nutritional assessment and support in visceral surgery

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

Small bowel necrosis after esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

The study aimed to fully understand small bowel necrosis, a rare but fatal complication after esophagectomy.

METHODS

Patients who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer at the Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center from January 2013 to December 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Clinical information on the demographics, presenting features, and outcomes of the cases were collected.

RESULTS

Of the 6607 patients during the study period, 11 (0.2%) underwent reoperation due to bowel necrosis, including nine males (81.8%) and two females (18.2%). Among them, eight cases (72.7%) had hypertension and seven (63.6%) suffered from lower thoracic esophageal cancer. Eight (72.7%) and three (27.3%) patients underwent the Ivor-Lewis and McKewon procedures, respectively. Jejunostomy was performed in nine patients (81.8%). The first signs of bowel necrosis appeared within 5 days after esophagectomy. Abdominal distension and deteriorating renal function were observed in seven patients (63.6%). There was no evidence of mesenteric vascular occlusion in any of the 11 cases, except for the hepatic portal venous gas found in seven patients on the computed tomography (CT) scan. Eight (72.7%) of the 11 patients underwent reoperation within 24 h due to the onset of the first symptoms. Eight (72.7%) had ileal necrosis, and three (27.3%) died.

CONCLUSION

Close attention should be paid to patients with abdominal distension, renal function damage, and portal hepatic venous gas after esophagectomy. These patients may suffer from small bowel necrosis, which may result in rapid disease progression. Exploratory laparotomy and bowel resection are effective treatments for such patients.

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.