Purely laparoscopic feeding jejunostomy: a procedure which deserves more attention

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.

Growing use of home enteral nutrition: a great tool in nutrition practice toolbox

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Home enteral nutrition (HEN) is a well-established practical nutrition therapy tool that is typically managed by an interdisciplinary team. Prevalence of HEN is increasing across the globe given significant evidence for utility, feasibility, efficacy, safety, and reliability of HEN in helping patients meeting their nutrition needs. The current review highlights the growing use of HEN in the context of what is novel in the field including trends in HEN practice with regards to tubes and connectors, feeding formula and real food blends, and common complications. The review also highlights that the use of HEN is expected to expand further over coming years emphasizing the need for national consensus recommendations and guidelines for HEN management.

RECENT FINDINGS

The growing use of HEN has always been parallel to adoption of holistic definitions and concept of malnutrition in clinical nutrition practice and more understanding of the need for malnutrition risk stratification, meeting unmet needs in practice and addressing challenges that lead to suboptimal enteral nutrition.

SUMMARY

Research and advancements in technology as well as in tube feeding formula industry have led to the development of more solutions and have helped identify and implement best HEN practices.