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.

Postoperative Nutrition Management: Who Needs What?

Background

Early oral feeding after major abdominal surgery has been clearly shown to be safe and not a risk factor for anastomotic dehiscence. Within the Enhanced Recovery after Surgery protocol, it is the nutritional plan A. Nonetheless, one must consider that postoperative protein and energy requirements will often be not covered by oral food intake alone. Because nutritional status has been shown to be a prognostic factor in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery, the preoperative identification of patients at risk may be mandatory. Malnutrition may be underestimated in an overweight society. With special regard to patients with cancer and those with preexisting malnutrition, an accumulating caloric gap may be harmful in the early and late postoperative periods. Furthermore, complications requiring reoperation and intensive care treatment may occur.

Summary

Therefore, a plan B for postoperative nutrition therapy is needed, using preferentially the enteral route. The European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism recently addressed perioperative nutritional management and the indications for enteral and even parenteral supplementation to achieve caloric requirements in the postoperative course. In the first months after surgery, persisting weight loss is common in patients with upper gastrointestinal resections, even in those with an uncomplicated course. This may delay the initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy, increase toxicity, and worsen long-term outcomes.

Closed-bowel Loop Obstruction-An Unusual and Forgotten Complication of Feeding Jejunostomy: Case Report

Feeding jejunostomy (FJ) is done as a part of significant upper gastrointestinal surgical procedures for patients who cannot tolerate enteral feeds. This procedure is related to different mechanical, infective, and metabolic inconveniences. However, closed-bowel loop obstruction following FJ is rare. We report an unusual complication of closed-bowel loop obstruction in the postoperative period of FJ done for a locally advanced carcinoma of gastroesophageal (GE) junction for enteral access in a 67-year-old male patient. This patient required an emergency laparotomy, to forestall exacerbating of abdomen distension which could have led to gastric ischemia and perforation following obstruction. A redo FJ was done, and the patient had an uneventful postoperative recovery. Therefore, surgeons should have high clinical suspicion for a rarer complication like a closed-loop obstruction in a patient with upper abdominal pain and distension without vomiting following FJ.

How to cite this article

Balamurugan S, Aslam MM, Kadambari D, et al. Closed-bowel Loop Obstruction-An Unusual and Forgotten Complication of Feeding Jejunostomy: Case Report. Euroasian J Hepato-Gastroenterol 2022;12(2):92-94.

Clinical Benefits of Routine Feeding Jejunostomy Tube Placement in Patients Undergoing Esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Routine placement of a feeding jejunostomy tube (FJT) following esophagectomy remains controversial due to the risk of complications including small bowel obstruction (SBO). This study aimed to evaluate FJT placement following esophagectomy.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included consecutive 229 patients undergoing thoracoscopic esophagectomy between January 2010 and June 2020. Short-term outcomes, postoperative nutritional status, incidence of SBO, and long-term outcomes were compared between patients according to FJT placement.

RESULTS

The total operative duration was significantly longer in the FJT group compared to the no FJT group (P < 0.0001); however, no differences in overall or severe postoperative morbidity were observed. Body weight loss at discharge was significantly attenuated in patients with FJT (5% vs 7%, P = 0.001). Serum cholinesterase levels were significantly higher in patients with FJT (P = 0.002), while no difference was observed in serum albumin levels. At 6-month follow-up, no statistically significant differences were observed in serological markers or percentage body weight. The incidence of SBO was significantly higher in the FJT group (P = 0.006). The 5-year incidence of SBO was 12%. Patients in the FJT group had higher progression-free and overall survival compared to patients in the no FJT group (P = 0.041 and P = 0.033, respectively). A similar trend toward better survival in the FJT group was observed after propensity score matching.

CONCLUSIONS

Routine placement of FJT significantly improves postoperative nutritional status and may contribute to improved long-term survival but is associated with increased long-term risk of SBO.

Nutritional jejunostomy in esophagectomy for cancer, a national register-based cohort study of associations with postoperative outcomes and survival

Purpose

Insertion of a nutritional jejunostomy in conjunction with esophagectomy is performed with the intention to decrease the risk for postoperative malnutrition and improve recovery without adding significant catheter-related complications. However, previous research has shown no clear benefit and there is currently no consensus of practice.

Methods

All patients treated with esophagectomy due to cancer during the period 2006–2017 reported in the Swedish National Register for Esophageal and Gastric Cancer were included in this register-based cohort study from a national database. Patients were stratified into two groups: esophagectomy alone and esophagectomy with jejunostomy.

Results

A total of 847 patients (45.27%) had no jejunostomy inserted while 1024 patients (54.73%) were treated with jejunostomy. The groups were comparable, but some differences were seen in histological tumor type and tumor stage between the groups. No significant differences in length of hospital stay, postoperative surgical complications, Clavien-Dindo score, or 90-day mortality rate were seen. There was no evidence of increased risk for significant jejunostomy-related complications. Patients in the jejunostomy group with anastomotic leaks had a statistically significant lower risk for severe morbidity defined as Clavien-Dindo score ≥ IIIb (adjusted odds ratio 0.19, 95% CI: 0.04–0.94, P = 0.041) compared to patients with anastomotic leaks and no jejunostomy.

Conclusion

A nutritional jejunostomy is a safe method for early postoperative enteral nutrition which might decrease the risk for severe outcomes in patients with anastomotic leaks. Nutritional jejunostomy should be considered for patients undergoing curative intended surgery for esophageal and gastro-esophageal junction cancer.

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.

A simple, novel laparoscopic feeding jejunostomy technique to prevent bowel obstruction after esophagectomy: the "curtain method"

BACKGROUND

Feeding jejunostomy (FJ) is a common treatment to support patients with esophageal cancer after esophagectomy. However, severe FJ-related complications, such as bowel obstruction, occasionally occur. We investigated the ability of our simple, novel FJ technique, the "curtain method," to prevent bowel obstruction.

METHODS

In laparoscopic surgery, the main mechanism of bowel obstruction involves torsion of the mesentery accompanied by migration of the intestine across the fixed FJ through the space surrounded by a triangle comprising the ligament of Treitz, fixed FJ, and spleen rather than adhesion. Our "curtain method" involves closure of this triangle zone with omentum, and the appearance of the lifted omentum resembles a curtain. Sixty patients treated with this modified FJ were retrospectively compared with 13 patients treated with conventional FJ in terms of the incidence of bowel obstruction, peritonitis, stoma site infection, and catheter obstruction.

RESULTS

From 2013 to 2017, 60 patients underwent esophagectomy and gastric conduit reconstruction accompanied by modified laparoscopic FJ. The median observation period, including the period after tube removal, was 644 days. No FJ-associated bowel obstruction, the prevention of which was the primary aim, occurred in any patient. Likewise, no peritonitis or dislodgement occurred. Eight patients (13%) developed a stoma site infection with granulation. The feeding tube became occluded in 11 patients (18%); however, a new feeding tube was reinserted under fluoroscopy for all of these patients. From 2003 to 2012, 13 patients underwent conventional FJ. The median observation period was 387 days. Three patients (23%) developed bowel obstruction by torsion 71 to 134 days after the first surgery, and all were treated by emergency operations. Other FJ-related complications were not different from those in the modified FJ group.

CONCLUSION

Our simple, novel technique, the "curtain method," for prevention of laparoscopic FJ-associated bowel obstruction after esophagectomy is a safe additional surgery.

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.

Congenital pyloric atresia - nine new cases: Single-center experience of the long-term follow-up and the lessons learnt over a decade

BACKGROUND

Congenital pyloric atresia (CPA) is a rare anomaly with an incidence of 1 in 100,000 live births. Depending on the type of anomaly patients can either present in the neonatal period or later in life with subtle nonspecific signs and symptoms. We present our institute's experience in handling these cases over the last decade and highlight lessons learnt.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed records of patients diagnosed with CPA and managed at our centre between Jan 2006 to June 2016. We looked into the period of gestation, birth weight, gender, age at onset of symptoms, age at presentation to the hospital, symptoms, investigations, associated anomalies, management and outcomes and follow up periods.

RESULTS

Nine patients were operated during the ten year period of study (6 males and 3 females). The median age at onset of symptoms was 06 months (01 day-36 months) and the median age of reporting to the hospital was 07 months (01 day-44 months) with a mean delay of 5 months between onset of symptoms and reporting to hospital. Six patients (67%) had associated anomalies including one with posterior urethral valve which has been reported for the first time in literature. Four out of five (80%) late presenters underwent an upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for diagnostic confirmation. All patients were operated upon and Type 1 CPA was seen in five patients (56%), Type 2 in two patients (33%) and Type 3 in one patient (11%). The overall survival was 89% as one patient with associated Epidermolysis Bullosa expired after 4 months due to fulminant sepsis. Three patients were lost to follow up and amongst the remaining five; the median follow up period is 36 months.

CONCLUSION

CPA is a rare entity that may present late with subtle signs like failure to thrive and nonbilious vomit. A high index of suspicion is mandated in these cases and an Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy will help in early diagnosis and avoid further unnecessary investigations. A feeding jejunostomy may benefit malnourished sick children before definitive surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 3, Type of study: Retrospective study.

Laparoscopic T-tube feeding jejunostomy as an adjunct to staging laparoscopy for upper gastrointestinal malignancies: the technique and review of outcomes

Background

In recent years, staging laparoscopy has gained acceptance as part of the assessment of resectability of upper gastrointestinal (UGI) malignancies. Not infrequently, we encounter tumours that are either locally advanced; requiring neoadjuvant therapy or occult peritoneal disease that requires palliation. In all these cases, the establishment of enteral feeding during staging laparoscopy is important for patients’ nutrition. This review describes our technique of performing laparoscopic feeding jejunostomy and the clinical outcomes.

Methods

The medical records of all patients who underwent laparoscopic feeding jejunostomy following staging laparoscopy for UGI malignancies between January 2010 and July 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. The data included patient demographics, operative technique and clinical outcomes.

Results

Fifteen patients (11 males) had feeding jejunostomy done when staging laparoscopy showed unresectable UGI maligancy. Eight (53.3%) had gastric carcinoma, four (26.7%) had oesophageal carcinoma and three (20%) had cardio-oesophageal junction carcinoma. The mean age was 63.3 ± 7.3 years. Mean operative time was 66.0 ± 7.4 min. Mean postoperative stay was 5.6 ± 2.2 days. Laparoscopic feeding jejunostomy was performed without intra-operative complications. There were no major complications requiring reoperation but four patients had excoriation at the T-tube site and three patients had tube dislodgement which required bedside replacement of the feeding tube. The mean duration of feeding tube was 127.3 ± 99.6 days.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic feeding jejunostomy is an important adjunct to staging laparoscopy that can be performed safely with low morbidity. Meticulous attention to surgical techniques is the cornerstone of success.

Critical analysis of feeding jejunostomy following resection of upper gastrointestinal malignancies

AIM

To assess nutritional recovery, particularly regarding feeding jejunostomy tube (FJT) utilization, following upper gastrointestinal resection for malignancy.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of a prospectively-maintained database of adult patients who underwent esophagectomy or gastrectomy (subtotal or total) for cancer with curative intent, from January 2001 to June 2014. Patient demographics, the approach to esophagectomy, the extent of gastrectomy, FJT placement and utilization at discharge, administration of parenteral nutrition (PN), and complications were evaluated. All patients were followed for at least ninety days or until death.

RESULTS

The 287 patients underwent upper GI resection, comprised of 182 esophagectomy (n = 107 transhiatal, 58.7%; n = 56 Ivor-Lewis, 30.7%) and 105 gastrectomy [n = 63 subtotal (SG), 60.0%; n = 42 total (TG), 40.0%]. 181 of 182 esophagectomy patients underwent FJT, compared with 47 of 105 gastrectomy patients (99.5% vs 44.8%, P < 0.0001), of whom most had undergone TG (n = 39, 92.9% vs n = 8 SG, 12.9%, P < 0.0001). Median length of stay was similar between esophagectomy and gastrectomy groups (14.7 d vs 17.1 d, P = 0.076). Upon discharge, 87 esophagectomy patients (48.1%) were taking enteral feeds, with 53 (29.3%) fully and 34 (18.8%) partially dependent. Meanwhile, 20 of 39 TG patients (51.3%) were either fully (n = 3, 7.7%) or partially (n = 17, 43.6%) dependent on tube feeds, compared with 5 of 8 SG patients (10.6%), all of whom were partially dependent. Gastrectomy patients were significantly less likely to be fully dependent on tube feeds at discharge compared to esophagectomy patients (6.4% vs 29.3%, P = 0.0006). PN was administered despite FJT placement more often following gastrectomy than esophagectomy (n = 11, 23.4% vs n = 7, 3.9%, P = 0.0001). FJT-specific complications requiring reoperation within 30 d of resection occurred more commonly in the gastrectomy group (n = 6), all after TG, compared to 1 esophagectomy patient (12.8% vs 0.6%, P = 0.0003). Six of 7 patients (85.7%) who experienced tube-related complications required PN.

CONCLUSION

Nutritional recovery following esophagectomy and gastrectomy is distinct. Operations are associated with unique complication profiles. Nutritional supplementation alternative to jejunostomy should be considered in particular scenarios.

Intussusception: a Rare Complication After Feeding Jejunostomy; a Case Report

Feeding jejunostomy (FJ) is a commonly done surgical procedure for enteral nutrition. Intussusception is one of the rare complications of FJ. Clinical presentation may be similar to other causes of small bowel obstruction. Intussusception should be suspected if a patient with jejunostomy tube develops upper gastrointestinal obstructive symptoms, which are relieved by nasogastric tube drainage. CT or ultrasonography (USG) can help to confirm the diagnosis. It can be relieved spontaneously or sometimes requires laparotomy. We have encountered such complication in one patient. The patient developed intestinal obstruction after removal of FJ tube and was diagnosed as having intussusception radiologically. On exploration, intussusception was identified at FJ site for which surgical reduction was done.

Study of Feeding Jejunostomy as an Add on Procedure in Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeries

Jejunostomy is usually indicated as an additional procedure during major surgery of upper digestive tract to administer enteral nutrition in post-operative period. Complications associated with it can be mechanical, infectious, gastrointestinal or metabolic. The aim of the study was to evaluate safety of post-operative feeding jejunostomy in different types of major upper gastrointestinal surgeries. It was a prospective study conducted during the period between August 2009 and September 2011. Post-operative cases of major upper gastrointestinal surgeries who receive jejunostomy feeds were included in the study. Sampling was done by convenient method with sample size of 50 cases. Post-operatively, patients were monitored according to standard orders of enteral nutrition. Total calorie and protein intake through feeding jejunostomy was calculated regularly, and complications were assessed in terms of frequency, type, duration, management, and final outcome in different types of upper gastro intestinal surgeries. Analysis was done using chi square test with the help of statistical package SPSS vers.13. P < 0.05 was considered as significant. Complications observed were gastrointestinal -8 (16 %), mechanical -6 (12 %), infectious -4 (8 %) and metabolic -4 (8 %). Duration of complications ranged from 1 to 7 days (mean, 4 days). All types of complications observed during study were less severe and could be managed by simple measurements. Haemoglobin, serum albumin and weight of the patient at the time of discharge were improved for all patients when compared to pre-operative values. All patients received target calories and proteins through feeding jejunostomy. Considering benefits of enteral feeding via jejunostomy tube with minor and acceptable complications, we conclude that feeding jejunostomy is a preferred route of nutritional administration in those who undergo major upper gastro intestinal surgeries.

Outcomes of laparoscopic feeding jejunostomy tube placement in 299 patients

BACKGROUND

Jejunostomy catheters for jejunal feeding are an effective method to improve nutritional status in malnourish patients. However, this procedure is commonly being performed using an open approach, which can be associated with more postoperative pain and prolonged recovery. The objective of this study was to assess the outcomes of patients who underwent placement of feeding jejunostomy using a laparoscopic approach.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of patients who underwent laparoscopic jejunostomy tube placement between 1998 and 2014. Main outcome measures included indication for catheter placement, rate of conversion rate to open surgery, perioperative and late morbidity and in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

Two hundred and ninety-nine consecutive patients underwent laparoscopic jejunostomy during the study period. The mean age was 64 years, and 81% of patients were male. The mean BMI was 26.2 kg/m(2). The most common indications for catheter placement were resectable esophageal cancer (78%), unresectable esophageal cancer (10%) and gastric cancer (6%). There were no conversions to open surgery. The 30-day complication rate was 4.0% and included catheter dislodgement (1%), intraperitoneal catheter displacement (0.7%), catheter blockage (1%) or breakage (0.3%), site infection requiring catheter removal (0.7%) and abdominal wall hematoma (0.3%). The late complication rate was 8.7% and included jejuno-cutaneous fistula (3.7%), jejunostomy tube dislodgement (3.3%), broken or clogged J-tube (1.3%) and small bowel obstruction (0.3%). The 30-day mortality was 0.3% for a patient with stage IV esophageal cancer who died in the postoperative period secondary to respiratory failure.

CONCLUSION

In this large consecutive series of feeding jejunostomy, the laparoscopic approach is feasible and safe and associated with a low rate of small bowel obstruction and no intraabdominal catheter-related infection.

Combined gastric and duodenal perforation through blunt abdominal trauma

Blunt abdominal traumas are uncommonly encountered despite their high prevalence, and injuries to the organ like duodenum are relatively uncommon (occurring in only 3%-5% of abdominal injuries) because of its retroperitoneal location. Duodenal injury combined with gastric perforation from a single abdominal trauma impact is rarely heard. The aim of this case report is to present a rare case of blunt abdominal trauma with combined gastric and duodenal injuries.

Successful Treatment of Septic Shock due to Spontaneous Esophageal Perforation 96 Hours after Onset by Drainage and Enteral Nutrition

Spontaneous esophageal perforation is relatively uncommon, but carries a high mortality rate if diagnosis or treatment is delayed. We report the case of a 68-year-old man with spontaneous esophageal perforation who was successfully treated over 96 h after onset by thoracic drainage and jejunostomy for enteral nutrition. He vomited after drinking alcohol, soon followed by epigastralgia. Heart failure was suspected on admission to another hospital. Spontaneous esophageal perforation was diagnosed 48 h after admission. Chest tube drainage was performed, but his general condition deteriorated and he was transferred to our hospital. Emergent surgery was performed and esophageal perforation combined with pyothorax and mediastinitis was identified on the left side of the lower esophagus. The left thoracic cavity was rinsed and thoracic drainage was performed. Feeding jejunostomy was performed for postoperative enteral nutrition. Effective drainage and sufficient nutrition management appear extremely valuable in treating spontaneous esophageal perforation.

Feeding jejunostomy during Whipple is associated with increased morbidity

BACKGROUND

Placement of a feeding jejunostomy tube (FJ) is often performed during pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). Few studies, however, have sought to determine whether such placement affects postoperative outcomes after PD.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database to determine the 30-d-postoperative mortality rate, major complication rate, and overall complication rate of jejunostomy tube placement at the time of PD. Univariate and multivariate comparison of postoperative outcomes between patients with and without FJ placement during PD was performed on a total of 4930 patients.

RESULTS

Thirty-day-postoperative mortality did not differ between the two groups (4.0% for patients with FJ versus 2.7% without, P = 0.13), whereas overall morbidity (43.3% with FJ versus 34.6% without, P < 0.0001) and serious morbidity (29.5% with FJ versus 22.8% without, P < 0.0001) were significantly higher in patients undergoing FJ placement during PD. The specific complications that occurred more frequently in FJ patients than patients without FJ included deep space surgical site infection, pneumonia, unplanned reintubation, acute renal failure, and sepsis.

CONCLUSION

Although FJ placement during PD is considered to be routine at many institutions, our analysis of data from NSQIP suggest that FJ placement may be associated with increased postoperative morbidity.