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

Vignesh N, V. Varshney, S. B, S. Soni, P. Varshney, Lokesh Agarwal
{"title":"Impact of nasogastric tube exclusion after minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a single-center retrospective study in India.","authors":"Vignesh N, V. Varshney, S. B, S. Soni, P. Varshney, Lokesh Agarwal","doi":"10.7602/jmis.2024.7.1.23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose\nThis study examines the impacts of omitting nasogastric tube (NGT) placement following cervical esophagogastric anastomosis (CEGA) in Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols, comparing outcomes to those from early NGT removal.\n\n\nMethods\nIn a retrospective cohort of esophagectomy patients treated for esophageal cancer, participants were divided into two groups: group 1 had the NGT inserted post-CEGA and removed by postoperative day 3, while group 2 underwent the procedure without NGT placement. We primarily investigated anastomotic leak rates, also analyzing hospital stay duration, pulmonary complications, and NGT reinsertion.\n\n\nResults\nAmong 50 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients, 30 in group I were compared with 20 in group II. The baseline demographic and tumor characteristics were similar between both groups. The overall incidence of anastomotic leak was 14.0%, comparable in both groups (16.7% vs. 10.0%, p = 0.63). The postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the no NGT group (median of 7 days vs. 6 days, p = 0.03) with similar major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥IIIa; 13.3% vs. 5.0%, p = 0.63). There was no 30-day mortality, and one patient in each group had reinsertion of NGT for conduit dilatation.\n\n\nConclusion\nThe exclusion of an NGT across CEGA after esophagectomy did not influence the anastomotic leak rate with comparable complications and a shorter hospital stay.","PeriodicalId":73832,"journal":{"name":"Journal of minimally invasive surgery","volume":"4 37","pages":"23-32"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of minimally invasive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7602/jmis.2024.7.1.23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose This study examines the impacts of omitting nasogastric tube (NGT) placement following cervical esophagogastric anastomosis (CEGA) in Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols, comparing outcomes to those from early NGT removal. Methods In a retrospective cohort of esophagectomy patients treated for esophageal cancer, participants were divided into two groups: group 1 had the NGT inserted post-CEGA and removed by postoperative day 3, while group 2 underwent the procedure without NGT placement. We primarily investigated anastomotic leak rates, also analyzing hospital stay duration, pulmonary complications, and NGT reinsertion. Results Among 50 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients, 30 in group I were compared with 20 in group II. The baseline demographic and tumor characteristics were similar between both groups. The overall incidence of anastomotic leak was 14.0%, comparable in both groups (16.7% vs. 10.0%, p = 0.63). The postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the no NGT group (median of 7 days vs. 6 days, p = 0.03) with similar major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥IIIa; 13.3% vs. 5.0%, p = 0.63). There was no 30-day mortality, and one patient in each group had reinsertion of NGT for conduit dilatation. Conclusion The exclusion of an NGT across CEGA after esophagectomy did not influence the anastomotic leak rate with comparable complications and a shorter hospital stay.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
食管癌微创食管切除术后排除鼻胃管的影响:印度一项单中心回顾性研究。
目的 本研究探讨了在术后强化恢复(ERAS)方案中,颈段食管胃吻合术(CEGA)后省略鼻胃管(NGT)置入的影响,并将结果与早期拔除鼻胃管的结果进行了比较。方法在食管癌食管切除术患者的回顾性队列中,参与者被分为两组:第一组在 CEGA 术后插入 NGT 并在术后第 3 天移除,而第二组在未插入 NGT 的情况下进行手术。我们主要调查了吻合口漏率,同时还分析了住院时间、肺部并发症和 NGT 重新插入的情况。结果在 50 名食管鳞状细胞癌患者中,第一组 30 人与第二组 20 人进行了比较。两组患者的基线人口统计学特征和肿瘤特征相似。吻合口漏的总发生率为 14.0%,两组相当(16.7% 对 10.0%,P = 0.63)。无 NGT 组的术后住院时间明显更短(中位数为 7 天 vs. 6 天,p = 0.03),主要发病率相似(Clavien-Dindo 分级≥IIIa;13.3% vs. 5.0%,p = 0.63)。结论:食管切除术后排除 NGT 穿过 CEGA 不会影响吻合口漏率,并发症相似,住院时间更短。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Acute peritonitis caused by a ruptured urachal cyst accompanied by omphalitis in an adult: a case report and literature review. Analyzing the emergence of surgical robotics in Africa: a scoping review of pioneering procedures, platforms utilized, and outcome meta-analysis. Assessment of mechanical bowel preparation prior to nephrectomy in the minimally invasive surgery era: insights from a national database analysis in the United States. Automated machine learning with R: AutoML tools for beginners in clinical research. Is prophylactic abdominal drainage mandatory in laparoscopic hemicolectomy?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1