Jejunostomy feeding plus oral feeding versus intravenous nutrition plus oral feeding after esophageal cancer resection: a comparative retrospective cohort study.

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q3 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM Journal of thoracic disease Pub Date : 2024-07-30 Epub Date: 2024-06-21 DOI:10.21037/jtd-24-657
Maoxiu Yuan, Hai Zhang, Mingchao Wei, Caiyun Lan, Zhenyang Zhang, Ling Huang, Jianzhong Zhou, Haiquan He, Kazuo Koyanagi, Qingyi Feng, Jiangbo Lin
{"title":"Jejunostomy feeding plus oral feeding versus intravenous nutrition plus oral feeding after esophageal cancer resection: a comparative retrospective cohort study.","authors":"Maoxiu Yuan, Hai Zhang, Mingchao Wei, Caiyun Lan, Zhenyang Zhang, Ling Huang, Jianzhong Zhou, Haiquan He, Kazuo Koyanagi, Qingyi Feng, Jiangbo Lin","doi":"10.21037/jtd-24-657","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There are multiple choices for the nutritional management mode after esophageal cancer surgery. Currently, there is still controversy regarding which nutritional management mode has an impact on the postoperative recovery and overall survival (OS) of patients. This study aims to compare the differences between two commonly used clinical nutritional management modes: jejunostomy feeding plus oral intake (JF plus OI) and intravenous nutrition plus oral intake (IN plus OI), in terms of short-term efficacy and 3-year OS, in order to further explore the optimal mode of enteral nutrition management after esophageal cancer surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We evaluated esophageal cancer patients who underwent radical surgery at Union Hospital of Fujian Medical University between January 1, 2010 and January 1, 2020. The purpose of this analysis was to compare the perioperative complications, Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS2002) nutritional scores at 1 week, 2 weeks, 1 month, and 3 months after surgery, as well as the 3-year OS rates, between two different nutritional management approaches: JF plus OI and IN plus OI following esophageal cancer surgery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the 822 patients included, 668 and 154 patients belonged to JF plus OI and IN plus OI groups, respectively. After propensity score matching, 149 patients per group were evaluated. The amount of gastric drainage fluid was higher in the IN plus OI group (P<0.05), and the incidence of postoperative gastrointestinal emptying disorder and intestinal obstruction was significantly higher in the JF plus OI group (P<0.05). The IN plus OI group had a higher incidence of perioperative hypoproteinemia (P<0.05), and a higher risk of malnutrition in 2 weeks after surgery (P<0.05). The 3-year OS was not significantly different (P>0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>JF plus OI may be the preferable nutritional management approach after esophageal cancer resection as it can potentially reduce perioperative nutritional deficiency. However, attention should be paid to the risk of gastrointestinal emptying and intestinal obstruction associated with JF.</p>","PeriodicalId":17542,"journal":{"name":"Journal of thoracic disease","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11320242/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of thoracic disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/jtd-24-657","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: There are multiple choices for the nutritional management mode after esophageal cancer surgery. Currently, there is still controversy regarding which nutritional management mode has an impact on the postoperative recovery and overall survival (OS) of patients. This study aims to compare the differences between two commonly used clinical nutritional management modes: jejunostomy feeding plus oral intake (JF plus OI) and intravenous nutrition plus oral intake (IN plus OI), in terms of short-term efficacy and 3-year OS, in order to further explore the optimal mode of enteral nutrition management after esophageal cancer surgery.

Methods: We evaluated esophageal cancer patients who underwent radical surgery at Union Hospital of Fujian Medical University between January 1, 2010 and January 1, 2020. The purpose of this analysis was to compare the perioperative complications, Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS2002) nutritional scores at 1 week, 2 weeks, 1 month, and 3 months after surgery, as well as the 3-year OS rates, between two different nutritional management approaches: JF plus OI and IN plus OI following esophageal cancer surgery.

Results: Among the 822 patients included, 668 and 154 patients belonged to JF plus OI and IN plus OI groups, respectively. After propensity score matching, 149 patients per group were evaluated. The amount of gastric drainage fluid was higher in the IN plus OI group (P<0.05), and the incidence of postoperative gastrointestinal emptying disorder and intestinal obstruction was significantly higher in the JF plus OI group (P<0.05). The IN plus OI group had a higher incidence of perioperative hypoproteinemia (P<0.05), and a higher risk of malnutrition in 2 weeks after surgery (P<0.05). The 3-year OS was not significantly different (P>0.05).

Conclusions: JF plus OI may be the preferable nutritional management approach after esophageal cancer resection as it can potentially reduce perioperative nutritional deficiency. However, attention should be paid to the risk of gastrointestinal emptying and intestinal obstruction associated with JF.

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
食管癌切除术后空肠造口术加口服喂养与静脉营养加口服喂养的比较:一项回顾性队列研究。
背景:食管癌术后的营养管理模式有多种选择。目前,关于哪种营养管理模式会影响患者的术后恢复和总生存率(OS)仍存在争议。本研究旨在比较空肠造口喂养加口服(JF 加 OI)和静脉营养加口服(IN 加 OI)两种临床常用营养管理模式在短期疗效和 3 年 OS 方面的差异,以进一步探讨食管癌术后肠内营养管理的最佳模式:我们对 2010 年 1 月 1 日至 2020 年 1 月 1 日期间在福建医科大学附属协和医院接受根治术的食管癌患者进行了评估。分析的目的是比较两种不同营养管理方法的围手术期并发症、术后 1 周、2 周、1 个月和 3 个月的营养风险筛查 2002(NRS2002)营养评分以及 3 年 OS 率:结果:在纳入的 822 例患者中,分别有 668 例和 154 例患者属于 JF 加 OI 组和 IN 加 OI 组。经过倾向评分匹配后,每组有 149 名患者接受了评估。IN加OI组的胃引流液量更高(P0.05):结论:JF 加 OI 可能是食管癌切除术后较好的营养管理方法,因为它有可能减少围手术期的营养缺乏。然而,应注意与 JF 相关的胃肠道排空和肠梗阻风险。
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
Journal of thoracic disease
Journal of thoracic disease RESPIRATORY SYSTEM-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
4.00%
发文量
254
期刊介绍: The Journal of Thoracic Disease (JTD, J Thorac Dis, pISSN: 2072-1439; eISSN: 2077-6624) was founded in Dec 2009, and indexed in PubMed in Dec 2011 and Science Citation Index SCI in Feb 2013. It is published quarterly (Dec 2009- Dec 2011), bimonthly (Jan 2012 - Dec 2013), monthly (Jan. 2014-) and openly distributed worldwide. JTD received its impact factor of 2.365 for the year 2016. JTD publishes manuscripts that describe new findings and provide current, practical information on the diagnosis and treatment of conditions related to thoracic disease. All the submission and reviewing are conducted electronically so that rapid review is assured.
期刊最新文献
A prediction model based on computed tomography characteristics for identifying malignant from benign sub-centimeter solid pulmonary nodules. Acute exacerbation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis a narrative review primary focus on treatments. Bronchoscopic holmium laser ablation continuous cryoablation for the treatment of airway stenosis caused by tissue hyperplasia after tracheal intubation: clinical case observation. Can the rest of the world replicate excellent segmentectomy outcomes with lower volume thoracic surgeons? Chest wall resections for non-small cell lung cancer: a literature review.
×
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