Risk Factors for Failure of Direct Oral Feeding Following a Totally Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy
- PMID: 34684617
- PMCID: PMC8539606
- DOI: 10.3390/nu13103616
Risk Factors for Failure of Direct Oral Feeding Following a Totally Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy
Abstract
Recently, it has been shown that directly starting oral feeding (DOF) from postoperative day one (POD1) after a totally minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy (MIE-IL) can further improve postoperative outcomes. However, in some patients, tube feeding by a preemptively placed jejunostomy is necessary. This single-center cohort study investigated risk factors associated with failure of DOF in patients that underwent a MIE-IL between October 2015 and April 2021. A total of 165 patients underwent a MIE-IL, in which DOF was implemented in the enhanced recovery after surgery program. Of these, 70.3% (n = 116) successfully followed the nutritional protocol. In patients in which tube feeding was needed (29.7%; n = 49), female sex (compared to male) (OR 3.5 (95% CI 1.5-8.1)) and higher ASA scores (III + IV versus II) (OR 2.2 (95% CI 1.0-4.8)) were independently associated with failure of DOF for any cause. In case of failure, this was either due to a postoperative complication (n = 31, 18.8%) or insufficient caloric intake on POD5 (n = 18, 10.9%). In the subgroup of patients with complications, higher ASA scores (OR 2.8 (95% CI 1.2-6.8)) and histological subtypes (squamous-cell carcinoma versus adenocarcinoma and undifferentiated) (OR 5.2 (95% CI 1.8-15.1)) were identified as independent risk factors. In the subgroup of patients with insufficient caloric intake, female sex was identified as a risk factor (OR 5.8 (95% CI 2.0-16.8)). Jejunostomy-related complications occurred in 17 patients (10.3%). In patients with preoperative risk factors, preemptively placing a jejunostomy may be considered to ensure that nutritional goals are met.
Keywords: enhanced recovery after surgery; esophageal cancer; jejunostomy; minimally invasive esophagectomy; nutrition.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.
References
-
- Voeten D.M., den Bakker C.M., Heineman D.J., Ket J.C.F., Daams F., van der Peet D.L. Definitive Chemoradiotherapy Versus Trimodality Therapy for Resectable Oesophageal Carcinoma: Meta-analyses and Systematic Review of Literature. World J. Surg. 2019;43:1271–1285. doi: 10.1007/s00268-018-04901-z. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Wang J., Qin J., Jing S., Liu Q., Cheng Y., Wang Y., Cao F. Clinical complete response after chemoradiotherapy for carcinoma of thoracic esophagus: Is esophagectomy always necessary? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Thorac. Cancer. 2018;9:1638–1647. doi: 10.1111/1759-7714.12874. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Gottlieb-Vedi E., Kauppila J.H., Malietzis G., Nilsson M., Markar S.R., Lagergren J. Long-term Survival in Esophageal Cancer After Minimally Invasive Compared to Open Esophagectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Ann. Surg. 2019;270:1005–1017. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003252. - DOI - PubMed
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous
