Tube feeding in patients with head and neck cancer undergoing chemoradiotherapy: A systematic review
- PMID: 35244947
- DOI: 10.1002/jpen.2360
Tube feeding in patients with head and neck cancer undergoing chemoradiotherapy: A systematic review
Abstract
Patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) are frequently malnourished at the time of diagnosis and before beginning treatment. In addition, chemoradiotherapy causes or exacerbates symptoms such as alteration or loss of taste, mucositis, xerostomia, fatigue, nausea, and vomiting, with consequent worsening of malnutrition. If obstructing cancer and/or mucositis interferes with swallowing, enteral nutrition should be delivered by a nasogastric tube (NGT) or percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG). To review studies comparing NGT's and PEG's nutrition outcomes, survival, hospitalizations, radiotherapy interruptions, quality of life, and swallowing function. Two hundred fifty publications were identified via electronic databases. 26 manuscripts that met the inclusion criteria were included for analysis. We divided the analysis in two sections: (1) comparison of enteral nutrition through NGT or PEG and (2) comparison of reactive PEG (R-PEG) and prophylactic PEG (P-PEG). They have comparable nutrition outcomes, number of radiotherapy interruptions, survival, and quality of life, whereas swallow function seems better with NGT. PEG may be associated with major complications such as exit-site infection, malfunction, leakage, pain, pulmonary infection, and higher costs. Nevertheless, NGTs dislodged more often; patients find NGTs more inconvenient; NGTs may cause aspiration pneumonia; P-PEG and R-PEG have similar nutrition outcomes, number of radiotherapy interruptions, and survival. PEG does not have better nutrition, oncologic, and quality-of-life outcomes than NGT. Prophylactic feeding through NGT or PEG, compared with reactive feeding, does not offer significant advantages in nutrition outcomes, radiotherapy interruptions, and survival. However, the number of prospective randomized studies on this topic is limited; consequently, definitive conclusions cannot be drawn. Further adequate, prospective randomized studies are needed.
Keywords: chemoradiotherapy; enteral nutrition; gastrostomy; head and neck cancer; malnutrition; nasogastric tube; nutrition; prophylactic; reactive; tube feeding.
© 2022 American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition.
References
REFERENCES
-
- Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(6):394-424. doi:10.3322/caac.21492
-
- Chow LQM. Head and neck cancer. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(1):60-72. doi:10.1056/NEJMra1715715
-
- Ferrão B, Neves PM, Santos T, Capelas ML, Mäkitie A, Ravasco P. Body composition changes in patients with head and neck cancer under active treatment: a scoping review. Support Care Cancer. 2020;28(10):4613-4625. doi:10.1007/s00520-020-05487-w
-
- Bossola M. Nutritional interventions in head and neck cancer patients undergoing chemoradiotherapy: a narrative review. Nutrients. 2015;7(1):265-276. doi:10.3390/nu7010265
-
- Mello AT, Borges DS, de Lima LP, Pessini J, Kammer PV, Trindade EBSM. Effect of oral nutritional supplements with or without nutritional counselling on mortality, treatment tolerance and quality of life in head-and-neck cancer patients receiving (chemo)radiotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Nutr. 2021;125(5):530-547. doi:10.1017/S0007114520002329
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous
