The role of early oral feeding in improving surgical recovery after esophagectomy

The feeding route after an esophagectomy was systematically reviewed in Chapter 2. The majority of patients were scheduled for a nil-by-mouth period for 1 week after surgery and received enteral feeding through a jejunostomy or nasojejunal tube. Minor jejunostomy related complications occurred frequently. Major complications were rarely described to be related to the jejunostomy use. The use of nasojejunal tubes showed no reported major complications. However, this route was described to dislocate frequently. Nasogastric decompression and nil-by-mouth regimes are thought to decrease the incidence of these complications. In Chapter 3 a systematic review with meta-analysis was presented studying nasogastric decompression specifically for patients after an esophagectomy. No difference in the incidence of anastomotic leakage, pneumonia, or mortality was observed for patients after esophageal surgery. Patients without nasogastric decompression even had a shorter length of stay. Based on these results, routine nasogastric decompression is not advised to be standard for patients after an esophagectomy. In Chapter 4 a narrative review was presented, documenting all feeding protocols known for patients after an esophagectomy. In Chapter 5, the adherence to postoperative enteral tube feeding protocol in 186 patients receiving esophagectomy was described in a retrospective study. More than half of these patients deviated from the feeding protocol. Main reason for deviation was a postoperative complication that dictated changes in feeding regime, such as anastomotic leakage or chyle leakage. No preoperative risk factors were observed that interfered with the postoperative feeding protocol, concluding that postoperative complications dictate the feeding protocol and not the other way around. The next study addresses the feasibility and safety of direct start of oral intake of patients receiving a minimal invasive esophagectomy (Chapter 6). Patients that received oral feeding directly after surgery had a complication rate comparable to patients receiving enteral tube feeding, showing that direct oral intake following esophagectomy is feasible and safe. In Chapter 7, long-term weight loss following esophagectomy was investigated in a retrospective cohort study. Patients receiving direct oral feeding lost more weight in the first month after surgery compared to patients with enteral tube feeding. In the next 2 months, patients in the enteral tube feeding group lost more weight than patient with an initial oral feeding schedule. In the last chapter a randomized controlled trial was presented Patients were randomly allocated to a “direct oral feeding group” or the “standard of care group”. In the standard of care group patients received five days enteral tube feeding via a surgically placed jejunostomy tube. Functional recovery was reached after a median of 7 days in the direct oral feeding group and after a median of 8 days in the control group. This reduction in time to functional recovery was not significant. Furthermore, the incidence and severity of postoperative complications did not differ between both groups. Importantly, early oral feeding did not result in more anastomotic leakage or (aspiration) pneumonia. The lower caloric intake by patients did not result in more weight loss in the first 3 months after surgery

Routes for early enteral nutrition after esophagectomy : A systematic review

BACKGROUND: Early enteral feeding following surgery can be given orally, via a jejunostomy or via a nasojejunal tube. However, the best feeding route following esophagectomy is unclear. OBJECTIVES: To determine the best route for enteral nutrition following esophagectomy regarding anastomotic leakage, pneumonia, percentage meeting the nutritional requirements, weight loss, complications of tube feeding, mortality, patient satisfaction and length of hospital stay. DESIGN: A systematic literature review following PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. RESULTS: There were 17 eligible studies on early oral intake, jejunostomy or nasojejunal tube feeding. Only one nonrandomized study (N = 133) investigated early oral feeding specifically following esophagectomy. Early oral feeding was associated with a reduced length of stay with delayed oral feeding, without increased complication rates. Postoperative nasojejunal tube feeding was not significantly different from jejunostomy tube feeding regarding complications or catheter efficacy in the only randomised trial on this subject (N = 150). Jejunostomy tube feeding outcome was reported in 12 non-comparative studies (N = 3293). It was effective in meeting short-term nutritional requirements, but major tube-related complications necessitated relaparotomy in 0-2.9% of patients. In three non-comparative studies (N = 135) on nasojejunal tube feeding only minor complications were reported, data on nutritional outcome was lacking. Data on patient satisfaction and long-term nutritional outcome were not found for any of the feeding routes investigated. CONCLUSION: It is unclear what the best route for early enteral nutrition is after esophagectomy. Especially data regarding early oral intake are scarce, and phase 2 trials are needed for further investigation. REGISTRATION: International prospective register of systematic reviews, CRD42013004032

Feeding protocol deviation after esophagectomy : A retrospective multicenter study

BACKGROUND: Esophagectomy is associated with high postoperative morbidity rates, which can result in decreased quality of life and impaired recovery. Implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols have made a great impact in optimizing postoperative recovery. However, the best timing to start oral intake is still unclear. Conservative feeding protocols have been developed with a nil-by-mouth period in the first postoperative days to reduce postoperative complication rates (e.g. anastomotic leakage and pneumonia). This study aimed to evaluate adherence to the feeding protocol following minimal invasive esophagectomy and identify reasons for protocol deviation. METHODS: All consecutive patients who underwent an esophagectomy with gastric tube reconstruction between 2014 and 2016 in two high-volume hospitals in the Netherlands were retrospectively analyzed. All patients were planned to receive enteral tube feeding via jejunostomy directly after surgery. Data regarding postoperative feeding related symptoms (e.g. nausea, vomiting, regurgitation) and adherence to the postoperative feeding protocol were gathered. RESULTS: A total of 186 patients were included. Feeding protocol deviation was observed in 109 patients (59%) and was significantly more common in patients with anastomotic leakage, chyle leakage, and acute respiratory distress. Postoperative feeding related symptoms were present in 107 patients (58%) and were significantly more common in female patients and patients with a cervical anastomosis. CONCLUSION: In this study, more than half of the patients deviated from the intended feeding protocol after esophagectomy. Postoperative complications appeared to be the main reason for feeding protocol deviation. This study shows that a predefined feeding protocol including an oral fasting period is often violated because of complications

Feeding protocol deviation after esophagectomy : A retrospective multicenter study

BACKGROUND: Esophagectomy is associated with high postoperative morbidity rates, which can result in decreased quality of life and impaired recovery. Implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols have made a great impact in optimizing postoperative recovery. However, the best timing to start oral intake is still unclear. Conservative feeding protocols have been developed with a nil-by-mouth period in the first postoperative days to reduce postoperative complication rates (e.g. anastomotic leakage and pneumonia). This study aimed to evaluate adherence to the feeding protocol following minimal invasive esophagectomy and identify reasons for protocol deviation. METHODS: All consecutive patients who underwent an esophagectomy with gastric tube reconstruction between 2014 and 2016 in two high-volume hospitals in the Netherlands were retrospectively analyzed. All patients were planned to receive enteral tube feeding via jejunostomy directly after surgery. Data regarding postoperative feeding related symptoms (e.g. nausea, vomiting, regurgitation) and adherence to the postoperative feeding protocol were gathered. RESULTS: A total of 186 patients were included. Feeding protocol deviation was observed in 109 patients (59%) and was significantly more common in patients with anastomotic leakage, chyle leakage, and acute respiratory distress. Postoperative feeding related symptoms were present in 107 patients (58%) and were significantly more common in female patients and patients with a cervical anastomosis. CONCLUSION: In this study, more than half of the patients deviated from the intended feeding protocol after esophagectomy. Postoperative complications appeared to be the main reason for feeding protocol deviation. This study shows that a predefined feeding protocol including an oral fasting period is often violated because of complications

The feeding route after esophagectomy : A review of literature

Enhanced recovery programs effectively optimize perioperative care and reduce postoperative morbidity. In esophagectomy, several components of the ERAS program are successfully introduced. However, timing and type of postoperative feeding remain a matter of debate. Adequate nutritional support is essential in patients undergoing an esophagectomy. These patients often present with weight loss and their eating pattern is strongly altered by the procedure and reconstruction. Total parenteral nutrition (TPN) is associated with severe septic complications and enteral nutrition (EN) does not increase major complications. Therefore, early EN after esophagectomy is favored over TPN. However, with enteral feeding tubes minor complications occur frequently (13-38%) and in some cases this can hamper recovery. Based on experience in other types of upper gastro-intestinal surgery, early start of oral feeding could improve time to functional recovery after surgery. The total length of stay was significantly shorter in four prospective studies (6-12 vs. 8-13 days). However, large randomized controlled trials are lacking and the potential benefit of early oral feeding after esophageal surgery remains elusive. EN is nowadays the optimal feeding route after esophagectomy. TPN should only be used in specific cases in which EN is contraindicated. Early initiation of oral intake is promising and could improve postoperative recovery. However, further research is needed to substantiate these results

The feeding route after esophagectomy : A review of literature

Enhanced recovery programs effectively optimize perioperative care and reduce postoperative morbidity. In esophagectomy, several components of the ERAS program are successfully introduced. However, timing and type of postoperative feeding remain a matter of debate. Adequate nutritional support is essential in patients undergoing an esophagectomy. These patients often present with weight loss and their eating pattern is strongly altered by the procedure and reconstruction. Total parenteral nutrition (TPN) is associated with severe septic complications and enteral nutrition (EN) does not increase major complications. Therefore, early EN after esophagectomy is favored over TPN. However, with enteral feeding tubes minor complications occur frequently (13-38%) and in some cases this can hamper recovery. Based on experience in other types of upper gastro-intestinal surgery, early start of oral feeding could improve time to functional recovery after surgery. The total length of stay was significantly shorter in four prospective studies (6-12 vs. 8-13 days). However, large randomized controlled trials are lacking and the potential benefit of early oral feeding after esophageal surgery remains elusive. EN is nowadays the optimal feeding route after esophagectomy. TPN should only be used in specific cases in which EN is contraindicated. Early initiation of oral intake is promising and could improve postoperative recovery. However, further research is needed to substantiate these results

The long-term effects of early oral feeding following minimal invasive esophagectomy

A nil-by-mouth regime with enteral nutrition via an artificial route is frequently applied following esophagectomy. However, early initiation of oral feeding could potentially improve recovery and has shown to be beneficial in many types of abdominal surgery. Although short-term nutritional safety of oral intake after an esophagectomy has been documented, long-term effects of this feeding regimen are unknown. In this cohort study, data from patients undergoing minimal invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy between 04-2012 and 09-2015 in three centers in Netherlands were collected. Patients in the oral feeding group were retrieved from a previous prospective study and compared with a cohort of patients with early enteral jejunostomy feeding but delayed oral intake. Body mass index (BMI) measurements, complications, and nutritional re-interventions (re- or start of artificial feeding, start of total parenteral nutrition) were gathered over the course of one year after surgery. One year after surgery the median BMI was 22.8 kg/m2 and weight loss was 7.0 kg (9.5%) in 114 patients. Patients in the early oral feeding group lost more weight during the first postoperative month (P = 0.004). However, in the months thereafter this difference was not observed anymore. In the early oral feeding group, 28 patients (56%) required a nutritional re-intervention, compared to 46 patients (72%) in the delayed oral feeding group (P = 0.078). During admission, more re-interventions were performed in the delayed oral feeding group (17 vs. 46 patients P < 0.001). Esophagectomy reduces BMI in the first year after surgery regardless of the feeding regimen. Direct start of oral intake following esophagectomy has no impact on early nutritional re-interventions and long-term weight loss

Immediate Postoperative Oral Nutrition Following Esophagectomy : A Multicenter Clinical Trial

Background Immediate start of oral intake is beneficial following colorectal surgery. However, following esophagectomy the safety and feasibility of immediate oral intake is unclear, thus these patients are still kept nil by mouth. This study therefore aimed to determine the feasibility and safety of oral nutrition immediately after esophagectomy. Methods A multicenter, prospective trial was conducted in 3 referral centers between August 2013 and May 2014, including 50 patients undergoing a minimally invasive esophagectomy. Oral nutrition was started postoperatively immediately (clear liquids on postoperative day [POD] 0, liquid nutrition on POD 1 to 6, solid food from POD 7). Nonoral enteral nutrition was started when <50% of caloric need was met on postoperative day POD 5 or when oral intake was impossible. A comparison was made with a retrospective cohort (n = 50) with a per-protocol delayed start of oral intake until POD 4 to 7. Results The median caloric intake at POD 5 was 58% of required. In 38% of the patients nonoral nutrition was started, mainly due to complications (36%). The pneumonia rate was 28% following immediate oral intake and 40% following delayed oral intake (p = 0.202). The aspiration pneumonia rate was 4% in both groups. The anastomotic leakage rate was 14% after immediate oral intake versus 24% following delayed oral intake (p = 0.202). The 90-day mortality rate was 2% in both groups. Hospital stay and intensive care unit stay were significantly shorter following immediate oral intake. Conclusions Immediate start of oral nutrition following esophagectomy seems to be feasible and does not increase complications compared to a retrospective cohort and literature. However, if complications arise an alternative nutritional route is required. This explorative study shows that a randomized controlled trial is needed

Immediate Postoperative Oral Nutrition Following Esophagectomy : A Multicenter Clinical Trial

Background Immediate start of oral intake is beneficial following colorectal surgery. However, following esophagectomy the safety and feasibility of immediate oral intake is unclear, thus these patients are still kept nil by mouth. This study therefore aimed to determine the feasibility and safety of oral nutrition immediately after esophagectomy. Methods A multicenter, prospective trial was conducted in 3 referral centers between August 2013 and May 2014, including 50 patients undergoing a minimally invasive esophagectomy. Oral nutrition was started postoperatively immediately (clear liquids on postoperative day [POD] 0, liquid nutrition on POD 1 to 6, solid food from POD 7). Nonoral enteral nutrition was started when <50% of caloric need was met on postoperative day POD 5 or when oral intake was impossible. A comparison was made with a retrospective cohort (n = 50) with a per-protocol delayed start of oral intake until POD 4 to 7. Results The median caloric intake at POD 5 was 58% of required. In 38% of the patients nonoral nutrition was started, mainly due to complications (36%). The pneumonia rate was 28% following immediate oral intake and 40% following delayed oral intake (p = 0.202). The aspiration pneumonia rate was 4% in both groups. The anastomotic leakage rate was 14% after immediate oral intake versus 24% following delayed oral intake (p = 0.202). The 90-day mortality rate was 2% in both groups. Hospital stay and intensive care unit stay were significantly shorter following immediate oral intake. Conclusions Immediate start of oral nutrition following esophagectomy seems to be feasible and does not increase complications compared to a retrospective cohort and literature. However, if complications arise an alternative nutritional route is required. This explorative study shows that a randomized controlled trial is needed

Learning Curve and Associated Morbidity of Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: A Retrospective Multicenter Study

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the morbidity that is associated with the learning curve of minimally invasive esophagectomy. BACKGROUND: Although learning curves have been described, it is currently unknown how much extra morbidity is associated with the learning curve of technically challenging surgical procedures. METHODS: Prospectively collected data were retrospectively analyzed of all consecutive patients undergoing minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy in 4 European expert centers. The primary outcome parameter was anastomotic leakage. Secondary outcome parameters were operative time and textbook outcome ("optimal outcome"). Learning curves were plotted using weighted moving average and CUSUM analysis was used to determine after how many cases the plateau was reached. Learning associated morbidity was calculated with area under the curve analysis. RESULTS: This study included 646 patients. Three of the 4 hospitals reached the plateau of 8% anastomotic leakage. The length of the learning curve was 119 cases. The mean incidence of anastomotic leakage decreased from 18.8% during the learning phase to 4.5% after the plateau had been reached (P < 0.001). Thirty-six extra patients (10.1% of all patients operated on during the learning curve) experienced learning associated anastomotic leakage, that could have been avoided if patients were operated by surgeons who had completed the learning curve. The incidence of textbook outcome increased from 28% to 53% and the mean operative time decreased from 344 minutes to 270 minutes. CONCLUSIONS: A considerable number of 36 extra patients (10.1%) experienced learning associated anastomotic leakage. More research is urgently needed to investigate how learning associated morbidity can be reduced to increase patient safety during learning curves