Xinhua Zhu1, Yafu Wu1, Yudong Qiu1, Chunping Jiang1, Yitao Ding2. 1. Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Affiliated Drum Tower Hospital, Medical School of Nanjing University, Nanjing, China. 2. Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Affiliated Drum Tower Hospital, Medical School of Nanjing University, Nanjing, China drzhuxh@hotmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The efficacy and feeding-related complications of a nasojejunal feeding tube and jejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) was investigated with a randomized, controlled clinical trial at the Affiliated Drum Tower Hospital. METHODS:Sixty-eight patients who underwent PD in the Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery were randomly divided into 2 groups: 34 patients received enteral feeding via a nasojejunal tube (NJT group) and 34 patients received enteral feeding via a jejunostomy tube (JT group). The assessment of clinical outcome was based on postoperative investigation of complications. The second part of the assessment included tube related complications and an index on catheter efficiency. RESULTS: There were 15 cases with infectious complications in the JT group and 13 cases in the NJT group, and there was no significant difference in the rate of infectious complications between the 2 groups. The rate of intestinal obstruction and delayed gastric emptying was significantly decreased in the NJT group (P < .05). Catheter-related complications were more common in the JT group as compared with the NJT group (35.3% vs 20.6%, P < .05). The time for removal of the feeding tube and nasogastric tube was significantly decreased in the NJT group. The postoperative hospital stay in the NJT group was significantly decreased (P < .05), and there was no hospital mortality in this study. CONCLUSION:Nasojejunal feeding is safer than jejunostomy, and it is associated with only minor complications. Nasojejunal feeding can significantly decrease the incidence of delayed gastric emptying and shorten the postoperative hospital stay.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The efficacy and feeding-related complications of a nasojejunal feeding tube and jejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) was investigated with a randomized, controlled clinical trial at the Affiliated Drum Tower Hospital. METHODS: Sixty-eight patients who underwent PD in the Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery were randomly divided into 2 groups: 34 patients received enteral feeding via a nasojejunal tube (NJT group) and 34 patients received enteral feeding via a jejunostomy tube (JT group). The assessment of clinical outcome was based on postoperative investigation of complications. The second part of the assessment included tube related complications and an index on catheter efficiency. RESULTS: There were 15 cases with infectious complications in the JT group and 13 cases in the NJT group, and there was no significant difference in the rate of infectious complications between the 2 groups. The rate of intestinal obstruction and delayed gastric emptying was significantly decreased in the NJT group (P < .05). Catheter-related complications were more common in the JT group as compared with the NJT group (35.3% vs 20.6%, P < .05). The time for removal of the feeding tube and nasogastric tube was significantly decreased in the NJT group. The postoperative hospital stay in the NJT group was significantly decreased (P < .05), and there was no hospital mortality in this study. CONCLUSION: Nasojejunal feeding is safer than jejunostomy, and it is associated with only minor complications. Nasojejunal feeding can significantly decrease the incidence of delayed gastric emptying and shorten the postoperative hospital stay.
Authors: Cheguevara Afaneh; Deborah Gerszberg; Eoin Slattery; David S Seres; John A Chabot; Michael D Kluger Journal: Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr Date: 2015-02 Impact factor: 7.293
Authors: Daniel P Nussbaum; Sabino Zani; Kara Penne; Paul J Speicher; Sandra S Stinnett; Bryan M Clary; Rebekah R White; Douglas S Tyler; Dan G Blazer Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2014-06-25 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Emma C Hamilton; Thomas Curtin; Rebecca S Slack; Christine Ge; Austen D Slade; Andrea Hayes-Jordan; Kevin P Lally; Mary T Austin Journal: J Pediatr Hematol Oncol Date: 2017-10 Impact factor: 1.289