Literature DB >> 28859364

Impact of supplemental home enteral feeding postesophagectomy on nutrition, body composition, quality of life, and patient satisfaction.

C L Donohoe1, L A Healy2, M Fanning2, S L Doyle1,3, A Mc Hugh2, J Moore1, N Ravi1, J V Reynolds1.   

Abstract

The aim of this prospective cohort study is to analyze the impact of supplemental home enteral nutrition (HEN) post-esophageal cancer surgery on nutritional parameters, quality of life (QL), and patient satisfaction. A systematic review reported that over 60% of patients lose >10% of both body weight and BMI by 6 months after esophagectomy. Enteral feeding (EF) is increasingly a modern standard postoperatively; however, the impact of extended HEN postdischarge has not been systematically studied. One hundred forty-nine consecutive patients [mean age 62 ± 9, 80% male,76% adenocarcinoma, 66% on multimodal protocols, and 69% with BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2] were studied. Jejunal EF commenced day 1 postoperatively, and supplemental overnight HEN (764 kcal; 32g protein) continued on discharge for a planned further 4 weeks. Weight, BMI, and body composition analysis (bioimpedance analysis) were measured at baseline, preoperatively and at 1, 3, and 6 months, along with the EORTC QLQ-C30/OES18 QL measures. A patient satisfaction questionnaire addressed eight key items in relation to HEN (max score 100/item). Median (range) total duration of EF was 49 days (28-96). Overall compliance was 96%. At 6 months, compared with preoperatively, 58 (39%) patients lost >10% weight, with median (IQR) loss of 6.8 (4-9) kg, and 62 (41%) patients lost >10% BMI. Lean body mass and body fat were significantly (p < 0.001) decreased. Mean global QL decreased (p < 0.01) from 82 to 72. A high mean satisfaction score (>70 ± 11/100) was reported, >80 for practical training, activities of daily living, pain, anxiety, recovery and impact on caregivers, with lower scores for appetite (33 ± 24) and sleep (63 ± 30). Supplemental HEN for a minimum of one month postdischarge is associated with high compliance and patient satisfaction. Weight and BMI loss may still be substantial, however this may be less than published literature, in addition the impact on HR-QL may be attenuated. HEN has both subjective and objective rationale and merits further validation toward optimizing nutritional recovery and overall wellbeing.
© The Authors 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cancer esophagus; nutrition; surgery

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28859364     DOI: 10.1093/dote/dox063

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dis Esophagus        ISSN: 1120-8694            Impact factor:   3.429


  8 in total

1.  C-reactive protein adjusted for body mass index as a predictor of postoperative complications following laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

Authors:  Kazuaki Matsui; Shinichi Sakuramoto; Hirofumi Sugita; Keiji Nishibeppu; Gen Ebara; Shohei Fujita; Shiro Fujihata; Shuichiro Oya; Yutaka Miyawaki; Hiroshi Sato; Shigeki Yamaguchi; Keishi Yamashita
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2021-05-21       Impact factor: 3.445

2.  CT-derived body composition measurements as predictors for neoadjuvant treatment tolerance and survival in gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Kyle J Lafata; Mustafa R Bashir; Mariana R DeFreitas; Amadu Toronka; Marybeth A Nedrud; Sarah Cubberley; Islam H Zaki; Brandon Konkel; Hope E Uronis; Manisha Palta; Dan G Blazer
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2022-10-09

3.  Specific Quality of Life Assessment by the NutriQoL® Questionnaire Among Patients Receiving Home Enteral Nutrition.

Authors:  Rocío Zamanillo Campos; María Teresa Colomar Ferrer; Rosa María Ruiz López; María Pilar Sanchís Cortés; Joan Ramón Urgelés Planella
Journal:  JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr       Date:  2020-05-27       Impact factor: 4.016

4.  A randomized controlled trial of oral nutritional supplementation versus standard diet following McKeown minimally invasive esophagectomy in patients with esophageal malignancy: a pilot study.

Authors:  Hounai Xie; Xiankai Chen; Lei Xu; Ruixiang Zhang; Xiaozheng Kang; Xiufeng Wei; Yafan Yang; Yin Li
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2021-11

5.  Effects of Enteral Nutrition on Patients With Oesophageal Carcinoma Treated With Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy: A Prospective, Multicentre, Randomised, Controlled Study.

Authors:  Jiahua Lyu; Anhui Shi; Tao Li; Jie Li; Ren Zhao; Shuchai Zhu; Jianhua Wang; Ligang Xing; Daoke Yang; Conghua Xie; Liangfang Shen; Hailin Zhang; Guangying Zhu; Jing Wang; Wenyan Pan; Fang Li; Jinyi Lang; Hanping Shi
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-02-25       Impact factor: 6.244

6.  Feeding jejunostomy following esophagectomy may increase the occurrence of postoperative small bowel obstruction.

Authors:  Tomoki Nakai; Junya Kitadani; Toshiyasu Ojima; Keiji Hayata; Masahiro Katsuda; Taro Goda; Akihiro Takeuchi; Shinta Tominaga; Naoki Fukuda; Shotaro Nagano; Hiroki Yamaue
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2022-09-16       Impact factor: 1.817

7.  Association between low-fat enteral nutrition after esophagectomy and a lower incidence of chyle leakage: A call for more and better evidence.

Authors:  Chu Zhang; Longbo Gong; Wenbin Wu; Miao Zhang; Hui Zhang; Chen Zhao
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2020-05       Impact factor: 1.671

Review 8.  Optimal timing and route of nutritional support after esophagectomy: A review of the literature.

Authors:  Richard Zheng; Courtney L Devin; Michael J Pucci; Adam C Berger; Ernest L Rosato; Francesco Palazzo
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2019-08-21       Impact factor: 5.742

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.