Literature DB >> 31329828

Safety, feasibility, and effect of an enhanced nutritional support pathway including extended preoperative and home enteral nutrition in patients undergoing enhanced recovery after esophagectomy: a pilot randomized clinical trial.

K Liu1, S Ji2, Y Xu3, Q Diao4, C Shao5, J Luo1,3, Y Zhu6, Z Jiang2, Y Diao7, Z Cong1,3, L Hu3, Y Qiang1,3,7, Y Shen1,3.   

Abstract

The aims of this pilot study are to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and effectiveness of conducting an enhanced nutritional support pathway including extended preoperative nutritional support and one month home enteral nutrition (HEN) for patients who underwent enhanced recovery after esophagectomy. We implemented extended preoperative nutritional support and one month HEN after discharge for patients randomized into an enhanced nutrition group and implemented standard nutritional support for patients randomized into a conventional nutrition group. Except the nutritional support program, both group patients underwent the same standardized enhanced recovery after surgery programs of esophagectomy based on published guidelines. Patients were assessed at preoperative day, postoperative day 7 (POD7), and POD30 for perioperative outcomes and nutritional status. To facilitate the determination of an effect size for subsequent appropriately powered randomized clinical trials and assess the effectiveness, the primary outcome we chose was the weight change before and after esophagectomy. Other outcomes including body mass index (BMI), lean body mass (LBM), appendicular skeletal muscle mass index (ASMI), nutrition-related complications, and quality of life (QoL) were also analyzed. The intention-to-treat analysis of the 50 randomized patients showed that there was no significant difference in baseline characteristics. The weight (-2.03 ± 2.28 kg vs. -4.05 ± 3.13 kg, P = 0.012), BMI (-0.73 ± 0.79 kg/m2 vs. -1.48 ± 1.11 kg/m2, P = 0.008), and ASMI (-1.10 ± 0.37 kg/m2 vs. -1.60 ± 0.66 kg/m2, P = 0.010) loss of patients in the enhanced nutrition group were obviously decreased compared to the conventional nutrition group at POD30. In particular, LBM (48.90 ± 9.69 kg vs. 41.96 ± 9.37 kg, p = 0.031) and ASMI (7.56 ± 1.07 kg/m2 vs. 6.50 ± 0.97 kg/m2, P = 0.003) in the enhanced nutrition group were significantly higher compared to the conventional nutrition group at POD30, despite no significant change between pre- and postoperation. In addition, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 scores revealed that enhanced nutritional support improved the QoL of patients in physical function (75.13 ± 9.72 vs. 68.33 ± 7.68, P = 0.009) and fatigue symptom (42.27 ± 9.93 vs. 49.07 ± 11.33, P = 0.028) compared to conventional nutritional support. This pilot study demonstrated that an enhanced nutritional support pathway including extended preoperative nutritional support and HEN was feasible, safe, and might be beneficial to patients who underwent enhanced recovery after esophagectomy. An appropriately powered trial is warranted to confirm the efficacy of this approach.
© The Author(s) 2019. 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:  ERAS; body composition; esophagectomy; nutritional support; quality of life

Year:  2020        PMID: 31329828     DOI: 10.1093/dote/doz030

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


  5 in total

1.  Quality of Life of Cancer Patients Receiving Enteral Nutrition: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Authors:  Elwira Gliwska; Dominika Guzek; Zuzanna Przekop; Jacek Sobocki; Dominika Głąbska
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2021-12-19       Impact factor: 5.717

2.  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

3.  Effect of Home Enteral Nutritional Support Compared With Normal Oral Diet in Postoperative Subjects With Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Resection: A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Fang Liu; Xuling Pan; SuQing Zhao; RuiJun Ren; GuiXia Chang; Yu Mao
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-02-18

4.  Home enteral nutrition for patients with esophageal cancer undergoing esophagectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Chi Zhang; Li-Wen Hu; Yong Qiang; Zhuang-Zhuang Cong; Chao Zheng; Wen-Feng Gu; Chao Luo; Kai Xie; Yi Shen
Journal:  Front Nutr       Date:  2022-07-28

5.  Therapeutic Effect and Cost-Benefit Analysis of Three Different Nutritional Schemes for Esophageal Cancer Patients in the Early Post-operative Period.

Authors:  Chen Huang; Xinyu Liang; Shanshan Du; Jie He; Qian Bai; Xiaoqing Feng; Xiaoqing Liu; Xu Tian; Jian Wang
Journal:  Front Nutr       Date:  2021-06-17
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.