Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26590903›Full record

Trial reportTrials2015

A randomised controlled trial of six weeks of home enteral nutrition versus standard care after oesophagectomy or total gastrectomy for cancer: report on a pilot and feasibility study.

David J Bowrey, Melanie Baker, Vanessa Halliday, Anne L Thomas, Ruth Pulikottil-Jacob, Karen Smith, Tom Morris, Arne Ring

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01870817 (A Pilot Study Investigating the Effect of Post-operative Home Jejunostomy Feeding on Quality of Life and Nutritional Parameters in Patients With Oesophago-gastric Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 20 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT01870817 nacompletednot on this map

A Pilot Study Investigating the Effect of Post-operative Home Jejunostomy Feeding on Quality of Life and Nutritional Parameters in Patients With Oesophago-gastric Cancer

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity Hospitals, LeicesterRan2012 to 2014Enrolled54ConditionsEsophageal NeoplasmsArmsHome jejunostomy feeding
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. The application of home enteral nutrition in cancer patients: a scoping review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. A Case of Percutaneous Transesophageal Jejunostomy after Subtotal Esophagectomy.Interventional radiology (Higashimatsuyama-shi (Japan) · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Early oral feeding following esophagectomy.Journal of thoracic disease · 2019
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

David J BowreyDepartment of Surgery, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Level 6 Balmoral Building, Leicester, UK. djb57@le.ac.uk.
Melanie BakerDepartment of Surgery, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Level 6 Balmoral Building, Leicester, UK. melanie.baker@uhl-tr.nhs.uk.
Vanessa HallidaySchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK. vanessa.halliday@sheffield.ac.uk.
Anne L ThomasDepartment of Cancer Studies, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK. at107@le.ac.uk.
Ruth Pulikottil-JacobDepartment of Health Economics, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK. r.jacob@warwick.ac.uk.
Karen SmithDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK. kls27@le.ac.uk.
Tom MorrisLeicester Clinical Trials Unit, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK. tm221@le.ac.uk.
Arne RingLeicester Clinical Trials Unit, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK. ar346@le.ac.uk.
University of Leicester · GBUniversity Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust · GBUniversity of Sheffield · GBUniversity of Warwick · GB

Funding

Department of Health PB-PG-0610-22480
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPoor nutrition in the first months after oesophago-gastric resection is a contributing factor to the reduced quality of life seen in these patients. The aim of this pilot and feasibility study was to ascertain the feasibility of conducting a multi-centre randomised controlled trial to evaluate routine home enteral nutrition in these patients.

methodsPatients undergoing oesophagectomy or total gastrectomy were randomised to either six weeks of home feeding through a jejunostomy (intervention), or treatment as usual (control). Intervention comprised overnight feeding, providing 50 % of energy and protein requirements, in addition to usual oral intake. Primary outcome measures were recruitment and retention rates at six weeks and six months. Nutritional intake, nutritional parameters, quality of life and healthcare costs were also collected. Interviews were conducted with a sample of participants, to ascertain patient and carer experiences.

resultsFifty-four of 112 (48 %) eligible patients participated in the study over the 20 months. Study retention at six weeks was 41/54 patients (76 %) and at six months was 36/54 (67 %). At six weeks, participants in the control group had lost on average 3.9 kg more than participants in the intervention group (95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.6 to 6.2). These differences remained evident at three months (mean difference 2.5 kg, 95 % CI -0.5 to 5.6) and at six months (mean difference 2.5 kg, 95 % CI -1.2 to 6.1). The mean values observed in the intervention group for mid arm circumference, mid arm muscle circumference, triceps skin fold thickness and right hand grip strength were greater than for the control group at all post hospital discharge time points. The economic evaluation suggested that it was feasible to collect resource use and EQ-5D data for a full cost-effectiveness analysis. Thematic analysis of 15 interviews identified three main themes related to the intervention and the trial: 1) a positive experience, 2) the reasons for taking part, and 3) uncertainty of the study process.

conclusionsThis study demonstrated that home enteral feeding by jejunostomy was feasible, safe and acceptable to patients and their carers. Whether home enteral feeding as 'usual practice' is a cost-effective therapy would require confirmation in an appropriately powered, multi-centre study.

trial registrationUK Clinical Research Network ID 12447 (main trial, first registered 30 May 2012); UK Clinical Research Network ID 13361 (qualitative substudy, first registered 30 May 2012); ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01870817 (first registered 28 May 2013).

Indexed as

Enteral NutritionHome Care Services, Hospital-BasedAgedCaregiversCost-Benefit AnalysisEnglandEsophageal NeoplasmsEsophagectomyEsophagogastric JunctionFeasibility StudiesFemaleGastrectomyHealth Care CostsHumansJejunostomyMale

Identifiers

PMID26590903
PMCPMC4654827
OpenAlexW2175749847

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.