ArticleInternational journal of clinical oncology2024
Clinical impact of diarrhea during enteral feeding after esophagectomy.
Article in International journal of clinical oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Essential updates 2022/2023: Recent advances in perioperative management of esophagectomy to improve operative outcomes.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEnteral feeding (EF) is recommended to enhance nutritional status after esophagectomy; however, diarrhea is a common complication of EF. We investigated the clinical and prognostic impact of diarrhea during EF after esophagectomy.
methodsOne hundred and fifty-two patients who underwent transthoracic esophagectomy were enrolled. The King's stool chart was used for stool characterization. The short- and long-term outcomes were compared between a non-diarrhea (Group N) and diarrhea group (Group D).
resultsA higher dysphagia score (≥ 1) was observed more frequently in Group D than in Group N (45.7% vs. 19.8%, p = 0.002). Deterioration of serum total protein, serum albumin, serum cholinesterase, and the prognostic nutritional index after esophagectomy was greater in Group D than in Group N (p = 0.003, 0.004, 0.014, and 0.001, respectively). Patients in Group D had significantly worse overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) than those in Group N (median survival time (MST): OS, 21.9 vs. 30.6 months, p = 0.001; RFS, 12.4 vs. 27.7 months, p < 0.001). In stratified analysis due to age, although there was no difference in OS with or without diarrhea in young patients (MST: 24.1 months in a diarrhea group vs. 33.6 months in a non-diarrhea group, p = 0.218), patients in a diarrhea group had significantly worse OS than those in a non-diarrhea group in elderly patients (MST: 17.8 months vs. 27.9 months, p < 0.001).
conclusionsDiarrhea during EF can put elderly patients at risk of postoperative malnutrition and a poor prognosis after esophagectomy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.