ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2024
Jejunostomy feeding plus oral feeding versus intravenous nutrition plus oral feeding after esophageal cancer resection: a comparative retrospective cohort study.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There are multiple choices for the nutritional management mode after esophageal cancer surgery. Currently, there is still controversy regarding which nutritional management mode has an impact on the postoperative recovery and overall survival (OS) of patients. This study aims to compare the differences between two commonly used clinical nutritional management modes: jejunostomy feeding plus oral intake (JF plus OI) and intravenous nutrition plus oral intake (IN plus OI), in terms of short-term efficacy and 3-year OS, in order to further explore the optimal mode of enteral nutrition management after esophageal cancer surgery. Methods: We evaluated esophageal cancer patients who underwent radical surgery at Union Hospital of Fujian Medical University between January 1, 2010 and January 1, 2020. The purpose of this analysis was to compare the perioperative complications, Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS2002) nutritional scores at 1 week, 2 weeks, 1 month, and 3 months after surgery, as well as the 3-year OS rates, between two different nutritional management approaches: JF plus OI and IN plus OI following esophageal cancer surgery. Results: Among the 822 patients included, 668 and 154 patients belonged to JF plus OI and IN plus OI groups, respectively. After propensity score matching, 149 patients per group were evaluated. The amount of gastric drainage fluid was higher in the IN plus OI group (P<0.05), and the incidence of postoperative gastrointestinal emptying disorder and intestinal obstruction was significantly higher in the JF plus OI group (P<0.05). The IN plus OI group had a higher incidence of perioperative hypoproteinemia (P<0.05), and a higher risk of malnutrition in 2 weeks after surgery (P<0.05). The 3-year OS was not significantly different (P>0.05). Conclusions: JF plus OI may be the preferable nutritional management approach after esophageal cancer resection as it can potentially reduce perioperative nutritional deficiency. However, attention should be paid to the risk of gastrointestinal emptying and intestinal obstruction associated with JF.
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.