Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract Background Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) for esophagectomy has been demonstrated to be safe and effective. However, there is significant variation in the nutritional support treatment modes during the perioperative period. We have recently developed a novel ERAS nutritional support mode. In this study, we compared this new mode with the previous ERAS nutritional support treatment mode to assess their impact on clinical and Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs), aiming to develop an optimal approach. Methods We enrolled 357 patients who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal thoracic cancer or esophagogastric junction cancer from June 2021 to August 2023. Two different ERAS nutritional support treatment protocols were used postoperatively: the control group previously received enteral nutrition by nasojejunal tube + parenteral nutrition + early oral diet after surgery, while the study group currently received parenteral nutrition + early oral diet. We compared the two groups in terms of clinical observation indicators, hematological analysis, serum protein changes and clinical outcomes. The comparison of quality of life on PROs was assessed using the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory. Symptom changes were analyzed using a mixed-effects model. Results A total of 324 patients successfully completed the ERAS nutritional support protocols. The success rates were 91% in the control group and 90.2% in the study group, with no statistically significant difference (p0.05). The incidence of complications did not significantly differ between the two groups (p0.05). Compared to the control group (n=223), the study group (n=101) significantly shortened the chest drain time (6.2±2.6 days vs. 6.6±1.5 days, p0.05) and elevated the levels of serum total protein and albumin on the 4th postoperative day (53±5 g/L vs. 51±4 g/L, 30±2 g/L vs. 28±2 g/L, p0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in the first flatus time, first defecation time, infusion time and postoperative hospital stay between the two groups (p0.05). The comparison of hematological analysis, serum protein changes, changes in body weight during the perioperative period and 30-day readmission rate showed no statistically significant differences (p0.05). In the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory, the study group had significantly better scores in sadness, dry mouth, enjoyment of life, and general activity dimensions compared to the control group (p=0.013, p0.001, p=0.045, p=0.008). Conclusion Based on the similar rehabilitation outcomes, the simplified ERAS nutritional support treatment mode without postoperative enteral nutrition by nasojejunal tube is more optimized because it is physiological sound and significantly improves quality of life on PROs.
Wang et al. (Sun,) studied this question.