Postoperative arginine-enriched immune modulating nutrition: Long-term survival results from a randomised clinical trial in patients with oesophagogastric and pancreaticobiliary cancer.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Immune modulating nutrition (IMN) has been shown to reduce postoperative infectious complications and length of stay in patients with gastrointestinal cancer. Two studies of IMN in patients undergoing surgery for head and neck cancer also suggested that this treatment might improve long-term survival and progression-free survival. In the present study, we analysed follow-up data from our previous randomised controlled trial of IMN, in patients undergoing surgery for oesophagogastric and pancreaticobiliary cancer, in order to evaluate the long-term impact on survival of postoperative IMN versus an isocaloric, isonitrogenous control feed. METHODS: This study included patients undergoing surgery for cancers of the pancreas, oesophagus and stomach, who had been randomised in a double-blind manner to receive postoperative jejunostomy feeding with IMN (Stresson, Nutricia Ltd.) or an isonitrogenous, isocaloric feed (Nutrison High Protein, Nutricia) for 10-15 days. The primary outcome was long-term overall survival. RESULTS: There was complete follow-up for all 108 patients, with 54 patients randomised to each group. There were no statistically significant differences between groups by demographics [(age, p = 0.63), sex (p = 0.49) or site of cancer (p = 0.25)]. 30-day mortality was 11.1% in both groups. Mortality in the intervention group was 13%, 31.5%, 70.4%, 85.2%, 88.9%, and 96.3% at 90 days, and 1, 5, 10, 15 and 20 years respectively. Corresponding mortality in the control group was 14.8%, 35.2%, 68.6%, 79.6%, 85.2% and 98.1% (p > 0.05 for all comparisons). CONCLUSION: Early postoperative feeding with arginine-enriched IMN had no impact on long-term survival in patients undergoing surgery for oesophagogastric and pancreaticobiliary cancer.

Comparison of Outcomes with Semi-mechanical and Circular Stapled Intrathoracic Esophagogastric Anastomosis following Esophagectomy.

BACKGROUND: Several techniques have been described for esophagogastric anastomosis following esophagectomy. This study compared the outcomes of circular stapled anastomoses with semi-mechanical technique using a linear stapler. METHODS: Perioperative data were extracted from a contemporaneously collected database of all consecutive esophagectomies for cancer with intrathoracic anastomoses performed in the Trent Oesophago-Gastric Unit between January 2015 and April 2018. Anastomotic techniques: circular stapled versus semi-mechanical, were evaluated and outcomes were compared. The primary outcome was anastomotic leak rate. Secondary outcomes included anastomotic stricture, overall complication rates, length of stay (LOS) and 30 day all-cause mortality. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-nine consecutive esophagectomies with intrathoracic anastomosis were performed during the study period. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of age, American Society of Anaesthesiologists score, Charlson comorbidity index and neoadjuvant therapies received. Circular stapled anastomoses were performed in 85 patients, while 74 patients received a semi-mechanical anastomosis. Clavien-Dindo complications II or more were higher in the circular stapled group (p = 0.02). There were 16 (10%) anastomotic leaks overall, three (4%) in semi-mechanical group versus 13 (15%) in the circular stapled group (p < 0.019). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of LOS, 30-day mortality or the need for endoscopic dilatation of the anastomosis at 3 months follow-up. CONCLUSION: The move from a circular stapled to a semi-mechanical intrathoracic anastomosis has been associated with a reduced postoperative anastomotic leak rate following esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

Analysis of blood transfusion predictors in patients undergoing elective oesophagectomy for cancer.

BACKGROUND: Oesophagectomy for cancers is a major operation with significant blood loss and usage. Concerns exist about the side effects of blood transfusion, cost and availability of donated blood. We are not aware of any previous study that has evaluated predictive factors for perioperative blood transfusion in patients undergoing elective oesophagectomy for cancer. This study aimed to audit the pattern of blood crossmatch and to evaluate factors predictive of transfusion requirements in oesophagectomy patients. METHODS: Data was collected from the database of all patients who underwent oesophagectomy for cancer over a 2-year period. Clinico-pathological data collected included patients demographics, clinical factors, tumour histopathological data, preoperative and discharge haemoglobin levels, total blood loss, number of units of blood crossmatched pre-, intra- and postoperatively, number of blood units transfused, crossmatched units reused for another patient and number of blood units wasted.Clinico-pathological variables were evaluated and logistic regression analysis was performed to determine which factors were predictive of blood transfusion. RESULTS: A total of 145 patients with a male to female ratio of 2.5:1 and median age of 68 (40-85) years were audited. The mean preoperative haemoglobin (Hb) was 13.0 g/dl. 37% of males (Hb < 13.0 g/dl) and 29% of females (Hb < 11.5 g/dl) were anaemic preoperatively. A total of 1241 blood units were crossmatched and 316 units were transfused to 71 patients. Seventy four patients (51%) did not require blood transfusion during their hospital episode. 846 blood units not used for oesophagectomy patients were reused for other patients and 79 units were wasted. The overall crossmatch to transfusion ratio was 4:1 and reuse and wastage rates were 65.2% and 6.3% respectively. The independent predictors of blood transfusion include age >70 years, Hb level <11.0 g/dl, T-stage, presence of postoperative complications and anastomotic leak. CONCLUSION: The cohort of patients audited was over-crossmatched. The identified independent predictors of blood transfusion should be considered in preoperative blood ordering for oesophagectomy patients. This study has directly led to a reduction in the maximum surgical blood-ordering schedule for oesophagectomy to 2 units and a reaudit is underway.

Early postoperative jejunostomy feeding with an immune modulating diet in patients undergoing resectional surgery for upper gastrointestinal cancer: a prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blind study.

BACKGROUND: The provision of perioperative immune modulating enteral feeds after major surgery may result in reduced infective complications, but meta-analyses have not demonstrated a survival advantage. The aim of this study was to determine whether early postoperative immune modulating jejunostomy feeding results in reduced infective complications in patients undergoing resectional surgery for upper gastrointestinal cancer. METHODS: A total of 120 patients undergoing resection for cancers of the pancreas, oesophagus and stomach were randomized in a double-blind manner to receive jejunostomy feeding with an immune modulating diet (Stresson-Group A) or an isonitrogenous, isocaloric feed (1250 Calories and 75 g protein/l--Nutrison High Protein-Group B) for 10-15 days. Feeding was commenced 4h postoperatively and continued for 20 h/day. The target volume (ml/h) was 25 on day 0, 50 on day 1, and 75 thereafter. Outcome measures included complications, hospital stay and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 108 patients (54 in each group) were analysed. Feed delivery, although less than targeted, was similar in both groups. There were 6 (11%) deaths in each group. Median (IQR) postoperative hospital stay was 14.5 (12-23) days in Group A and 17.5 (13-23) days in Group B (P=0.48). A total of 24 (44%) patients in each group had infective complications (P=1.0). A total of 21 (39%) patients in Group A and 28 (52%) in Group B had non-infective complications (P=0.18). Jejunostomy-related complications occurred in 26 (48%) patients in Group A and 30 (56%) in Group B (P=0.3). CONCLUSION: Early postoperative feeding with an immune modulating diet conferred no outcome advantage when compared with a standard feed.