Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Complications of Feeding Jejunostomy Tubes in Patients with Gastroesophageal Cancer.
Choi, Audrey H; O'Leary, Michael P; Merchant, Shaila J; Sun, Virginia; Chao, Joseph; Raz, Dan J; Kim, Jae Y; Kim, Joseph.
Afiliação
  • Choi AH; Department of Surgery, City of Hope, Duarte, CA, USA.
  • O'Leary MP; Department of Surgery, City of Hope, Duarte, CA, USA.
  • Merchant SJ; Department of Surgery, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
  • Sun V; Division of Nursing Research and Education, City of Hope, Duarte, CA, USA.
  • Chao J; Department of Medical Oncology, City of Hope, Duarte, CA, USA.
  • Raz DJ; Department of Surgery, City of Hope, Duarte, CA, USA.
  • Kim JY; Department of Surgery, City of Hope, Duarte, CA, USA.
  • Kim J; Department of Surgery, SUNY Stony Brook, Stony Brook, NY, USA. joseph.kim1@stonybrookmedicine.edu.
J Gastrointest Surg ; 21(2): 259-265, 2017 02.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27785689
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Feeding jejunostomy tubes (FJT) in patients undergoing resection of gastroesophageal cancers facilitate perioperative nutrition. Data regarding FJT use and complications are limited. STUDY

DESIGN:

A single institution review was performed for patients who underwent perioperative FJT placement for gastrectomy or esophagogastrectomy from 2007 to 2015. FJT-related and unrelated complications were evaluated.

RESULTS:

FJTs were inserted for total/completion gastrectomy (n = 49/117, 41.9 %), proximal gastrectomy (n = 7/117, 6.0 %), or esophagogastrectomy (n = 61/117, 52.1 %). Ninety percent (n = 106/117) of patients used an FJT at some time point. Although the majority of patients (75.2 %) used FJTs after discharge, 8.5 % (n = 10/117) never used the FJT and 10.3 % (n = 12/117) used the FJT only during hospitalization. Overall, 44.4 % (n = 52/117) had FJT-related complications, including dislodgement (n = 22), clogging (n = 13), and leakage (n = 6). The majority of FJT complications were resolved by telephone triage (13.5 %) or bedside/clinic intervention (57.7 %), but 3.4 % required operative intervention for small bowel obstruction (n = 3) and hemorrhage (n = 1). FJT complications were more common with gastrectomy than esophagogastrectomy (53.6 vs. 36.0 %), perhaps related to longer FJT use in gastrectomy patients (71 vs. 38 days).

CONCLUSIONS:

FJT-related complications are common, occurring more frequently after gastrectomy than esophagogastrectomy. In most patients, complications can be managed by simple measures, rarely requiring operative intervention. Nevertheless, the need for FJTs should be carefully considered to balance nutritional benefits with the risks of insertion and usage.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Neoplasias Gástricas / Neoplasias Esofágicas / Jejunostomia / Nutrição Enteral / Desnutrição Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adult / Aged / Aged80 / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2017 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Neoplasias Gástricas / Neoplasias Esofágicas / Jejunostomia / Nutrição Enteral / Desnutrição Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adult / Aged / Aged80 / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2017 Tipo de documento: Article