000			03089nam a22003857a 4500
008			210628s20212021 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
022			_a2078-6891
024			_a10.21037/jgo-21-133 [doi]
024			_ajgo-12-02-433 [pii]
024			_aPMC8107594 [pmc]
040			_aOvid MEDLINE(R)
099			_a34012637
245			_aUtility of feeding jejunostomy in patients with esophageal cancer undergoing esophagectomy with a high risk of anastomotic leakage.
251			_aJournal of Gastrointestinal Oncology. 12(2):433-445, 2021 Apr.
252			_aJ. gastrointest. oncol.. 12(2):433-445, 2021 Apr.
253			_aJournal of gastrointestinal oncology
260			_c2021
260			_fFY2021
260			_p2021 Apr
265			_sppublish
266			_d2021-06-28
520			_aBackground: Feeding jejunostomy is widely used for enteral nutrition (EN) after esophagectomy; however, its risks and benefits are still controversial. We aimed to evaluate the short-term and long-term outcomes of feeding jejunal tube (FJT) in patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) who were deemed high-risk for anastomotic leakage.
520			_aConclusions: FJT showed acceptable safety profile along with potential benefits for ESCC patients with a high presumed risk of anastomotic leakage. While FJT does not impact OS, placement of FJT should be considered in esophagectomy patients and tailored to individual patients based on their leak-risk profile. Copyright 2021 Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology. All rights reserved.
520			_aMethods: We retrospectively analyzed 716 patients who underwent esophagectomy with (FJT group, n=68) or without (control group, n=648) intraoperative placement of FJT. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used for the adjustment of confounding factors. Risk level for anastomotic leakage was determined for every patient after PSM.
520			_aResults: Patients in the FJT group were at higher risk of anastomotic leakage (14.9% vs. 11.3%), and had a statistically non-significant increase of postoperative complications [31.3% vs. 21.8%, odds ratio (OR) =1.139, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.947-1.370, P=0.141] after PSM. Medical expenditure, length of postoperative hospital stay, and short-term mortality were similar between the FJT and control groups. Placement of FJT appeared to accelerate the recovery of anastomotic leakage (27.2 vs. 37.4 d, P=0.073). Patients in FJT group achieved comparable overall survival (OS) both before [hazard ratio (HR) =0.850, P=0.390] and after (HR =0.797, P=0.292) PSM.
546			_aEnglish
650			_aIN PROCESS -- NOT YET INDEXED
651			_aMedStar Washington Hospital Center
656			_aSurgery/Thoracic Surgery
657			_aJournal Article
700			_aGaur Khaitan, Puja
790			_aChen G, Deng C, Huang S, Khaitan PG, Koyanagi K, Liu H, Ozawa S, Piessen G, Qiao G, Shi R, Tian D, Wu H, Wu Y, Zhou Z, Zhuang W
856			_uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.21037/jgo-21-133 _zhttps://dx.doi.org/10.21037/jgo-21-133
942			_cART _dArticle
999			_c6548 _d6548