Feeding jejunostomy tube placement during resection of gastric cancers

Zhifei Sun, Mithun M. Shenoi, Daniel P. Nussbaum, Jeffrey E. Keenan, Brian C. Gulack, Douglas Tyler, Paul J. Speicher, Dan G. Blazer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Feeding tube placement is common among patients undergoing gastrectomy, and national guidelines currently recommend consideration of a feeding jejunostomy tube (FJT) for all patients undergoing resection for gastric cancer. However, data are limited regarding the safety of FJT placement at the time of gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Methods: The 2005-2011 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Participant User Files were queried to identify patients who underwent gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Subjects were classified by the concomitant placement of an FJT. Groups were then propensity matched using a 1:1 nearest neighbor algorithm, and outcomes were compared between groups. The primary outcomes of interest were overall 30-d overall complications and mortality. Secondary end points included major complications, surgical site infection, and early reoperation. Results: In total, 2980 subjects underwent gastrectomy for gastric cancer, among whom 715 (24%) also had an FJT placed. Patients who had an FJT placed were more likely to be male (61.6% versus 56.6%, P=0.02), have recent weight loss (21.0% versus 14.8%, P<0.01), and have undergone recent chemotherapy (7.9% versus 4.2%, P<0.01) and radiation therapy (4.2% versus 1.3%, P<0.01). They were also more likely to have undergone total (compared with partial) gastrectomy (66.6% versus 28.6%, P<0.01) and have concomitant resection of an adjacent organ (40.4 versus 24.1%, P<0.01). After adjustment with propensity matching, however, all baseline characteristics and treatment variables were highly similar. Between groups, there were no statistically significant differences in 30-d overall complications (38.8% versus 36.1%, P=0.32) or mortality (5.8 versus 3.7%, P=0.08). There were also no differences in major complications, surgical site infection, or early reoperation. Operative time was slightly longer among patients with feeding tubes placed (median, 248 versus 233 min, P=0.01), but otherwise there were no significant differences in any outcomes between groups. Conclusions: Concomitant placement of FJT at the time of gastrectomy may result in slightly increased operative times but does not appear to lead to increased perioperative morbidity or mortality. Further investigation is needed to identify the patients most likely to benefit from FJT placement.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of Surgical Research
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Dec 23 2014

Fingerprint

Jejunostomy
Enteral Nutrition
Stomach Neoplasms
Gastrectomy
Surgical Wound Infection
Operative Time
Reoperation
Mortality
Quality Improvement
Weight Loss
Radiotherapy
Guidelines
Morbidity
Safety
Drug Therapy

Keywords

  • Feeding jejunostomy tube
  • Gastrectomy
  • Gastric cancer
  • Nutrition
  • Outcomes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Sun, Z., Shenoi, M. M., Nussbaum, D. P., Keenan, J. E., Gulack, B. C., Tyler, D., ... Blazer, D. G. (Accepted/In press). Feeding jejunostomy tube placement during resection of gastric cancers. Journal of Surgical Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2015.07.014

Feeding jejunostomy tube placement during resection of gastric cancers. / Sun, Zhifei; Shenoi, Mithun M.; Nussbaum, Daniel P.; Keenan, Jeffrey E.; Gulack, Brian C.; Tyler, Douglas; Speicher, Paul J.; Blazer, Dan G.

In: Journal of Surgical Research, 23.12.2014.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Sun, Zhifei ; Shenoi, Mithun M. ; Nussbaum, Daniel P. ; Keenan, Jeffrey E. ; Gulack, Brian C. ; Tyler, Douglas ; Speicher, Paul J. ; Blazer, Dan G. / Feeding jejunostomy tube placement during resection of gastric cancers. In: Journal of Surgical Research. 2014.
@article{6a8328a34c3f419d93d163f11d2c9faf,
title = "Feeding jejunostomy tube placement during resection of gastric cancers",
abstract = "Background: Feeding tube placement is common among patients undergoing gastrectomy, and national guidelines currently recommend consideration of a feeding jejunostomy tube (FJT) for all patients undergoing resection for gastric cancer. However, data are limited regarding the safety of FJT placement at the time of gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Methods: The 2005-2011 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Participant User Files were queried to identify patients who underwent gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Subjects were classified by the concomitant placement of an FJT. Groups were then propensity matched using a 1:1 nearest neighbor algorithm, and outcomes were compared between groups. The primary outcomes of interest were overall 30-d overall complications and mortality. Secondary end points included major complications, surgical site infection, and early reoperation. Results: In total, 2980 subjects underwent gastrectomy for gastric cancer, among whom 715 (24{\%}) also had an FJT placed. Patients who had an FJT placed were more likely to be male (61.6{\%} versus 56.6{\%}, P=0.02), have recent weight loss (21.0{\%} versus 14.8{\%}, P<0.01), and have undergone recent chemotherapy (7.9{\%} versus 4.2{\%}, P<0.01) and radiation therapy (4.2{\%} versus 1.3{\%}, P<0.01). They were also more likely to have undergone total (compared with partial) gastrectomy (66.6{\%} versus 28.6{\%}, P<0.01) and have concomitant resection of an adjacent organ (40.4 versus 24.1{\%}, P<0.01). After adjustment with propensity matching, however, all baseline characteristics and treatment variables were highly similar. Between groups, there were no statistically significant differences in 30-d overall complications (38.8{\%} versus 36.1{\%}, P=0.32) or mortality (5.8 versus 3.7{\%}, P=0.08). There were also no differences in major complications, surgical site infection, or early reoperation. Operative time was slightly longer among patients with feeding tubes placed (median, 248 versus 233 min, P=0.01), but otherwise there were no significant differences in any outcomes between groups. Conclusions: Concomitant placement of FJT at the time of gastrectomy may result in slightly increased operative times but does not appear to lead to increased perioperative morbidity or mortality. Further investigation is needed to identify the patients most likely to benefit from FJT placement.",
keywords = "Feeding jejunostomy tube, Gastrectomy, Gastric cancer, Nutrition, Outcomes",
author = "Zhifei Sun and Shenoi, {Mithun M.} and Nussbaum, {Daniel P.} and Keenan, {Jeffrey E.} and Gulack, {Brian C.} and Douglas Tyler and Speicher, {Paul J.} and Blazer, {Dan G.}",
year = "2014",
month = "12",
day = "23",
doi = "10.1016/j.jss.2015.07.014",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Journal of Surgical Research",
issn = "0022-4804",
publisher = "Academic Press Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Feeding jejunostomy tube placement during resection of gastric cancers

AU - Sun, Zhifei

AU - Shenoi, Mithun M.

AU - Nussbaum, Daniel P.

AU - Keenan, Jeffrey E.

AU - Gulack, Brian C.

AU - Tyler, Douglas

AU - Speicher, Paul J.

AU - Blazer, Dan G.

PY - 2014/12/23

Y1 - 2014/12/23

N2 - Background: Feeding tube placement is common among patients undergoing gastrectomy, and national guidelines currently recommend consideration of a feeding jejunostomy tube (FJT) for all patients undergoing resection for gastric cancer. However, data are limited regarding the safety of FJT placement at the time of gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Methods: The 2005-2011 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Participant User Files were queried to identify patients who underwent gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Subjects were classified by the concomitant placement of an FJT. Groups were then propensity matched using a 1:1 nearest neighbor algorithm, and outcomes were compared between groups. The primary outcomes of interest were overall 30-d overall complications and mortality. Secondary end points included major complications, surgical site infection, and early reoperation. Results: In total, 2980 subjects underwent gastrectomy for gastric cancer, among whom 715 (24%) also had an FJT placed. Patients who had an FJT placed were more likely to be male (61.6% versus 56.6%, P=0.02), have recent weight loss (21.0% versus 14.8%, P<0.01), and have undergone recent chemotherapy (7.9% versus 4.2%, P<0.01) and radiation therapy (4.2% versus 1.3%, P<0.01). They were also more likely to have undergone total (compared with partial) gastrectomy (66.6% versus 28.6%, P<0.01) and have concomitant resection of an adjacent organ (40.4 versus 24.1%, P<0.01). After adjustment with propensity matching, however, all baseline characteristics and treatment variables were highly similar. Between groups, there were no statistically significant differences in 30-d overall complications (38.8% versus 36.1%, P=0.32) or mortality (5.8 versus 3.7%, P=0.08). There were also no differences in major complications, surgical site infection, or early reoperation. Operative time was slightly longer among patients with feeding tubes placed (median, 248 versus 233 min, P=0.01), but otherwise there were no significant differences in any outcomes between groups. Conclusions: Concomitant placement of FJT at the time of gastrectomy may result in slightly increased operative times but does not appear to lead to increased perioperative morbidity or mortality. Further investigation is needed to identify the patients most likely to benefit from FJT placement.

AB - Background: Feeding tube placement is common among patients undergoing gastrectomy, and national guidelines currently recommend consideration of a feeding jejunostomy tube (FJT) for all patients undergoing resection for gastric cancer. However, data are limited regarding the safety of FJT placement at the time of gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Methods: The 2005-2011 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Participant User Files were queried to identify patients who underwent gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Subjects were classified by the concomitant placement of an FJT. Groups were then propensity matched using a 1:1 nearest neighbor algorithm, and outcomes were compared between groups. The primary outcomes of interest were overall 30-d overall complications and mortality. Secondary end points included major complications, surgical site infection, and early reoperation. Results: In total, 2980 subjects underwent gastrectomy for gastric cancer, among whom 715 (24%) also had an FJT placed. Patients who had an FJT placed were more likely to be male (61.6% versus 56.6%, P=0.02), have recent weight loss (21.0% versus 14.8%, P<0.01), and have undergone recent chemotherapy (7.9% versus 4.2%, P<0.01) and radiation therapy (4.2% versus 1.3%, P<0.01). They were also more likely to have undergone total (compared with partial) gastrectomy (66.6% versus 28.6%, P<0.01) and have concomitant resection of an adjacent organ (40.4 versus 24.1%, P<0.01). After adjustment with propensity matching, however, all baseline characteristics and treatment variables were highly similar. Between groups, there were no statistically significant differences in 30-d overall complications (38.8% versus 36.1%, P=0.32) or mortality (5.8 versus 3.7%, P=0.08). There were also no differences in major complications, surgical site infection, or early reoperation. Operative time was slightly longer among patients with feeding tubes placed (median, 248 versus 233 min, P=0.01), but otherwise there were no significant differences in any outcomes between groups. Conclusions: Concomitant placement of FJT at the time of gastrectomy may result in slightly increased operative times but does not appear to lead to increased perioperative morbidity or mortality. Further investigation is needed to identify the patients most likely to benefit from FJT placement.

KW - Feeding jejunostomy tube

KW - Gastrectomy

KW - Gastric cancer

KW - Nutrition

KW - Outcomes

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84938651291&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84938651291&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jss.2015.07.014

DO - 10.1016/j.jss.2015.07.014

M3 - Article

JO - Journal of Surgical Research

JF - Journal of Surgical Research

SN - 0022-4804

ER -