title: Critical analysis of feeding jejunostomy following resection of upper gastrointestinal malignancies.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To assess nutritional recovery, particularly regarding feeding jejunostomy tube (FJT) utilization, following upper gastrointestinal resection for malignancy.
  
  
  METHODS
  A retrospective review was performed of a prospectively-maintained database of adult patients who underwent esophagectomy or gastrectomy (subtotal or total) for cancer with curative intent, from January 2001 to June 2014. Patient demographics, the approach to esophagectomy, the extent of gastrectomy, FJT placement and utilization at discharge, administration of parenteral nutrition (PN), and complications were evaluated. All patients were followed for at least ninety days or until death.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The 287 patients underwent upper GI resection, comprised of 182 esophagectomy (n= 107 transhiatal, 58.7%;n= 56 Ivor-Lewis, 30.7%) and 105 gastrectomy [n= 63 subtotal (SG), 60.0%;n= 42 total (TG), 40.0%]. 181 of 182 esophagectomy patients underwent FJT, compared with 47 of 105 gastrectomy patients (99.5%vs44.8%,P< 0.0001), of whom most had undergone TG (n= 39, 92.9%vs n= 8 SG, 12.9%,P< 0.0001). Median length of stay was similar between esophagectomy and gastrectomy groups (14.7 dvs17.1 d,P= 0.076). Upon discharge, 87 esophagectomy patients (48.1%) were taking enteral feeds, with 53 (29.3%) fully and 34 (18.8%) partially dependent. Meanwhile, 20 of 39 TG patients (51.3%) were either fully (n= 3, 7.7%) or partially (n= 17, 43.6%) dependent on tube feeds, compared with 5 of 8 SG patients (10.6%), all of whom were partially dependent. Gastrectomy patients were significantly less likely to be fully dependent on tube feeds at discharge compared to esophagectomy patients (6.4%vs29.3%,P= 0.0006). PN was administered despite FJT placement more often following gastrectomy than esophagectomy (n= 11, 23.4%vs n= 7, 3.9%,P= 0.0001). FJT-specific complications requiring reoperation within 30 d of resection occurred more commonly in the gastrectomy group (n= 6), all after TG, compared to 1 esophagectomy patient (12.8%vs0.6%,P= 0.0003). Six of 7 patients (85.7%) who experienced tube-related complications required PN.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Nutritional recovery following esophagectomy and gastrectomy is distinct. Operations are associated with unique complication profiles. Nutritional supplementation alternative to jejunostomy should be considered in particular scenarios.
authors.affiliation: Andrew M Blakely, Saad Ajmal, Thomas T Ng, Thomas J Miner, Department of Surgery, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, RI 02903, United States.
authors.forename: Andrew M
authors.initials: AM
authors.lastname: Blakely
authors.affiliation: Andrew M Blakely, Saad Ajmal, Thomas T Ng, Thomas J Miner, Department of Surgery, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, RI 02903, United States.
authors.forename: Saad
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Ajmal
authors.affiliation: Andrew M Blakely, Saad Ajmal, Thomas T Ng, Thomas J Miner, Department of Surgery, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, RI 02903, United States.
authors.forename: Rachel E
authors.initials: RE
authors.lastname: Sargent
authors.affiliation: Andrew M Blakely, Saad Ajmal, Thomas T Ng, Thomas J Miner, Department of Surgery, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, RI 02903, United States.
authors.forename: Thomas T
authors.initials: TT
authors.lastname: Ng
authors.affiliation: Andrew M Blakely, Saad Ajmal, Thomas T Ng, Thomas J Miner, Department of Surgery, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, RI 02903, United States.
authors.forename: Thomas J
authors.initials: TJ
authors.lastname: Miner
keywords: Esophagectomy; Feeding jejunostomy; Gastrectomy; Nutritional recovery; Outcomes