• 1. The First Clinical Medical College of Gansu University of Chinese Medicine, Lanzhou, 730000, P. R. China;
  • 2. Department of Thoracic Surgery, The Gansu Provincial Hospital, Lanzhou, 730000, P. R. China;
GOU Yunjiu, Email: gouyunjiu@163.com
Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Objective To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of jejunostomy tube versus nasojejunal tube for enteral nutrition after radical resection of esophageal cancer. Methods PubMed, EMbase, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP and CBM databases were searched to collect the clinical effects of jejunostomy tube versus nasojejunal nutrition tube after radical resection of esophageal cancer from inception to October 2021. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software. Results Twenty-six articles were included, including 17 randomized controlled studies and 9 cohort studies, with a total of 35 808 patients. Meta-analysis results showed that: in the jejunostomy tube group, the postoperative exhaust time (MD=–4.27, 95%CI –5.87 to –2.66, P=0.001), the incidence of pulmonary infection (OR=1.39, 95%CI 1.06 to 1.82, P=0.02), incidence of tube removal (OR=0.11, 95%CI 0.04 to 0.30, P=0.001), incidence of tube blockage (OR=0.47, 95%CI 0.23 to 0.97, P=0.04), incidence of nasopharyngeal discomfort (OR=0.04, 95%CI 0.01 to 0.13, P=0.001), the incidence of nasopharyngeal mucosal damage (OR=0.13, 95%CI 0.04 to 0.42, P=0.008), the incidence of nausea and vomiting (OR=0.20, 95%CI 0.08 to 0.47, P=0.003) were significantly shorter or lower than those of the nasojejunal tube group. The postoperative serum albumin level (MD=5.75, 95%CI 5.34 to 6.16, P=0.001) was significantly better than that of the nasojejunal tube group. However, the intraoperative operation time of the jejunostomy tube group (MD=13.65, 95%CI 2.32 to 24.98, P=0.02) and the indent time of the postoperative nutrition tube (MD=17.81, 95%CI 12.71 to 22.91, P=0.001) were longer than those of the nasojejunal nutrition tube. At the same time, the incidence of postoperative intestinal obstruction (OR=6.08, 95%CI 2.55 to 14.50, P=0.001) was significantly higher than that of the nasojejunal tube group. There were no statistical differences in the length of postoperative hospital stay or the occurrence of anastomotic fistula between the two groups (P>0.05). Conclusion In the process of enteral nutrition after radical resection of esophageal cancer, jejunostomy tube has better clinical treatment effect and is more comfortable during catheterization, but the incidence of intestinal obstruction is higher than that of traditional nasojejunal tube.

Citation: BAI Xiangdou, ZENG Weiqiang, CUI Baiqiang, YANG Ning, HE Xiaoyang, ZHANG Siyuan, JIN Dacheng, GOU Yunjiu. Efficacy and safety of enteral nutrition with jejunostomy tube versus nasojejunal tube after radical resection of esophageal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Chinese Journal of Clinical Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 2023, 30(10): 1475-1482. doi: 10.7507/1007-4848.202111015 Copy

  • Previous Article

    Risk factors for postoperative pulmonary infection in patients with esophageal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis
  • Next Article

    Risk factors for postoperative hypoxemia in patients with Stanford type A aortic dissection: A systematic review and meta-analysis