273. EVALUATION OF THE RESULTS OF ‘TUBELESS’ ESOPHAGECTOMY IN PATIENTS WITH ESOPHAGEAL CANCER WITHIN AN ERAS PROTOCOL

Classically, esophagectomy used to routinely left chest drains, as well as decompressive nasogastric tube (NGT) and feeding jejunostomy, making the postoperative period slower and more uncomfortable for patients. Our objective is to evaluate the results of not using tubes and drains (tubeless esopha...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Diseases of the esophagus 2022-09, Vol.35 (Supplement_2)
Hauptverfasser: de Zadava Lissón, Miriam Menéndez Jiménez, Esteban, Marcos Bruna, Navarro, Fernando Mingol, Urbaneja, Francisco Javier Vaqué, Pardo, Luis Hurtado, García, Alberto Sánchez
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue Supplement_2
container_start_page
container_title Diseases of the esophagus
container_volume 35
creator de Zadava Lissón, Miriam Menéndez Jiménez
Esteban, Marcos Bruna
Navarro, Fernando Mingol
Urbaneja, Francisco Javier Vaqué
Pardo, Luis Hurtado
García, Alberto Sánchez
description Classically, esophagectomy used to routinely left chest drains, as well as decompressive nasogastric tube (NGT) and feeding jejunostomy, making the postoperative period slower and more uncomfortable for patients. Our objective is to evaluate the results of not using tubes and drains (tubeless esophagectomy) in patients with esophageal cancer undergoing McKeown esophagectomy within an ERAS protocol in our center. Retrospective, descriptive and comparative study of two consecutive groups undergoing McKeown esophagectomy. The first group (P) included 25 patients with tubes and drains (April 2018–August 2019) and the second group (T) 25 patients undergoing tubeless esophagectomy (July 2020–December 2021). In group P all patients were left with thoracic drainage and jejunostomy and in selected cases abdominal drainage; no patient was left with NGT. In group T (‘TUBELESS’) no drains or NGT were placed. No jejunostomy was performed except in those patients at high risk of malnutrition, and a phantom jejunostomy was used instead. Both study groups are comparable in terms of epidemiological characteristics, etiology, preoperative tumor stage and neoadjuvant treatment. In group P, 86% of the patients underwent or already had a jejunostomy, 100% of the patients were left with a left thoracic drain and 28% with an abdominal drain. None of the patients had a cervical drain or NGT. In group T no cervical, abdominal or thoracic drain was placed, but 2 patients (8%) underwent a jejunostomy due to high risk of malnutrition. Table 1 shows the postoperative results. There are no significant differences in 90-day mortality, readmission rate or anastomotic leakage. Despite the widespread thought of the need for the use of chest drains after esophagectomy, abstention from their use, as well as abstention from the use of decompressive nasogastric tube and feeding jejunostomy (replacing it with the use of a ghost jejunostomy), does not increase morbimortality and improves the postoperative comfort of the patient, as well as the hospital stay.
doi_str_mv 10.1093/dote/doac051.273
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>crossref</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1093_dote_doac051_273</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>10_1093_dote_doac051_273</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-crossref_primary_10_1093_dote_doac051_2733</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqdj01OwzAQhS0EEqWwZzkXSBgn6d_SWFMSycRR7IBYWVFJJRCoKGbTXY9Br9eT4KCKA3QzM2_me9I8xm45xhwX6d3r5rsLpV3hhMfJLD1jI55lSZTgBM_DzBOM5tNFdsmuvH9H5LN0Oh-xbUBjoCehGmELXYJegs0JajKNsmaQh92Pbe5JkTGH3R7I6CoXDyStfnyBooQqGKkM7HNh8_-zUCBFKan-WwdMlEC1MFDV2mqp1TW7WLcfvrs59jHDJVmZR6t-433frd1X__bZ9lvH0Q0R3RDRHSO68Hd6guUXOgJVKw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>273. EVALUATION OF THE RESULTS OF ‘TUBELESS’ ESOPHAGECTOMY IN PATIENTS WITH ESOPHAGEAL CANCER WITHIN AN ERAS PROTOCOL</title><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><creator>de Zadava Lissón, Miriam Menéndez Jiménez ; Esteban, Marcos Bruna ; Navarro, Fernando Mingol ; Urbaneja, Francisco Javier Vaqué ; Pardo, Luis Hurtado ; García, Alberto Sánchez</creator><creatorcontrib>de Zadava Lissón, Miriam Menéndez Jiménez ; Esteban, Marcos Bruna ; Navarro, Fernando Mingol ; Urbaneja, Francisco Javier Vaqué ; Pardo, Luis Hurtado ; García, Alberto Sánchez</creatorcontrib><description>Classically, esophagectomy used to routinely left chest drains, as well as decompressive nasogastric tube (NGT) and feeding jejunostomy, making the postoperative period slower and more uncomfortable for patients. Our objective is to evaluate the results of not using tubes and drains (tubeless esophagectomy) in patients with esophageal cancer undergoing McKeown esophagectomy within an ERAS protocol in our center. Retrospective, descriptive and comparative study of two consecutive groups undergoing McKeown esophagectomy. The first group (P) included 25 patients with tubes and drains (April 2018–August 2019) and the second group (T) 25 patients undergoing tubeless esophagectomy (July 2020–December 2021). In group P all patients were left with thoracic drainage and jejunostomy and in selected cases abdominal drainage; no patient was left with NGT. In group T (‘TUBELESS’) no drains or NGT were placed. No jejunostomy was performed except in those patients at high risk of malnutrition, and a phantom jejunostomy was used instead. Both study groups are comparable in terms of epidemiological characteristics, etiology, preoperative tumor stage and neoadjuvant treatment. In group P, 86% of the patients underwent or already had a jejunostomy, 100% of the patients were left with a left thoracic drain and 28% with an abdominal drain. None of the patients had a cervical drain or NGT. In group T no cervical, abdominal or thoracic drain was placed, but 2 patients (8%) underwent a jejunostomy due to high risk of malnutrition. Table 1 shows the postoperative results. There are no significant differences in 90-day mortality, readmission rate or anastomotic leakage. Despite the widespread thought of the need for the use of chest drains after esophagectomy, abstention from their use, as well as abstention from the use of decompressive nasogastric tube and feeding jejunostomy (replacing it with the use of a ghost jejunostomy), does not increase morbimortality and improves the postoperative comfort of the patient, as well as the hospital stay.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1120-8694</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1442-2050</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/dote/doac051.273</identifier><language>eng</language><ispartof>Diseases of the esophagus, 2022-09, Vol.35 (Supplement_2)</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>de Zadava Lissón, Miriam Menéndez Jiménez</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Esteban, Marcos Bruna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Navarro, Fernando Mingol</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Urbaneja, Francisco Javier Vaqué</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pardo, Luis Hurtado</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>García, Alberto Sánchez</creatorcontrib><title>273. EVALUATION OF THE RESULTS OF ‘TUBELESS’ ESOPHAGECTOMY IN PATIENTS WITH ESOPHAGEAL CANCER WITHIN AN ERAS PROTOCOL</title><title>Diseases of the esophagus</title><description>Classically, esophagectomy used to routinely left chest drains, as well as decompressive nasogastric tube (NGT) and feeding jejunostomy, making the postoperative period slower and more uncomfortable for patients. Our objective is to evaluate the results of not using tubes and drains (tubeless esophagectomy) in patients with esophageal cancer undergoing McKeown esophagectomy within an ERAS protocol in our center. Retrospective, descriptive and comparative study of two consecutive groups undergoing McKeown esophagectomy. The first group (P) included 25 patients with tubes and drains (April 2018–August 2019) and the second group (T) 25 patients undergoing tubeless esophagectomy (July 2020–December 2021). In group P all patients were left with thoracic drainage and jejunostomy and in selected cases abdominal drainage; no patient was left with NGT. In group T (‘TUBELESS’) no drains or NGT were placed. No jejunostomy was performed except in those patients at high risk of malnutrition, and a phantom jejunostomy was used instead. Both study groups are comparable in terms of epidemiological characteristics, etiology, preoperative tumor stage and neoadjuvant treatment. In group P, 86% of the patients underwent or already had a jejunostomy, 100% of the patients were left with a left thoracic drain and 28% with an abdominal drain. None of the patients had a cervical drain or NGT. In group T no cervical, abdominal or thoracic drain was placed, but 2 patients (8%) underwent a jejunostomy due to high risk of malnutrition. Table 1 shows the postoperative results. There are no significant differences in 90-day mortality, readmission rate or anastomotic leakage. Despite the widespread thought of the need for the use of chest drains after esophagectomy, abstention from their use, as well as abstention from the use of decompressive nasogastric tube and feeding jejunostomy (replacing it with the use of a ghost jejunostomy), does not increase morbimortality and improves the postoperative comfort of the patient, as well as the hospital stay.</description><issn>1120-8694</issn><issn>1442-2050</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqdj01OwzAQhS0EEqWwZzkXSBgn6d_SWFMSycRR7IBYWVFJJRCoKGbTXY9Br9eT4KCKA3QzM2_me9I8xm45xhwX6d3r5rsLpV3hhMfJLD1jI55lSZTgBM_DzBOM5tNFdsmuvH9H5LN0Oh-xbUBjoCehGmELXYJegs0JajKNsmaQh92Pbe5JkTGH3R7I6CoXDyStfnyBooQqGKkM7HNh8_-zUCBFKan-WwdMlEC1MFDV2mqp1TW7WLcfvrs59jHDJVmZR6t-433frd1X__bZ9lvH0Q0R3RDRHSO68Hd6guUXOgJVKw</recordid><startdate>20220924</startdate><enddate>20220924</enddate><creator>de Zadava Lissón, Miriam Menéndez Jiménez</creator><creator>Esteban, Marcos Bruna</creator><creator>Navarro, Fernando Mingol</creator><creator>Urbaneja, Francisco Javier Vaqué</creator><creator>Pardo, Luis Hurtado</creator><creator>García, Alberto Sánchez</creator><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20220924</creationdate><title>273. EVALUATION OF THE RESULTS OF ‘TUBELESS’ ESOPHAGECTOMY IN PATIENTS WITH ESOPHAGEAL CANCER WITHIN AN ERAS PROTOCOL</title><author>de Zadava Lissón, Miriam Menéndez Jiménez ; Esteban, Marcos Bruna ; Navarro, Fernando Mingol ; Urbaneja, Francisco Javier Vaqué ; Pardo, Luis Hurtado ; García, Alberto Sánchez</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-crossref_primary_10_1093_dote_doac051_2733</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>de Zadava Lissón, Miriam Menéndez Jiménez</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Esteban, Marcos Bruna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Navarro, Fernando Mingol</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Urbaneja, Francisco Javier Vaqué</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pardo, Luis Hurtado</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>García, Alberto Sánchez</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Diseases of the esophagus</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>de Zadava Lissón, Miriam Menéndez Jiménez</au><au>Esteban, Marcos Bruna</au><au>Navarro, Fernando Mingol</au><au>Urbaneja, Francisco Javier Vaqué</au><au>Pardo, Luis Hurtado</au><au>García, Alberto Sánchez</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>273. EVALUATION OF THE RESULTS OF ‘TUBELESS’ ESOPHAGECTOMY IN PATIENTS WITH ESOPHAGEAL CANCER WITHIN AN ERAS PROTOCOL</atitle><jtitle>Diseases of the esophagus</jtitle><date>2022-09-24</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>35</volume><issue>Supplement_2</issue><issn>1120-8694</issn><eissn>1442-2050</eissn><abstract>Classically, esophagectomy used to routinely left chest drains, as well as decompressive nasogastric tube (NGT) and feeding jejunostomy, making the postoperative period slower and more uncomfortable for patients. Our objective is to evaluate the results of not using tubes and drains (tubeless esophagectomy) in patients with esophageal cancer undergoing McKeown esophagectomy within an ERAS protocol in our center. Retrospective, descriptive and comparative study of two consecutive groups undergoing McKeown esophagectomy. The first group (P) included 25 patients with tubes and drains (April 2018–August 2019) and the second group (T) 25 patients undergoing tubeless esophagectomy (July 2020–December 2021). In group P all patients were left with thoracic drainage and jejunostomy and in selected cases abdominal drainage; no patient was left with NGT. In group T (‘TUBELESS’) no drains or NGT were placed. No jejunostomy was performed except in those patients at high risk of malnutrition, and a phantom jejunostomy was used instead. Both study groups are comparable in terms of epidemiological characteristics, etiology, preoperative tumor stage and neoadjuvant treatment. In group P, 86% of the patients underwent or already had a jejunostomy, 100% of the patients were left with a left thoracic drain and 28% with an abdominal drain. None of the patients had a cervical drain or NGT. In group T no cervical, abdominal or thoracic drain was placed, but 2 patients (8%) underwent a jejunostomy due to high risk of malnutrition. Table 1 shows the postoperative results. There are no significant differences in 90-day mortality, readmission rate or anastomotic leakage. Despite the widespread thought of the need for the use of chest drains after esophagectomy, abstention from their use, as well as abstention from the use of decompressive nasogastric tube and feeding jejunostomy (replacing it with the use of a ghost jejunostomy), does not increase morbimortality and improves the postoperative comfort of the patient, as well as the hospital stay.</abstract><doi>10.1093/dote/doac051.273</doi></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1120-8694
ispartof Diseases of the esophagus, 2022-09, Vol.35 (Supplement_2)
issn 1120-8694
1442-2050
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_1093_dote_doac051_273
source Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)
title 273. EVALUATION OF THE RESULTS OF ‘TUBELESS’ ESOPHAGECTOMY IN PATIENTS WITH ESOPHAGEAL CANCER WITHIN AN ERAS PROTOCOL
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T16%3A11%3A07IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-crossref&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=273.%20EVALUATION%20OF%20THE%20RESULTS%20OF%20%E2%80%98TUBELESS%E2%80%99%20ESOPHAGECTOMY%20IN%20PATIENTS%20WITH%20ESOPHAGEAL%20CANCER%20WITHIN%20AN%20ERAS%20PROTOCOL&rft.jtitle=Diseases%20of%20the%20esophagus&rft.au=de%20Zadava%20Liss%C3%B3n,%20Miriam%20Men%C3%A9ndez%20Jim%C3%A9nez&rft.date=2022-09-24&rft.volume=35&rft.issue=Supplement_2&rft.issn=1120-8694&rft.eissn=1442-2050&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/dote/doac051.273&rft_dat=%3Ccrossref%3E10_1093_dote_doac051_273%3C/crossref%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true