Optimal dose of preoperative enteral immunonutrition for patients with esophageal cancer.

Second Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Wakayama Medical University, 811-1 Kimiidera, Wakayama 641-8510, Japan.
Surgery Today (Impact Factor: 0.96). 01/2009; 39(10):855-60. DOI: 10.1007/s00595-009-3967-z
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT A preoperative immunonutrition pharmaceutics diet (IMPACT) significantly reduced the incidence of postoperative infectious complications, but the optimal regimen still remains unclear. We evaluated the optimal dose of a preoperative IMPACT for patients with esophageal carcinoma and the incidence of postoperative complications based on the dose of IMPACT.
This study design was a prospective nonrandomized study. Twenty patients with thoracic esophageal carcinoma who underwent a right transthoracic subtotal esophagectomy were divided into two groups. These patients were administered immunonutrition of 500 ml/day (IMP500) or 1000 ml/day (IMP1000) for 7 days before the operation.
The incidence of postoperative mortality and morbidity was not different between the IMP500 group and the IMP1000 group. No difference was observed in the perioperative changes in inflammatory, immunological and nutritional variables between the two groups. There were no adverse effects in the IMP500 group, but four patients (40%) had diarrhea and four patients (40%) had appetite loss in the IMP1000 group. In the IMP1000 group, only four patients (40%) could take 1000 ml, but others reduced the quantity of IMPACT because of diarrhea and discomfort.
This study suggests that 500 ml of IMPACT is recommended as an optimal dose for patients with esophageal cancer.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective: Surgeries for cancer of the esophagus are still associated with a high rate of postoperative morbidity. There are few reports of perioperative nutritional support for patients undergoing esophageal cancer surgery, and there is insufficient evidence to recommend routine use of immunonutrition in these patients. The aim of this study was to determine whether preoperative immunonutrition positively influences key clinical outcomes such as postoperative infectious complications, mortality, length of hospital stay, and short-term survival in this population. Design and Setting: We undertook a retrospective investigation of the effects of preoperative nutritional support on the postoperative course of esophageal cancer surgery at the Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, International University of Health and Welfare Mita Hospital, Tokyo, Japan. Participants: Fifty-five patients who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer were included in this study. Of the 55 patients, 26 patients consumed a liquid dietary supplement (IMPACT group) before surgery and 29 patients did not (STANDARD group). Intervention: Before surgery, the IMPACT group consumed 750 ml (3 packs)/day of Impact® for 5 consecutive days. Measurements: The analysis was based on postoperative complications, hospital mortality, length of hospital stay, and short-term survival. Results: Significantly fewer patients developed postoperative infections in the IMPACT group compared with the STANDARD group (p=.007): 4 of 21 patients in the IMPACT group and 10 of 29 patients in the STANDARD group. Either an infectious complication or another complication developed in 8 patients in the IMPACT group and 13 patients in the STANDARD group, with the result that 6 patients in the STANDARD group died of postoperative complications (p=.001). The duration of hospitalization was 34 days in the IMPACT group and 48 days in the STANDARD group; hence, hospitalization was significantly shorter in patients treated with Impact® (p=.008). The mean 6-month survival rates for the IMPACT group and the STANDARD group were 92% (24/26) and 72% (21/29), respectively (p=.028). Conclusion: Simple preoperative supplementation significantly improved outcome. Administration of the supplemental diet before esophageal surgery appeared to be an effective strategy in reducing infectious complications, mortality, and hospitalization, and improving short-term survival.
    The Journal of Nutrition Health and Aging 01/2014; 18(4):437-40. · 2.39 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study was to assess the resting energy expenditure of patients with esophageal cancer using indirect calorimetry. Eight male patients with esophageal cancer and eight male healthy controls were enrolled in this study. All patients underwent transthoracic esophagectomy with lymph nodes dissections. The resting energy expenditure was measured preoperatively, and on postoperative day 7 and 14 using indirect calorimetry. Preoperatively, the measured resting energy expenditure/body weight in these patients was significantly higher than that of the controls (23.3 ± 2.1 kcal/kg/day vs 20.4 ± 1.6 kcal/kg/day), whereas the measured/predicted energy expenditure from the Harris-Benedict equation ratio was 1.01 ± 0.09, which did not differ significantly from the control values. The measured resting energy expenditure/body weight was 27.3 ± 3.5 kcal/kg/day on postoperative day 7, and 23.7 ± 5.07 kcal/kg/day on postoperative day 14. Significant increases in the measured resting energy expenditure were observed on postoperative day 7, and the measured/predicted energy expenditure ratio was 1.17 ± 0.15. In conclusion, patients with operable esophageal cancers were almost normometabolic before surgery. On the other hand, the patients showed a hyper-metabolic status after esophagectomy. We recommended that nutritional management based on 33 kcal/body weight/day (calculated by the measured resting energy expenditure × active factor 1.2-1.3) may be optimal for patients undergoing esophagectomy.
    Journal of Clinical Biochemistry and Nutrition 11/2011; 49(3):169-73. · 2.25 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Esophageal cancer has traditionally been a disease with poor long term outcomes in terms of both survival and quality of life. In combination with surgical and pharmacologic therapy, nutrition support has been demonstrated to improve patient tolerance of treatment, quality of life, and longterm outcomes. An aggressive multi-disciplinary approach is warranted with nutrition support remaining a cornerstone in management. Historically, nutrition support has focused on adequate caloric provision to prevent weight loss and allow for tolerance of treatment regimens. Alterations in metabolism occur in these patients making their use of available calories inefficient and the future of nutritional support may lie in the ability to alter this deranged metabolism. The purpose of this article is to review the current literature surrounding the etiology, treatment, and role of nutrition support in improving outcomes in esophageal cancer.
    Current Gastroenterology Reports 06/2012; 14(4):356-66.