Frontiers in surgery · 2026
Nasojejunal tube, jejunostomy tube, and fine needle catheter jejunostomy effects after esophagectomy.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wang Wu, Yang Tianbao, Xie Jinbiao, Huang Shijie, Chen Boyang
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: To analyze and compare the effect of nasojejunal tube placement (NTP), jejunostomy tube placement (JTP), and fine needle catheter jejunostomy (FNCJ) after esophagectomy.
METHODS: Herein, 159 patients with esophageal carcinoma who underwent esophagectomy were retrospectively analyzed and divided into the following groups: the NTP group (n = 68), JTP group (n = 51), and FNCJ group (n = 40). The operation time, complication rate, average time to start a liquid diet, and average length of hospital stay were compared among the three groups.
RESULTS: The complication rate was significantly higher in the NTP group than in the two other groups (P < 0.05), and it did not statistically significantly differ between the JTP and FNCJ groups (P > 0.05). The tube placement time and average length of hospital stay were also significantly longer in the NTP group than in the two other groups (P < 0.05). The NTP group was associated with significantly longer tube placement time, average length of hospital stay, and average time to start a liquid diet (P < 0.05). The operation time was significantly longer in the JTP group than in the FNCJ group (P < 0.05). The average time to start a liquid diet and length of hospital stay were slightly longer in the JTP group than in the FNCJ group (P > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: NTP showed distinct advantages and disadvantages compared with JTP and FNCJ. When selecting the feeding method, comprehensive consideration should be given to the patient's specific condition.
METHODS: Herein, 159 patients with esophageal carcinoma who underwent esophagectomy were retrospectively analyzed and divided into the following groups: the NTP group (n = 68), JTP group (n = 51), and FNCJ group (n = 40). The operation time, complication rate, average time to start a liquid diet, and average length of hospital stay were compared among the three groups.
RESULTS: The complication rate was significantly higher in the NTP group than in the two other groups (P < 0.05), and it did not statistically significantly differ between the JTP and FNCJ groups (P > 0.05). The tube placement time and average length of hospital stay were also significantly longer in the NTP group than in the two other groups (P < 0.05). The NTP group was associated with significantly longer tube placement time, average length of hospital stay, and average time to start a liquid diet (P < 0.05). The operation time was significantly longer in the JTP group than in the FNCJ group (P < 0.05). The average time to start a liquid diet and length of hospital stay were slightly longer in the JTP group than in the FNCJ group (P > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: NTP showed distinct advantages and disadvantages compared with JTP and FNCJ. When selecting the feeding method, comprehensive consideration should be given to the patient's specific condition.