Surgery · 1998
Prophylactic jejunostomy: a reappraisal.
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.
Zapas J L, Karakozis S, Kirkpatrick J R
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of enteral feeding in maintaining postoperative nutrition has led some investigators to recommend prophylactic jejunostomy at the time of any high-risk abdominal operation. A failed procedure in this setting weighs heavily on the side of risk without identifiable benefit.
METHODS: A benefit/risk analysis comparing complication rate, avoidance of parenteral nutrition, and discontinuation of jejunostomy feeding was performed in 92 patients. These patients were judged retrospectively to be undergoing either a prophylactic jejunostomy placed at the time of operation for another serious condition (group A) or therapeutic jejunostomy alone (group B) during a 3-year period (1993 to 1996). Classification as prophylactic or therapeutic was determined by the surgeon's preoperative intent.
RESULTS: Avoidance of parenteral nutritional support, a goal of prophylactic jejunostomy, was not achieved in 39% of the patients. Patients in group A had a 5-fold increase in the risk of premature discontinuation of enteral feeds when compared with group B (P < .03). The complication rate was higher in group A (41%) than in group B (26%). Four life-threatening complications occurred in group A; all required reversal of the feeding jejunostomy.
CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that the benefit/risk ratio of prophylactic jejunostomy is low. This adds weight to the notion that this procedure be abandoned in favor of other forms of nutritional support.
METHODS: A benefit/risk analysis comparing complication rate, avoidance of parenteral nutrition, and discontinuation of jejunostomy feeding was performed in 92 patients. These patients were judged retrospectively to be undergoing either a prophylactic jejunostomy placed at the time of operation for another serious condition (group A) or therapeutic jejunostomy alone (group B) during a 3-year period (1993 to 1996). Classification as prophylactic or therapeutic was determined by the surgeon's preoperative intent.
RESULTS: Avoidance of parenteral nutritional support, a goal of prophylactic jejunostomy, was not achieved in 39% of the patients. Patients in group A had a 5-fold increase in the risk of premature discontinuation of enteral feeds when compared with group B (P < .03). The complication rate was higher in group A (41%) than in group B (26%). Four life-threatening complications occurred in group A; all required reversal of the feeding jejunostomy.
CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that the benefit/risk ratio of prophylactic jejunostomy is low. This adds weight to the notion that this procedure be abandoned in favor of other forms of nutritional support.