Enteral Nutritional Support, Gastrointestinal Fistula
Conditions
Keywords
enteral nutrition, parenteral nutrition, gastrointestinal fistula
Brief summary
The incidence of clinically significant anastomotic leaks (AL) after upper gastrointestinal (GI) surgery is approximately 4 % - 20 %, and the associated mortality can be as high as 80 % . Nutritional support is a key component of therapy in such cases, related to high prevalence of malnutrition and nil per month required for leak treatment. In the prophylactic setting, before the occurrence of any AL, a literature review based on seven randomised trials showed that enteral nutrition (EN) is associated with shorter hospital stay, lower incidence of severe of infectious complications, lower severity of complications and decreased cost compared to parenteral nutrition (TPN) following major upper GI surgery . In the curative setting, after the AL occurrence, very few evidence is available. Only one randomized clinical trial suggested the superiority of EN versus TPN after pancreatic surgery with a increase of the 30-day fistula closure rate from 37% in the TPN group to 60% in the EN group . This sole randomised study available did not include all postoperative upper GI AL (PUGIAL) that can occur after esophageal, gastric, duodenal, pancreatic surgery (including obesity surgery), whereas the concept of enteral nutritional support is highly relevant for all these situations. However surgeons are usually reluctant to provide EN in case of AL. A randomized study suggested the feasibility of EN in 47 patients with upper GI AL but no randomized study to date has been designed to test the superiority of EN versus TPN in PUGIAL. The study aim is to demonstrate the superiority of EN versus TPN to accelerate AL healing after upper GI surgery. Hypothesis: EN increases the 30-day fistula closure rate in PUGIAL, allowing better HRQOL without increasing morbi-mortality.
Interventions
OTHEREnteral nutrition
administration of enteral nutrition
OTHERParenteral nutrition
administration of parenteral nutrition
Sponsors
University Hospital, Lille
Ministry of Health, France
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Patients ≥ 18 years * Patients having received upper GI surgery for benign or malignant disease including, oesophageal, gastric, duodenal or pancreatic surgery or bariatric surgery * Diagnosis of an active postoperative fistula or persisting after a failure of surgical or endoscopic procedure dedicated to close the fistula * AL diagnosed from less than 72h AND confirmed on at least two criteria among the followings: * clinical symptoms of AL * ct scan / ultrason imaging and /or endoscopic diagnosis of AL * biologic/bacteriology diagnosis on fluid output * intraoperative diagnosis of AL at time of reoperation * Indication of nil per mouth * American society of anesthesiologist score 1, 2 or 3 * In case of neoplasm, absence of peritoneal carcinomatosis or distant metastasis * No severe concomitant uncontrolled disease * Life expectancy more than 6 months * No history of allergy or study product intolerance * Ongoing healthcare insurance
Exclusion criteria
* \- Scheduled surgical or endoscopic treatment with the aim to close the fistula (suture, prosthesis, clip or glue). In case of such treatment failure, patients are eligible to participate to the study. Endoscopic or surgical drainage are not
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 30-day fistula closure rate | 30 days after randomization | Fistula closure will be defined as an output of no fluid for at least 48 hours in wound or drainage AND absence of any fluid collection on imaging (Computed Tomography scan with injection of contrast product). |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 6-month fistula closure rate | at 6 months after randomization | Percentage of patients having their fistula closed according to the definition above within 6 months after randomization |
| Time to first fistula closure | at 6 months after randomization | Time to first fistula closure defined as time in days from randomization to first AL closure within 6 months after randomization |
| Treatment-related complications | longitudinal evaluation during all the study duration (from randomization to 6 months) | number of patients presenting at least one complication related to the nutritional support (catheter related infection or thrombosis, tube related complication) |
| Postoperative mortality rate | at 30 days after randomization | rate of death after operation |
| Postoperative morbidity rate | at 30 days after randomization | rate of patients with a Clavien-Dindo grade 3-4-5 complications |
| Weight | longitudinal evaluation during all the study duration (from randomization to 6 months) | in kg |
| Albumin and prealbumin | longitudinal evaluation during all the study duration (from randomization to 6 months) | in g/L |
| C reactive protein | longitudinal evaluation during all the study duration (from randomization to 6 months) | mg/L |
| Grip test | longitudinal evaluation during all the study duration (from randomization to 6 months) | muscular strength |
| Length of hospital stay in healthcare structure | from the randomization until the end of hospitalization, up to 6 months | Length of hospital stay in healthcare structure (including home hospitalization) based on the number of days of hospitalization |
| Short form questionnaire 36 (SF-36) | at inclusion, day 30, day 60, 3 months and 6 months | Patient's Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) score. The SF-36 includes a single-item measure of health transition or change. he SF-36® Health Survey items and scales were constructed using the Likert method of summated ratings.4 Answers to each question are scored (some items need to be recoded). These scores are then summed to produce raw scale scores for each health concept which are then transformed to a 0 - 100 scale. Thie higher the score is, the better the quality of life is. |
Countries
France
Contacts
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORGuillaume Piessen, MD,PhD
University Hospital, Lille
Outcome results
None listed