• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content

SAGES

Reimagining surgical care for a healthier world

  • Home
    • Search
    • SAGES Home
    • SAGES Foundation Home
  • About
    • Awards
    • Who Is SAGES?
    • Leadership
    • Our Mission
    • Advocacy
    • Committees
      • SAGES Board of Governors
      • Officers and Representatives of the Society
      • Committee Chairs and Co-Chairs
      • Committee Rosters
      • SAGES Past Presidents
  • Meetings
    • SAGES NBT Innovation Weekend
    • SAGES Annual Meeting
      • 2026 Scientific Session Call for Abstracts
      • 2026 Emerging Technology Call for Abstracts
    • CME Claim Form
    • SAGES Past, Present, Future, and Related Meeting Information
    • SAGES Related Meetings & Events Calendar
  • Join SAGES!
    • Membership Application
    • Membership Benefits
    • Membership Types
      • Requirements and Applications for Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Affiliate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Associate Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Candidate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for International Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements for Medical Student Membership
    • Member Spotlight
    • Give the Gift of SAGES Membership
  • Patients
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Healthy Sooner – Patient Information for Minimally Invasive Surgery
    • Choosing Wisely – An Initiative of the ABIM Foundation
    • All in the Recovery: Colorectal Cancer Alliance
    • Find A SAGES Surgeon
  • Publications
    • Sustainability in Surgical Practice
    • SAGES Stories Podcast
    • SAGES Clinical / Practice / Training Guidelines, Statements, and Standards of Practice
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Patient Information From SAGES
    • TAVAC – Technology and Value Assessments
    • Surgical Endoscopy and Other Journal Information
    • SAGES Manuals
    • MesSAGES – The SAGES Newsletter
    • COVID-19 Archive
    • Troubleshooting Guides
  • Education
    • Wellness Resources – You Are Not Alone
    • Avoid Opiates After Surgery
    • SAGES Subscription Catalog
    • SAGES TV: Home of SAGES Surgical Videos
    • The SAGES Safe Cholecystectomy Program
    • Masters Program
    • Resident and Fellow Opportunities
      • SAGES Free Resident Webinar Series
      • Fluorescence-Guided Surgery Course for Fellows
      • Fellows’ Career Development Course
      • SAGES Robotics Residents and Fellows Courses
      • MIS Fellows Course
    • SAGES S.M.A.R.T. Enhanced Recovery Program
    • SAGES @ Cine-Med Products
      • SAGES Top 21 Minimally Invasive Procedures Every Practicing Surgeon Should Know
      • SAGES Pearls Step-by-Step
      • SAGES Flexible Endoscopy 101
    • SAGES OR SAFETY Video Activity
  • Opportunities
    • Fellowship Recognition Opportunities
    • SAGES Advanced Flexible Endoscopy Area of Concentrated Training (ACT) SEAL
    • Multi-Society Foregut Fellowship Certification
    • Research Opportunities
    • FLS
    • FES
    • FUSE
    • Jobs Board
    • SAGES Go Global: Global Affairs and Humanitarian Efforts
  • Search
    • Search the SAGES Site
    • Guidelines Search
    • Video Search
    • Search Images
    • Search Abstracts
  • OWLS/FLS
  • Login
You are here: Home / Abstracts / Does Concomitant Placement of a Feeding Jejunostomy Tube During Esophagectomy Affect Quality Outcomes?

Does Concomitant Placement of a Feeding Jejunostomy Tube During Esophagectomy Affect Quality Outcomes?

Landon Guntman, MD, Adil Ayub, MD, Sadiq Rehmani, MD, Faiz Bhora, MD, FACS, Wissam Raad, MD, FACS. Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai

Background: Placement of a feeding jejunostomy tube (FJ) is often performed during esophagectomy.  Few studies, however, have sought to determine whether concomitant placement affects postoperative outcomes of esophagectomy.

Materials and methods: The American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database was queried using current procedural terminology (CPT) billing codes to identify all patients who underwent elective esophagectomy secondary to cancer between 2012 and 2014. Subgroup analysis was performed to determine whether there was any difference based on neck, chest, or an enteral/colonic transposition anastomosis. Patient demographics, comorbidities, operative characteristics and postoperative complications were compared using Chi-squared and Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test.

Results: A total of 3051 cases were identified. FJ placement was concomitantly placed in 1794(59%). Overall, the thirty-day-postoperative mortality did not differ between the two groups (2.6% for patients with FJ versus 2.0% without, P 0.258). The readmission rate, return to OR, LOS, and wound infection rates were similar. The mean operative time was longer in those undergoing concomitant FJ (375 min for patients with FJ versus 335 min without, P 0.0001). Postoperative pneumonia, and UTI were higher in patients undergoing FJ placement during esophagectomy. Upon subgroup analysis, when a cervical anastomosis was performed, the rate of superficial SSI was 6.4% in the FJ group versus 10% in the non-FJ group.

Conclusion: Although FJ placement during esophagectomy is associated with increased operative time, pneumonia, and UTI, our analysis of data from NSQIP suggest that FJ placement is not associated with increased mortality, debilitating postoperative morbidity, readmission, or increased length of stay. When a cervical anastomosis is performed, FJ placement is associated with a lower rate of superficial SSI.


Presented at the SAGES 2017 Annual Meeting in Houston, TX.

Abstract ID: 86875

Program Number: P736

Presentation Session: iPoster Session (Non CME)

Presentation Type: Poster

95


  • Foundation
  • SAGES.TV
  • MyCME
  • Educational Activities

Copyright © 2025 Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons