Effects of Early Initiation of Solid Versus Liquid Diet after Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection on Quality of Life and Postoperative Outcomes: A Prospective Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection
/ adverse effects
Feasibility Studies
Female
Gastroscopy
/ adverse effects
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Nutrition Therapy
/ adverse effects
Pilot Projects
Postoperative Care
/ adverse effects
Postoperative Complications
/ etiology
Prospective Studies
Quality of Life
Stomach Neoplasms
/ surgery
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
Early solid diet
Endoscopic submucosal dissection
Enhanced recovery after surgery
Gastric neoplasms
Quality of life
Journal
Digestion
ISSN: 1421-9867
Titre abrégé: Digestion
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 0150472
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2019
2019
Historique:
received:
03
08
2018
accepted:
12
10
2018
pubmed:
17
12
2018
medline:
27
2
2020
entrez:
17
12
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Feeding recommendations after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for gastric neoplasms are not established and based on clinical experience. This was a prospective pilot randomized controlled trial. Patients undergoing ESD for gastric neoplasms were randomly assigned to solid (n = 50) or liquid diet (n = 50) groups. Beginning the day after hemostasis confirmation until discharge, the solid diet group started on a diet of rice porridge, whereas the liquid diet group started on a liquid diet, with gradual transition to solid food. The primary endpoint was delayed bleeding rate. The secondary endpoints were quality of life (QOL), ulcer-stage, hospital fees, and post-ESD symptoms. Delayed bleeding occurred in the solid diet group (2%) but not in the liquid diet group. The QOL evaluation using European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-STO22 showed better score in the solid diet group. The patients who felt dietary restriction at discharge was of a larger number in the liquid diet group (p = 0.019). More patients experienced appetite loss (p = 0.038), constipation (p = 0.022), and dietary restriction (p = 0.037) in the liquid diet group during hospitalization. The other endpoints were equivalent between the groups. Early initiation of solid foods after ESD is feasible and associated with higher QOL, potentially rendering conventional liquid diets unnecessary, although additional studies are needed (Trial registration number: UMIN000013297).
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND/AIMS
OBJECTIVE
Feeding recommendations after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for gastric neoplasms are not established and based on clinical experience.
METHODS
METHODS
This was a prospective pilot randomized controlled trial. Patients undergoing ESD for gastric neoplasms were randomly assigned to solid (n = 50) or liquid diet (n = 50) groups. Beginning the day after hemostasis confirmation until discharge, the solid diet group started on a diet of rice porridge, whereas the liquid diet group started on a liquid diet, with gradual transition to solid food. The primary endpoint was delayed bleeding rate. The secondary endpoints were quality of life (QOL), ulcer-stage, hospital fees, and post-ESD symptoms.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Delayed bleeding occurred in the solid diet group (2%) but not in the liquid diet group. The QOL evaluation using European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-STO22 showed better score in the solid diet group. The patients who felt dietary restriction at discharge was of a larger number in the liquid diet group (p = 0.019). More patients experienced appetite loss (p = 0.038), constipation (p = 0.022), and dietary restriction (p = 0.037) in the liquid diet group during hospitalization. The other endpoints were equivalent between the groups.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Early initiation of solid foods after ESD is feasible and associated with higher QOL, potentially rendering conventional liquid diets unnecessary, although additional studies are needed (Trial registration number: UMIN000013297).
Identifiants
pubmed: 30554216
pii: 000494490
doi: 10.1159/000494490
pmc: PMC6878853
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
160-169Informations de copyright
© 2018 The Author(s) Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.
Références
Surg Endosc. 2017 Sep;31(9):3412-3436
pubmed: 28776285
Gastric Cancer. 2017 Jan;20(1):1-19
pubmed: 27342689
PLoS One. 2014 Nov 14;9(11):e112062
pubmed: 25397686
Oncotarget. 2017 Jun 20;8(43):75699-75711
pubmed: 29088903
Gastric Cancer. 2007;10(1):1-11
pubmed: 17334711
J Gastric Cancer. 2012 Sep;12(3):194-200
pubmed: 23094232
Scand J Gastroenterol. 2012 Sep;47(8-9):1108-14
pubmed: 22783937
Intern Med. 2010;49(4):253-9
pubmed: 20154428
J Dig Dis. 2017 Aug;18(8):445-452
pubmed: 28644907
World J Surg. 2007 Jun;31(6):1234-9
pubmed: 17468901
Surg Endosc. 2014 Apr;28(4):1321-9
pubmed: 24337884
JAMA Surg. 2017 Mar 1;152(3):292-298
pubmed: 28097305
World J Gastroenterol. 2014 Jan 14;20(2):578-83
pubmed: 24574728
Ann Surg Oncol. 2016 Sep;23(9):2928-35
pubmed: 27084538
Gastroenterology. 2010 Apr;138(4):1312-20
pubmed: 20060830
Surgery. 2011 Apr;149(4):561-8
pubmed: 21146844
Digestion. 2008;77 Suppl 1:23-8
pubmed: 18204258
Gastrointest Endosc. 2009 Jun;69(7):1228-35
pubmed: 19249769
J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012 May;27(5):907-12
pubmed: 22142449
Endoscopy. 2014 Jan;46(1):46-52
pubmed: 24218308
Gut. 2015 Mar;64(3):397-405
pubmed: 25301853
Gut Liver. 2007 Jun;1(1):12-21
pubmed: 20485653
Eur J Cancer. 2001 May;37(8):966-71
pubmed: 11334720
Endoscopy. 2008 Mar;40(3):179-83
pubmed: 18322872
World J Surg. 2012 Dec;36(12):2879-87
pubmed: 22941233
Gastric Cancer. 2006;9(4):262-70
pubmed: 17235627
Scand J Gastroenterol. 2009;44(11):1370-6
pubmed: 19891589
Gastric Cancer. 2000 Dec;3(4):219-225
pubmed: 11984739
Br J Surg. 2002 Apr;89(4):467-70
pubmed: 11952589
World J Gastroenterol. 2006 Aug 28;12(32):5108-12
pubmed: 16937520
Gut Liver. 2017 Jan 15;11(1):87-92
pubmed: 27282267
Eur J Cancer. 2004 Oct;40(15):2260-8
pubmed: 15454251
World J Surg Oncol. 2017 Nov 23;15(1):207
pubmed: 29169362