Predictors of gastrostomy tube placement in patients with head and neck cancer undergoing resection and flap-based reconstruction: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Flap-based reconstruction
Gastrostomy tube
Head and neck cancer
Meta-analysis
Journal
Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS
ISSN: 1878-0539
Titre abrégé: J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101264239
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 2023
04 2023
Historique:
received:
13
05
2022
accepted:
17
08
2022
medline:
11
4
2023
pubmed:
14
2
2023
entrez:
13
2
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Nutritional status may be impaired in patients with head and neck cancer undergoing surgical treatment, often necessitating gastrostomy tube (G-tube) placement. Identifying which patients will require a G-tube remains a challenge. This study identifies predictors of G-tube requirement in patients undergoing tumor resection and reconstruction with pedicled or free flaps. Systematic review of the PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus databases was performed of English language articles, discussing risk factors of perioperative G-tube placement among patients >18 years. Data on patient, tumor, and treatment factors, as well as need for G-tube, were collected. Univariable meta-analysis was conducted to identify predictors for G-tube placement. Eleven studies (1,112 patients) met inclusion criteria. Overall pooled prevalence of postoperative G-tube placement was 25%. Patients with advanced cancer stage IV/recurrence were more likely to require a G-tube (OR 2.81 [CI 1.03-7.69]; p<0.05), as were those who had undergone preoperative radiation (OR 3.55 [CI 2.03-6.20], p<0.05). Reconstruction with a radial forearm free flap was associated with a lower need for G-tube versus rectus abdominis (OR 0.25 [CI 0.08-0.83], p=0.02) and latissimus dorsi flap (OR 0.21 [CI 0.04-1.09], p=0.06). There was no difference in G-tube placement between those receiving pedicled flaps versus free flaps (OR 1.54 [CI 0.38-6.20], p=0.54). Among patients with head and neck cancer undergoing resection with immediate pedicled or free flap reconstruction, advanced tumor stage and history of prior radiation therapy are associated with increased likelihood of G-tube placement. More randomized controlled trials are needed to develop a decision-making algorithm.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Nutritional status may be impaired in patients with head and neck cancer undergoing surgical treatment, often necessitating gastrostomy tube (G-tube) placement. Identifying which patients will require a G-tube remains a challenge. This study identifies predictors of G-tube requirement in patients undergoing tumor resection and reconstruction with pedicled or free flaps.
METHODS
Systematic review of the PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus databases was performed of English language articles, discussing risk factors of perioperative G-tube placement among patients >18 years. Data on patient, tumor, and treatment factors, as well as need for G-tube, were collected. Univariable meta-analysis was conducted to identify predictors for G-tube placement.
RESULTS
Eleven studies (1,112 patients) met inclusion criteria. Overall pooled prevalence of postoperative G-tube placement was 25%. Patients with advanced cancer stage IV/recurrence were more likely to require a G-tube (OR 2.81 [CI 1.03-7.69]; p<0.05), as were those who had undergone preoperative radiation (OR 3.55 [CI 2.03-6.20], p<0.05). Reconstruction with a radial forearm free flap was associated with a lower need for G-tube versus rectus abdominis (OR 0.25 [CI 0.08-0.83], p=0.02) and latissimus dorsi flap (OR 0.21 [CI 0.04-1.09], p=0.06). There was no difference in G-tube placement between those receiving pedicled flaps versus free flaps (OR 1.54 [CI 0.38-6.20], p=0.54).
CONCLUSIONS
Among patients with head and neck cancer undergoing resection with immediate pedicled or free flap reconstruction, advanced tumor stage and history of prior radiation therapy are associated with increased likelihood of G-tube placement. More randomized controlled trials are needed to develop a decision-making algorithm.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36780787
pii: S1748-6815(22)00483-1
doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2022.08.040
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1-10Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of Competing Interest None of the authors have any conflicts of interest and all authors contributed to the development of this research.