Skip to main content

Table 5 Comparison of 1minor jejunostomy complications for the two groups

From: A randomised controlled trial of six weeks of home enteral nutrition versus standard care after oesophagectomy or total gastrectomy for cancer: report on a pilot and feasibility study

Minor jejunostomy complications

2Intervention (n = 22)

3Control (n = 23)

In hospital

  

Any jejunostomy complication (%)

11 (50 %)

7 (30 %)

Diarrhoea (%)

2 (9 %)

3 (13 %)

Reflux of feed/vomiting (%)

0 (0 %)

0 (0 %)

Tube displacement or migration (%)

0 (0 %)

1 (4 %)

Inadvertent tube removal (%)

1 (4 %)

1 (4 %)

Tube fracture (%)

0 (0 %)

0 (0 %)

Leakage around insertion site (%)

5 (23 %)

1 (4 %)

Tube occlusion (%)

4 (18 %)

3 (13 %)

2Functional jejunostomy at hospital discharge

20

21

Out of hospital

Intervention (n = 20)

Control (n = 21)

Any jejunostomy complication (%)

11 (55 %)

14 (67 %)

Diarrhoea (%)

4 (20 %)

3 (14 %)

Reflux of feed/vomiting (%)

2 (10 %)

0 (0 %)

Tube displacement or migration (%)

1 (5 %)

0 (0 %)

Inadvertent tube removal (%)

3 (15 %)

5 (24 %)

Tube fracture (%)

0 (0 %)

0 (0 %)

Leakage around insertion site (%)

4 (20 %)

4 (19 %)

Tube occlusion (%)

2 (10 %)

2 (9 %)

Functional jejunostomy at end of six weeks (%)

16 (80 %)

16 (76 %)

  1. 1Indicates Clavien-Dindo grade 1 or 2 complications
  2. 2One participant had a non-functioning jejunostomy tube and one participant underwent gastric mobilisation with jejunostomy placement, but did not proceed to resection
  3. 3One participant had a non-functioning jejunostomy tube, and for one participant the jejunostomy fell out