Abstract
Background: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program has become the main trend in gastrointestinal surgery. The aim of this study is to investigate factors influencing the decision-making of nasogastric tube (NGT) placement and its safety and efficacy in clinical practice. Methods: We analyzed our prospectively maintained database including 287 patients underwent elective gastrectomy in our department from January 1 to December 31, 2017. All cases were divided into two groups, namely, the non-nasogastric tube group and the nasogastric tube group. Logistic regression was used to analyze the factors that affect the decision of nasogastric tube placement, and propensity score matching (PSM) was later applied to balance those factors for the analysis of the safety outcomes between the groups. Results: Multivariate analysis showed that resection range ( p =0.004, proximal gastrectomy: OR=4.555, 95%CI=1.392-14.905, p =0.016; total gastrectomy: OR=1.990, 95%CI=1.205-3.287, p =0.009) was the only independent risk factors of nasogastric tube placement. NGT was omitted in the majority (58.8%) of distal gastrectomy, but only in 42.5% and 25% in total and proximal gastrectomy. After PSM, we found no significant differences between patients with or without NGT in postoperative hospital stay, time to first flatus and defecation, time to fluid and semi-fluid diet, rate of reinsertion, or hospitalization expenditure (p>0.05 respectively). The incidence of postoperative complications in the two groups were 21.7% and 23.5% respectively ( p =0.753), and the incidence of major complications were 7.0% and 9.6% ( p =0.472). Conclusions: The decision-making of NGT placement is mainly influenced by the resection range. Omitting NGT is a safe approach in all types of gastrectomy but was not able to enhance the recovery in our practice.
Omitting nasogastric tube placement after gastrectomy does not enhance postoperative recovery: a propensity score matched analysis
