This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes and hospitalization cost between early enteral nutrition (EEN) and parenteral nutrition (PN) after resection of esophageal cancer. A total of 79 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent surgical treatment in our hospital from July 2010 to July 2013 were enrolled in this study. They were divided into EEN group (n = 39) and PN group (n = 40) based on the nutrition support modes. The clinical factors such as time to first fecal passage, postoperative albumin infusion, differences of serum albumin value, hospital stay, systematic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) duration, complications, initial hospitalization cost, and mortality were retrospectively compared. The EEN group had a significantly shorter hospital stay, lower initial hospitalization cost, earlier first fecal passage, and shorter duration of SIRS than PN group (P < 0.05). The dose of albumin infusion was significantly smaller in EEN group (P < 0.05) and the decreased value of serum albumin (Δalb) was more prominent in PN group compared with EEN group (P < 0.05). The percentage of patients having any postoperative complication was much higher in PN group than EEN group (P < 0.05), but there was no significant difference in in-hospital morbidity between two groups. Pneumonia was found significantly more frequent in PN group compared with EEN group (P < 0.05). Early EN started within 48 h after esophagectomy is safe, economic, and superior for reduction of postoperative complication, for promoting early recovery of intestinal movement, and for early recovery from systemic inflammation.
Keywords: Complication; Enteral nutrition; Esophageal cancer; Parenteral nutrition.