We retrospectively examined a large cohort of esophageal carcinoma patients who received early enteral nutrition (EEN) to clarify the validity of EEN compared with total parenteral nutrition (TPN). Included were a total of 665 consecutive patients with histologically confirmed carcinoma of the esophagus or esophagogastric junction; and all patients underwent esophagectomy. The patients were divided into two groups: TPN (n = 262) and EEN (n = 403). The TPN group consisted of patients who only received intravenous nutrition support after operation. The postoperative length of hospital stay (PLOS), anastomotic leakage, mortality after surgery, and hospital charges were reviewed and analyzed. Compared with the TPN group, the EEN group had significantly shorter mean PLOS (15.6 days vs. 22.5 days; P < 0.01). Multivariable linear regression analysis revealed EEN to be associated with shorter PLOS even after adjustment for tumor histology, tumor location, type of esophagectomy, and postoperative albumin infusion. Hospital charges were also significantly less for those in the EEN group than the TPN group. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding the complication of anastomotic leakage and clinical outcome after surgery. These findings suggest that EEN reduces PLOS and hospital charges of Chinese esophageal cancer patients who had an esophagectomy.