Skip to main content

Lund University Publications

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Nasogastric tube after oesophagectomy and risk of anastomotic leak : a Nordic, multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial

Hedberg, Jakob ; Kauppila, Joonas ; Aahlin, Eirik Kjus ; Edholm, David ; Johnsen, Gjermund ; Johansson, Jan LU orcid ; Lagergren, Pernilla ; Lindblad, Mats ; Lindberg, Fredrik and Helminen, Olli , et al. (2025) In The Lancet regional health. Europe 57. p.1-10
Abstract

BACKGROUND: Oesophagectomy, a corner stone in curative treatment of oesophageal cancer, is a complex procedure with high complication rates. Postoperative gastric tube decompression is debated and some centres are abandoning routine nasogastric (NG) tube use. We hypothesised that postoperative NG tube removal is non-inferior to five days of NG tube decompression, with regard to the risk of anastomotic leak.

METHODS: In this open-label, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial across 12 hospitals in Sweden, Norway, Denmark and Finland, participants treated for oesophageal or gastroesophageal junctional cancer with oesophagectomy were randomly assigned (1:1) to no postoperative NG tube or five days of NG tube decompression.... (More)

BACKGROUND: Oesophagectomy, a corner stone in curative treatment of oesophageal cancer, is a complex procedure with high complication rates. Postoperative gastric tube decompression is debated and some centres are abandoning routine nasogastric (NG) tube use. We hypothesised that postoperative NG tube removal is non-inferior to five days of NG tube decompression, with regard to the risk of anastomotic leak.

METHODS: In this open-label, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial across 12 hospitals in Sweden, Norway, Denmark and Finland, participants treated for oesophageal or gastroesophageal junctional cancer with oesophagectomy were randomly assigned (1:1) to no postoperative NG tube or five days of NG tube decompression. Anastomotic leak was the primary outcome and secondary outcomes included pneumonia and length of hospital stay. Analyses were performed on the intention to treat and per protocol populations and non-inferiority for anastomotic leak was defined as a risk difference below 9%. ISRCTN.com registration ISRCTN39935085.

FINDINGS: Between January 1st 2022 and March 27th 2024, 448 patients were randomly assigned, 217 to no postoperative NG tube and 231 to five days NG tube treatment. The mean age was 67.5 (standard deviation (SD) 9.8) years and 367 (81.9%) were males. Non-inferiority with regard to anastomotic leak for no NG tube decompression could not be shown with 48 patients (22.1% (95% confidence interval (CI) 16.8%, 28.2%)) having anastomotic leak compared to 35 (15.2% (95% CI 10.8%, 20.4%)) with five days of NG tube decompression, a risk difference of -7.0% (95% CI -14.4%, 0.00%), pnon-inferiority 0.30. In a Supplementary analysis, patients had a lower risk of anastomotic leak if postoperative NG decompression was used. Rate of other complications, e.g., pneumonia, were similar between groups. In a per-protocol analysis, the risk difference was -11.3% to the advantage of NG tube (95% CI, -19.1, -0.3%).

INTERPRETATION: We could not establish safety (increased risk of anastomotic leak) and therefore do not support omission of NG tube after oesophagectomy.

FUNDING: This trial was funded by the Swedish Cancer Society and the Nordic Cancer Union.

(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; and , et al. (More)
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; and (Less)
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
in
The Lancet regional health. Europe
volume
57
article number
101411
pages
1 - 10
publisher
Elsevier
external identifiers
  • pmid:40799505
  • scopus:105012117621
ISSN
2666-7762
DOI
10.1016/j.lanepe.2025.101411
language
English
LU publication?
yes
additional info
Crown Copyright © 2025 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
id
3450039f-aacf-4b44-9ce9-8c82e18a289b
date added to LUP
2025-08-21 15:09:58
date last changed
2025-10-03 08:00:01
@article{3450039f-aacf-4b44-9ce9-8c82e18a289b,
  abstract     = {{<p>BACKGROUND: Oesophagectomy, a corner stone in curative treatment of oesophageal cancer, is a complex procedure with high complication rates. Postoperative gastric tube decompression is debated and some centres are abandoning routine nasogastric (NG) tube use. We hypothesised that postoperative NG tube removal is non-inferior to five days of NG tube decompression, with regard to the risk of anastomotic leak.</p><p>METHODS: In this open-label, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial across 12 hospitals in Sweden, Norway, Denmark and Finland, participants treated for oesophageal or gastroesophageal junctional cancer with oesophagectomy were randomly assigned (1:1) to no postoperative NG tube or five days of NG tube decompression. Anastomotic leak was the primary outcome and secondary outcomes included pneumonia and length of hospital stay. Analyses were performed on the intention to treat and per protocol populations and non-inferiority for anastomotic leak was defined as a risk difference below 9%. ISRCTN.com registration ISRCTN39935085.</p><p>FINDINGS: Between January 1st 2022 and March 27th 2024, 448 patients were randomly assigned, 217 to no postoperative NG tube and 231 to five days NG tube treatment. The mean age was 67.5 (standard deviation (SD) 9.8) years and 367 (81.9%) were males. Non-inferiority with regard to anastomotic leak for no NG tube decompression could not be shown with 48 patients (22.1% (95% confidence interval (CI) 16.8%, 28.2%)) having anastomotic leak compared to 35 (15.2% (95% CI 10.8%, 20.4%)) with five days of NG tube decompression, a risk difference of -7.0% (95% CI -14.4%, 0.00%), pnon-inferiority 0.30. In a Supplementary analysis, patients had a lower risk of anastomotic leak if postoperative NG decompression was used. Rate of other complications, e.g., pneumonia, were similar between groups. In a per-protocol analysis, the risk difference was -11.3% to the advantage of NG tube (95% CI, -19.1, -0.3%).</p><p>INTERPRETATION: We could not establish safety (increased risk of anastomotic leak) and therefore do not support omission of NG tube after oesophagectomy.</p><p>FUNDING: This trial was funded by the Swedish Cancer Society and the Nordic Cancer Union.</p>}},
  author       = {{Hedberg, Jakob and Kauppila, Joonas and Aahlin, Eirik Kjus and Edholm, David and Johnsen, Gjermund and Johansson, Jan and Lagergren, Pernilla and Lindblad, Mats and Lindberg, Fredrik and Helminen, Olli and Löfdahl, Per and Førland, Dag Tidemann and Vikhammer, Mads and de Heer, Pieter and Sundbom, Magnus and Szabo, Eva and Åkesson, Oscar and Nilsson, Magnus and Nilsson, Albert and Achiam, Michael and Mala, Tom}},
  issn         = {{2666-7762}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  pages        = {{1--10}},
  publisher    = {{Elsevier}},
  series       = {{The Lancet regional health. Europe}},
  title        = {{Nasogastric tube after oesophagectomy and risk of anastomotic leak : a Nordic, multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial}},
  url          = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lanepe.2025.101411}},
  doi          = {{10.1016/j.lanepe.2025.101411}},
  volume       = {{57}},
  year         = {{2025}},
}