Patient-Reported Outcomes after Surgical, Endoscopic, or Radiological Techniques for Nutritional Support in Esophageal Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review

Several techniques exist to maintain oral and/or enteral feeding among esophageal cancer (EC) patients, but their impact on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) remains unclear. This systematic review aimed to assess the impact of nutritional support techniques on PROs in EC patients. We searched Medline, Web of Science, and CINAHL Complete from inception to 3 April 2024. Eligible studies included those evaluating EC patients, reporting PROs using standardized measures, and providing data on different nutritional support techniques or comparing them to no intervention. The reference lists of the included studies were also screened for additional eligible articles. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used to evaluate the quality of the included studies. Of the 694 articles identified from databases and 224 from backward citation, 11 studies met the inclusion criteria. Nine studies evaluated the overall quality of life (QoL), four assessed pain, and one evaluated depression. Among those submitted to esophagectomy, jejunostomy may be associated with higher QoL scores and less postoperative pain, compared to a nasojejunal tube, but no significant differences were found when compared to no intervention. For patients undergoing chemotherapy or receiving palliative/symptomatic treatment, expandable metal stents (SEMSs) were associated with higher levels of emotional functioning when compared with laparoscopic gastrostomy. Moreover, percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy or SEMSs were associated with a higher QoL compared with nasogastric tubes. This review underscores the importance of considering PRO measures when evaluating nutritional support techniques in cancer patients, though further robust evidence is needed to fully understand these associations.