Overall , there is little direct evidence for components of ERAS , with much derived from nonesophageal thoracoabdominal surgery .
ERAS in principle seems logical and safe for esophagectomy .
OBJECTIVE This article aims to provide the first systematic review of enhanced recovery after surgery ( ERAS ) programs for  esophagectomy  and generate guidelines .
BACKGROUND ERAS programs use multimodal approaches to reduce complications and accelerate recovery .
Although ERAS is well established in colorectal surgery , experience after esophagectomy has been minimal .
However , esophagectomy remains an extremely high-risk operation , commonly performed in patients with significant comorbidities .
Consequently , ERAS may have a significant role to play in improving outcomes .
No guidelines or review s have been published in esophagectomy .
Omission of Nasogastric Tube Application in Postoperative Care of Esophagectomy
Introduction Surgeons routinely use nasogastric ( NG ) tubes in most esophageal resection surgeries . Considering the numerous complications caused by using the tube and the uncertainty about its usefulness and the scarcity of studies conducted on the subject , particularly in patients with esophageal cancer , the necessity of using the tube in these types of cases is investigated in the present study . Methods In this clinical trial , patients with esophageal cancer were r and omized into groups with NG tube and without NG tube after surgery ; the latter were prescribed Metoclopramide , as well . The variables recorded for each patient included the first day of gas passage , defecation and bowel sounds ( BSs ) auscultation , as well as the duration of postoperative hospitalization , nausea and vomiting , abdominal distension , pulmonary complications , wound complications , anastomosis leak , and the need for placing/replacing the NG tube . Results The incidence of anastomosis leak was significantly higher in the NG-tube group ( 6 vs. 0 ; P = 0.016 ) . Other complications were not different in the two groups . The mean time of gas passage , defecation , BS auscultation , and the duration of postoperative hospitalization did not have meaningful differences in the two groups . The need for placing/replacing the NG tube was the same for both groups . Conclusions The routine application of NG tubes after surgery is not recommended for all patients . We suggest that NG tubes should be used according to the specific problems of each patient
Overall , there is little direct evidence for components of ERAS , with much derived from nonesophageal thoracoabdominal surgery .
ERAS in principle seems logical and safe for esophagectomy .
OBJECTIVE This article aims to provide the first systematic review of enhanced recovery after surgery ( ERAS ) programs for  esophagectomy  and generate guidelines .
BACKGROUND ERAS programs use multimodal approaches to reduce complications and accelerate recovery .
Although ERAS is well established in colorectal surgery , experience after esophagectomy has been minimal .
However , esophagectomy remains an extremely high-risk operation , commonly performed in patients with significant comorbidities .
Consequently , ERAS may have a significant role to play in improving outcomes .
No guidelines or review s have been published in esophagectomy .