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 .
Postoperative enteral versus parenteral nutrition in malnourished patients with gastrointestinal cancer: a randomised multicentre trial
BACKGROUND Although current opinion favours the use of enteral over parenteral nutrition , the clinical benefits of early postoperative nutrition in patients undergoing elective surgery have never been clearly shown . We aim ed to test the hypothesis that postoperative enteral nutrition is better ( fewer postoperative complications ) than parenteral nutrition containing similar energy and nitrogen amounts ( 112 kJ kg(-1 ) day(-1 ) and 1.4 g aminoacid kg(-1 ) day(-1 ) ) . METHODS We did a r and omised multicentre clinical trial in patients with gastrointestinal cancer who were malnourished and c and i date s for major elective surgery . 159 patients were assigned to enteral nutrition and 158 to parenteral nutrition .  The primary endpoint was the occurrence of postoperative complications , and secondary endpoints were length of postoperative hospital stay , adverse effects , and treatment crossover . Analysis was by intention to treat . FINDINGS Postoperative complications occurred in 54 ( 34 % ) patients fed enterally versus 78 ( 49 % ) fed parenterally ( relative risk 0.69 , 95 % CI 0.53 - 0.90 , p=0.005 ) . Length of postoperative stay was 13.4 days and 15.0 days in the enteral nutrition and parenteral nutrition groups , respectively ( p=0.009 ) . Adverse effects occurred in 56 ( 35 % ) patients fed enterally versus 22 ( 14 % ) patients fed parenterally ( 2.50 , 1.61 - 3.86 , p<0.0001 ) . 14 ( 9 % ) patients on enteral nutrition had to switch to parenteral nutrition , whereas none of those fed parenterally crossed over to enteral feeding . INTERPRETATION We conclude that early enteral nutrition significantly reduces the complication rate and duration of postoperative stay compared with parenteral nutrition , although parenteral nutrition is better tolerated than enteral nutrition
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 .