期刊文献+

Evaluation of a new method for placing nasojejunal feeding tubes 被引量:6

Evaluation of a new method for placing nasojejunal feeding tubes
在线阅读 下载PDF
导出
摘要 AIM:To compare fluoroscopic, endoscopic and guide wire assistance with ultraslim gastroscopy for placement of nasojejunal feeding tubes. METHODS:The information regarding nasojejunal tube placement procedures was retrieved using the gastrointestinal tract database at Tongji Hospital affiliated to Tongji Medical College. Records from 81 patients who underwent nasojejunal tubes placement by different techniques between 2004 and 2011 were reviewed for procedure success and tube-related outcomes. RESULTS:Nasojejunal feeding tubes were successfully placed in 78 (96.3%) of 81 patients. The success rate by fluoroscopy was 92% (23 of 25), by endoscopic technique 96.3% (26 of 27), and by guide wire assistance (whether via transnasal or transoral insertion)100% (23/23, 6/6). The average time for successful placement was 14.9 ± 2.9 min for fluoroscopic placement, 14.8 ± 4.9 min for endoscopic placement, 11.1 ± 2.2 min for guide wire assistance with transnasal gastroscopic placement, and 14.7 ± 1.2 min for transoral gastroscopic placement. Statistically, the duration for the third method was significantly different (P < 0.05) compared with the other three methods. Transnasal placement over a guidewire was significantly faster (P < 0.05) than any of the other approaches. CONCLUSION:Guide wire assistance with transnasal insertion of nasojejunal feeding tubes represents a safe, quick and effective method for providing enteral nutrition. AIM: To compare fluoroscopic, endoscopic and guide wire assistance with ultraslim gastroscopy for place- ment of nasojejunal feeding tubes. METHODS: The information regarding nasojejunal tube placement procedures was retrieved using the gastrointestinal tract database at Tongji Hospital affiliat- ed to Tongji Medical College. Records from 81 patients who underwent nasojejunal tubes placement by differ- ent techniques between 2004 and 2011 were reviewed for procedure success and tube-related outcomes. RESULTS: Nasojejunal feeding tubes were success- fully placed in 78 (96.3%) of 81 patients. The success rate by fluoroscopy was 92% (23 of 25), by endoscopic technique 96.3% (26 of 27), and by guide wire as- sistance (whether via transnasal or transoral insertion) 100% (23/23, 6/6). The average time for successful placement was 14.9 ± 2.9 min for fluoroscopic place- ment, 14.8 ± 4.9 min for endoscopic placement, 11.1 ± 2.2 min for guide wire assistance with transnasal gas- troscopic placement, and 14.7 ± 1.2 min for transoral gastroscopic placement. Statistically, the duration for the third method was significantly different (P 〈 0.05) compared with the other three methods. Transnasal placement over a guidewire was significantly faster (P 〈 0.05) than any of the other approaches. CONCLUSION: Guide wire assistance with transnasal insertion of nasojejunal feeding tubes represents a safe, quick and effective method for providing enteral nutrition.
出处 《World Journal of Gastroenterology》 SCIE CAS CSCD 2012年第37期5295-5299,共5页 世界胃肠病学杂志(英文版)
关键词 Enteral nutrition Nasojejunal feeding tube Guide wire assistance FLUOROSCOPY ENDOSCOPY 放置 喂养 空肠 评价 胃镜检查 信息检索 X光透视
  • 相关文献

参考文献27

  • 1McClave SA, Chang WK, Dhaliwal R, Heyland DK. Nutri- tion support in acute pancreatitis: a systematic review of the literature. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 2006; 30:143-156.
  • 2Abou-Assi S, craig K, O'Keefe SJ. Hypocaloric jejunal feed- ing is better than total parenteral nutrition in acute pancreati- tis: results of a randomized comparative study. Am J Gastro- entero12002; 97:2255-2262.
  • 3EckerwaU GE, Axelsson JB, Andersson RG. Early nasogas- tric feeding in predicted severe acute pancreatitis: A clinical, randomized study. Ann Surg 2006; 244: 959-965; discussion 965-957.
  • 4Ohih A, Pardavi G, Bel-gyi T, Nagy A, Issekutz A, Mohamed GE. Early nasojejunal feeding in acute pancreatitis is associat- ed with a lower complication rate. Nutrition 2002; 18:259-262.
  • 5MacFie J. Enteral versus parenteral nutrition: the significance of bacterial translocation and gut-barrier function. Nutrition 2000; 16:606-611.
  • 6Davies AR, Bellomo R. Establishment of enteral nutrition: prokinetic agents and small bowel feeding tubes. Curr Opin Crit Care 2004; 10:156-161.
  • 7Davies AR, Froomes PR, French CJ, Bellomo R, Gutteridge GA, Nyulasi I, Walker R, Sewell RB. Randomized compari- son of nasojejunal and nasogastric feeding in critically illpatients. Crit Care Med 2002; 30:586-590.
  • 8Silk DB. The evolving role of post-ligament of Trietz nasoje- junal feeding in enteral nutrition and the need for improved feeding tube design and placement methods. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 2011; 35:303-307.
  • 9Schwab D, Mtthldorfer S, Nusko G, Radespiel-TrOger M, Hahn EG, Strauss R. Endoscopic placement of nasojejunal tubes: a randomized, controlled, prospective trial comparing suitability and technical success for two different tubes. Gas- trointest Endosc 2002; 56:858-863.
  • 10Welpe P, Frutiger A, Vanek P, Kleger GR. Jejunal feeding tubes can be efficiently and independently placed by inten- sive care unit teams. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 2010; 34: 121-124.

同被引文献42

引证文献6

二级引证文献19

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部