Comparison of Feeding Efficiency and Hospital Mortality between Small Bowel and Nasogastric Tube Feeding in Critically Ill Patients at High Nutritional Risk.

Nasogastric tube enteral nutrition (NGEN) should be initiated within 48 h for patients at high nutritional risk. However, whether small bowel enteral nutrition (SBEN) should be routinely used instead of NGEN to improve hospital mortality remains unclear. We retrospectively analyzed 113 critically ill patients with modified Nutrition Risk in Critically Ill (mNUTRIC) score ≥ 5 and feeding volume < 750 mL/day in the first week of their stay in the intensive care unit (ICU). Age, sex, mNUTRIC score, and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score were matched in the SBEN (n = 48) and NGEN (n = 65) groups. Through a univariate analysis, factors associated with hospital mortality were SBEN group (hazard ratio (HR), 0.56; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.31-1.00), Simplified Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score on day 7 (HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.03-1.22), and energy intake achievement rate < 65% (HR, 2.53; 95% CI, 1.25-5.11). A multivariate analysis indicated that energy intake achievement rate < 65% on the third follow-up day (HR, 2.29; 95% CI, 1.12-4.69) was the only factor independently associated with mortality. We suggest initiation of SBEN on the seventh ICU day before parenteral nutrition initiation for critically ill patients at high nutrition risk.

Nasogastric versus nasojejunal tube feeding for severe acute pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: Nutrition is an important aspect of management in severe acute pancreatitis. Enteral nutrition has advantages over parenteral nutrition and is the preferred method of feeding. Enteral feeding via nasojejunal tube is often recommended, but its benefits over nasogastric feeding are unclear. The placement of a nasogastric tube is technically simpler than the placement of a nasojejunal tube. OBJECTIVES: To compare the mortality, morbidity, and nutritional status outcomes of people with severe acute pancreatitis fed via nasogastric tube versus nasojejunal tube. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS on 17 October 2019 without using any language restrictions. We also searched reference lists and conference proceedings for relevant studies and clinical trial registries for ongoing trials. We contacted authors for additional information. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing enteral feeding by nasogastric and nasojejunal tubes in participants with severe acute pancreatitis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias of the included studies, and extracted data. This information was independently verified by the other review authors. We used standard methods expected by Cochrane to assess the risk of bias and perform data synthesis. We rated the certainty of evidence according to GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: We included five RCTs that randomised a total of 220 adult participants from India, Scotland, and the USA. Two of the trial reports were available only as abstracts. The trials differed in the criteria used to rate the severity of acute pancreatitis, and three trials excluded those who presented in severe shock. The duration of onset of symptoms before presentation in the trials ranged from within one week to four weeks. The trials also differed in the methods used to confirm the placement of the tubes and in what was considered to be nasojejunal placement. We assessed none of the trials as at high risk of bias, though reporting of methods in four trials was insufficient to judge the risk of bias for one or more of the domains assessed. There was no evdence of effect with nasogastric or nasojejunal placement on the primary outcome of mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 1.17; I2 = 0%; 5 trials, 220 participants; very low-certainty evidence due to indirectness and imprecision). Similarly, there was no evidence of effect on the secondary outcomes for which data were available. These included organ failure (3 trials, 145 participants), rate of infection (2 trials, 108 participants), success rate (3 trials, 159 participants), complications associated with the procedure (2 trials, 80 participants), need for surgical intervention (3 trials, 145 participants), requirement of parenteral nutrition (2 trials, 80 participants), complications associated with feeds (4 trials, 195 participants), and exacerbation of pain (4 trials, 195 participants). However, the certainty of the evidence for these secondary outcomes was also very low due to indirectness and imprecision. Three trials (117 participants) reported on length of hospital stay, but the data were not suitable for meta-analysis. None of the trials reported data suitable for meta-analysis for the other secondary outcomes of this review, which included days taken to achieve full nutrition requirement, duration of tube feeding, and duration of analgesic requirement after feeding tube placement. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to conclude that there is superiority, inferiority, or equivalence between the nasogastric and nasojejunal mode of enteral tube feeding in people with severe acute pancreatitis.

Nasogastric tube feeding versus assisted hand feeding in-home healthcare older adults with severe dementia in Taiwan: a prognosis comparison.

BACKGROUND: All individuals with severe dementia should be offered careful hand feeding. However, under certain circumstances, people with severe dementia have a feeding tube placed. In Taiwan, tube feeding rate in demented older home care residents is increasing; however, the benefits of tube feeding in this population remain unknown. We compared the clinical prognosis and mortality of older patients with severe dementia receiving nasogastric tube feeding (NGF) or assisted hand feeding (AHF). METHODS: Data from the in-home healthcare system between January 1 and December 31, 2017 were analyzed to identify 169 participants over 60 years of age in this retrospective longitudinal study. All subjects with severe dementia and complete functional dependence suffered from difficulty in oral intake and required either AHF or NGF. Data were collected from both groups to analyze pneumonia, hospitalization, and mortality rates. RESULTS: A total of 169 subjects (56 males and 113 females, aged 85.9 ± 7.5 years) were analyzed. 39 required AHF and 130 NGF. All subjects were bedridden; 129 (76%) showed Barthel index < 10. Pneumonia risk was higher in the NGF group (48%) than in the AHF group (26%, p = 0.015). After adjusting for multiple factors in the regression model, the risk of pneumonia was not significantly higher in the NGF group compared with the AHF group. One-year mortality rates in the AHF and NGF groups were 8 and 15%, respectively, and no significant difference was observed after adjustment with logistic regression (aOR = 2.38; 95% CI, 0.58-9.70). There were no significant differences in hospitalization rate and duration. CONCLUSIONS: For older patients with dementia requiring in-home healthcare, NGF is not associated with a significantly lower risk of pneumonia than AHF. Additionally, neither mortality nor hospitalization rates decreased with NGF. On the contrary, a nonsignificant trend of increased risk of pneumonia was observed in NGF group. Therefore, the benefits of NGF are debatable in older patients with severe dementia requiring in-home healthcare. Continued careful hand feeding could be an alternative to NG feeding in patients with severe dementia. Furthermore, large-scale studies on in-home healthcare would be required to support these results.

Survival and Health Care Use After Feeding Tube Placement in Children With Neurologic Impairment.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Children with neurologic impairment (NI) often undergo feeding tube placement for undernutrition or aspiration. We evaluated survival and acute health care use after tube placement in this population. METHODS: This is a population-based exposure-crossover study for which we use linked administrative data from Ontario, Canada. We identified children aged 13 months to 17 years with a diagnosis of NI undergoing primary gastrostomy or gastrojejunostomy tube placement between 1993 and 2015. We determined survival time from procedure until date of death or last clinical encounter and calculated mean weekly rates of unplanned hospital days overall and for reflux-related diagnoses, emergency department visits, and outpatient visits. Rate ratios were estimated from negative binomial generalized estimating equation models adjusting for time and age. RESULTS: Two-year survival after feeding tube placement was 87.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 85.2%-89.4%) and 5-year survival was 75.8% (95% CI: 72.8%-78.4%). The adjusted rate ratio comparing weekly rates of unplanned hospital days during the 2 years after versus before tube placement was 0.92 (95% CI: 0.57-1.48). Similarly, rates of reflux-related hospital days, emergency department visits, and outpatient visits were unchanged. Unplanned hospital days were stable within subgroups, although rates across subgroups varied. CONCLUSIONS: Mortality is high among children with NI after feeding tube placement. However, the stability of health care use before and after the procedure suggests that the high mortality may reflect underlying fragility rather than increased risk from nonoral feeding. Further research to inform risk stratification and prognostic accuracy is needed.

The impact of aspiration pneumonia and nasogastric feeding on clinical outcomes in stroke patients: A retrospective cohort study.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To determine presence of clinical complications related to dysphagia and to explore their operational outcomes. BACKGROUND: Dysphagia is a common complication of stroke. The management of poststroke dysphagia is multidisciplinary with nurses playing a key role in screening for dysphagia risk, monitoring tolerance of food and fluids and checking for the development of complications such as fever, dehydration and change in medical status. Dysphagia often results in further complications including aspiration pneumonia and the need for nasogastric feeding. Dysphagia-related complications have been shown to have a significant impact on morbidity and mortality, length of stay and cost of admission. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: A total of 110 patients presenting with an ischaemic stroke were chart-audited. RESULTS: Aspiration pneumonia poststroke was found to be significantly associated with increased overall length of stay, poorer functional outcomes poststroke as well as being associated with a high risk of mortality. The presence of a nasogastric tube was also associated with reduced functional outcomes poststroke and increased risk of death. CONCLUSION: High prevalence and cost of complications associated with stroke highlight the complexity of providing nursing and allied health care to this patient population. This provides a snapshot of dysphagia-related complications experienced by stroke patients. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: This paper highlights that poststroke complications can significantly impact on patient outcomes and operational factors such as cost of admission; therefore, poststroke care requires a multidisciplinary approach to management. Furthermore, preventing and managing complications poststroke is a key element of nursing care and has the potential to significantly reduce incidence of mortality, length of stay and cost of hospital admission.

Influence of the Extent and Dose of Radiation on Complications After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation and Subsequent Esophagectomy With Gastric Tube Reconstruction With a Cervical Anastomosis.

PURPOSE: To determine, in a large series, the influence of the extent and dose of radiation to the fundus of the stomach and mediastinum on the development and severity of anastomotic complications in patients with esophageal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by esophagectomy with cervical anastomosis. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between 2005 and 2012, 364 consecutive patients with esophageal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation (41.4 Gy combined with chemotherapy) followed by esophagectomy were included. The future anastomotic region in the fundus was determined, and the mean dose, V20-V40, and upper planning target volume border in relation to mediastinal length, expressed as the mediastinal ratio, were calculated. RESULTS: Anastomotic leakage occurred in 22% and anastomotic stenosis in 41%. Logistic regression analysis revealed no influence of age, comorbidity, mean fundus dose, V20-V40, or the mediastinal ratio on the incidence of anastomotic leakage or anastomotic stenosis. In 28% of the patients severe complications (Clavien-Dindo score of ≥IIIB) occurred. The presence of multiple comorbidities (hazard ratio 2.4 [95% confidence interval 1.3-4.5], P=.006) and a mediastinal ratio of 0.5 to 1.0 (hazard ratio 1.9 [95% confidence interval 1.0-3.5], P=.036) were both independent predictors of severe complications. CONCLUSION: With a mean radiation dose of 24.2 Gy to the future anastomotic region of the gastric fundus, the radiation dose was not associated with the incidence of anastomotic leakage or anastomotic stenosis. The incidence of severe complications was associated with a high superior mediastinal planning target volume border.

Enteral nutrition at home and in nursing homes: an 11-year (2002-2012) epidemiological analysis.

BACKGROUND: Home enteral nutrition (HEN) is a well-established extra-hospital therapy that can reduce the risk of malnutrition, ensure the rapid discharge of patients from hospital and significantly reduce health care expenditure. The data reported in this study allow us to understand the relationships between mortality, the place of treatment either at patients' homes (PH) or in nursing homes (NHR) and nutritional status. METHODS: Patients were analyzed according to age, gender, underlying disease, the Karnofsky Index, type of enteral access device (nasogastric tube or percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy), weight and Body Mass Index (BMI). The duration of HEN therapy was then calculated and the outcome was established on patient mortality or survival. RESULTS: Over an 11-year period, 3246 subjects were administered HEN therapy. The mean duration of HEN therapy was equal to 312±487 days at PH and 398±573 in NHR. The mean incidence is 406±58 patients/million inhabitants/year at PH and 319±44 in NHR (mean prevalence rate: 464±129 cases/million inhabitants at PH compared to 478±164 in NHR). Analysis of variance was used for continuous variables. The study reveals that >8% (8.6% at PH; 8.5% in NHR) of patients die within 10 days of starting HEN therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The study shows a progressive increase in HEN therapy and highlights clinical, organizational and ethical issues, which also need to be analyzed in relation to the progressively aging population.

Diagnostic accuracy of methods used to verify nasogastric tube position in mechanically ventilated adult patients: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Nasogastric tubes are widely used in hospitals, e.g. for the administration of nutrients. However, nasogastric tubes can be inserted accidently into the airways leading to complications like pneumonia, pneumothorax and even death. Mechanically ventilated patients are at high risk of having a nasogastric tube misplaced, since they often have reduced consciousness and weak cough reflex. A variety of methods have been used for determination of nasogastric tube placement, but with varying success. OBJECTIVES: The present systematic review was carried out to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of methods used to determine nasogastric tube placement in mechanically ventilated adult patients. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Studies including mechanically ventilated adult patients with a nasogastric tube were considered for inclusion, regardless of the type of nasogastric tube.All methods (index tests) used to verify nasogastric tubes placed in the airways and in the gastrointestinal tract were included. As a reference standard, X-ray was used to verify the accuracy of each index test.The studies that were included in the present systematic review were designed based on diagnostic test accuracy studies.The outcome was the accuracy (sensitivity and specificity) of the methods to discriminate between respiratory and gastrointestinal placement of the nasogastric tube. SEARCH STRATEGY: The search strategy aimed to find both published and unpublished studies before September 2013. Eleven electronic databases were searched including CINAHL, PubMed, Scopus and Embase. METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY: Methodological quality was assessed independently by two reviewers using QUADAS as a critical appraisal tool. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted by two reviewers independently using a modified Joanna Briggs Institute data extraction form including specific details such as: population, setting, index test, sensitivity and specificity. DATA SYNTHESIS: Sensitivity and specificity were extracted from the studies and presented in tables. When these were not written in the studies, calculations were performed based on data presented in the studies. RESULTS: Five relevant papers describing two different methods for determining nasogastric tube position were identified: colorimetric capnography (four studies) and capnography (one study).In all four studies examining colorimetric capnography the sensitivity was 100% when nasogastric tubes were inserted intentionally into the airways through an already existing tracheal tube, thereby imitating misplaced nasogastric tubes. When inserted through the nose, the sensitivity was 88-100% and specificity was 99-100%.Capnography obtained a specificity of 100% but sensitivity for when the nasogastric tube was inserted through the nose could not be calculated based on available data. CONCLUSIONS: We found evidence (Level 2b) for colorimetric capnography to be a valid method for verifying nasogastric tube placement.Capnography also detected nasogastric tube position with very high accuracy. However, since these methods were tested in only a single study with a limited sample size, further research is required before clinical recommendations can be made.Despite the impressive results obtained by using colorimetric capnography, implication for practice is not straightforward. A concern is that the colorimetric capnograph is not produced by the manufacture to fit a NG tube and therefore has to be connected to the NG tube by an adaptor-system. Practical issues therefore have to be resolved if the method is supposed to become a standard procedure in a clinical setting.The execution of the procedure using colorimetric capnography differs between the studies. This systematic review therefore recommends that further research should be done to optimize the execution of the procedure.We also recommend that further research be done to reproduce the results obtained using capnography, since this method was tested only in a single study with a limited sample size.

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy versus nasogastric tube feeding for adults with swallowing disturbances.

BACKGROUND: A number of conditions compromise the passage of food along the digestive tract. Nasogastric tube (NGT) feeding is a classic, time-proven technique, although its prolonged use can lead to complications such as lesions to the nasal wing, chronic sinusitis, gastro-oesophageal reflux, and aspiration pneumonia. Another method of infusion, percutaneous endoscopy gastrostomy (PEG), is generally used when there is a need for enteral nutrition for a longer time period. There is a high demand for PEG in patients with swallowing disorders, although there is no consistent evidence about its effectiveness and safety as compared to NGT. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of PEG compared with NGT for adults with swallowing disturbances. SEARCH METHODS: We searched The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and LILACS from inception to January 2014, and contacted the main authors in the subject area. There was no language restriction in the search. SELECTION CRITERIA: We planned to include randomised controlled trials comparing PEG versus NGT for adults with swallowing disturbances or dysphagia and indications for nutritional support, with any underlying diseases. The primary outcome was intervention failure (e.g. feeding interruption, blocking or leakage of the tube, no adherence to treatment). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. For dichotomous and continuous variables, we used risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD), respectively with the random-effects statistical model and 95% confidence interval (CI). We assumed statistical heterogeneity when I² > 50%. MAIN RESULTS: We included 11 randomised controlled studies with 735 participants which produced 16 meta-analyses of outcome data. Meta-analysis indicated that the primary outcome of intervention failure, occurred in lower proportion of participants with PEG compared to NGT (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.59, eight studies, 408 participants, low quality evidence) and this difference was statistically significant. For this outcome, we also subgrouped the studies by endoscopic gastrostomy technique into pull, and push and not reported. We observed a significant difference favouring PEG in the pull subgroup (RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.35, three studies, 90 participants). Thepush subgroup contained only one clinical trial and the result favoured PEG (RR 0.05, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.74, one study, 33 participants) techniques. We found no statistically significant difference in cases where the technique was not reported (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.44, four studies, 285 participants).There was no statistically significant difference between the groups for meta-analyses of the secondary outcomes of mortality (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.28, 644 participants, nine studies, very low quality evidence), overall reports of any adverse event at any follow-up time point (ITT analysis, RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.34), 597 participants, 6 studies, moderate quality evidence), specific adverse events including pneumonia (aspiration) (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.06, 645 participants, seven studies, low quality evidence), or for the meta- analyses of the secondary outcome of nutritional status including weight change from baseline, and mid-arm circumference at endpoint, although there was evidence in favour of PEG for meta-analyses of mid-arm circumference change from baseline (MD 1.16, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.31, 115 participants, two studies), and levels of serum albumin were higher in the PEG group (MD 6.03, 95% CI 2.31 to 9.74, 107 participants).For meta-analyses of the secondary outcomes of time on enteral nutrition, there was no statistically significant difference (MD 14.48, 95% CI -2.74 to 31.71; 119 participants, two studies). For meta-analyses of quality of life measures (EuroQol) outcomes in two studies with 133 participants, for inconvenience (RR 0.03, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.29), discomfort (RR 0.03, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.29), altered body image (RR 0.01, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.18; P = 0.001) and social activities (RR 0.01, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.18) the intervention favoured PEG, that is, fewer participants found the intervention of PEG to be inconvenient, uncomfortable or interfered with social activities. However, there were no significant differences between the groups for pain, ease of learning to use, or the secondary outcome of length of hospital stay (two studies, 381 participants). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: PEG was associated with a lower probability of intervention failure, suggesting the endoscopic procedure may be more effective and safe compared with NGT. There is no significant difference in mortality rates between comparison groups, or in adverse events, including pneumonia related to aspiration. Future studies should include details of participant demographics including underlying disease, age and gender, and the gastrostomy technique.

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy versus nasogastric tube feeding for patients with head and neck cancer: a systematic review.

There are two main enteral feeding strategies-namely nasogastric (NG) tube feeding and percutaneous gastrostomy-used to improve the nutritional status of patients with head and neck cancer (HNC). But up till now there has been no consistent evidence about which method of enteral feeding is the optimal method for this patient group. To compare the effectiveness of percutaneous gastrostomy and NGT feeding in patients with HNC, relevant literature was identified through Medline, Embase, Pubmed, Cochrane, Wiley and manual searches. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-experimental studies comparing percutaneous gastrostomy-including percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and percutaneous fluoroscopic gastrostomy (PFG) -with NG for HNC patients. Data extraction recorded characteristics of intervention, type of study and factors that contributed to the methodological quality of the individual studies. Data were then compared with respect to nutritional status, duration of feeding, complications, radiotherapy delays, disease-free survival and overall survival. Methodological quality of RCTs and non-experimental studies were assessed with separate standard grading scales. It became apparent from our studies that both feeding strategies have advantages and disadvantages.

Moving beyond the 'pancreatic rest' in severe and critical acute pancreatitis.

Nasojejunal tube feeding is considered the current standard of care in patients with severe and critical acute pancreatitis. However, it is not known whether enteral nutrition is best delivered into the jejunum. This Commentary discusses recent clinical studies that have shown that tube feeding into the stomach is safe and well tolerated in the vast majority of patients with acute pancreatitis, thus overthrowing the notion of putting the pancreas at rest. Development of a new conceptual framework is warranted to further advance nutritional management of patients with acute pancreatitis.

Nasogastric or nasojejunal feeding in predicted severe acute pancreatitis: a meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Enteral feeding can be given either through the nasogastric or the nasojejunal route. Studies have shown that nasojejunal tube placement is cumbersome and that nasogastric feeding is an effective means of providing enteral nutrition. However, the concern that nasogastric feeding increases the chance of aspiration pneumonitis and exacerbates acute pancreatitis by stimulating pancreatic secretion has prevented it being established as a standard of care. We aimed to evaluate the differences in safety and tolerance between nasogastric and nasojejunal feeding by assessing the impact of the two approaches on the incidence of mortality, tracheal aspiration, diarrhea, exacerbation of pain, and meeting the energy balance in patients with severe acute pancreatitis. METHOD: We searched the electronic databases of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, and EMBASE. We included prospective randomized controlled trials comparing nasogastric and nasojejunal feeding in patients with predicted severe acute pancreatitis. Two reviewers assessed the quality of each study and collected data independently. Disagreements were resolved by discussion among the two reviewers and any of the other authors of the paper. We performed a meta-analysis and reported summary estimates of outcomes as Risk Ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: We included three randomized controlled trials involving a total of 157 patients. The demographics of the patients in the nasogastric and nasojejunal feeding groups were comparable. There were no significant differences in the incidence of mortality (RR=0.69, 95% CI: 0.37 to 1.29, P=0.25); tracheal aspiration (RR=0.46, 95% CI: 0.14 to 1.53, P=0.20); diarrhea (RR=1.43, 95% CI: 0.59 to 3.45, P=0.43); exacerbation of pain (RR=0.94, 95% CI: 0.32 to 2.70, P=0.90); and meeting energy balance (RR=1.00, 95% CI: 0.92 to 1.09, P=0.97) between the two groups. Nasogastric feeding was not inferior to nasojejunal feeding. CONCLUSIONS: Nasogastric feeding is safe and well tolerated compared with nasojejunal feeding. Study limitations included a small total sample size among others. More high-quality large-scale randomized controlled trials are needed to validate the use of nasogastric feeding instead of nasojejunal feeding.

Comparisons between intragastric and small intestinal delivery of enteral nutrition in the critically ill: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The largest cohort of critically ill patients evaluating intragastric and small intestinal delivery of nutrients was recently reported. This systematic review included recent data to compare the effects of small bowel and intragastric delivery of enteral nutrients in adult critically ill patients. METHODS: This is a systematic review of all randomised controlled studies published between 1990 and March 2013 that reported the effects of the route of enteral feeding in the critically ill on clinically important outcomes. RESULTS: Data from 15 level-2 studies were included. Small bowel feeding was associated with a reduced risk of pneumonia (Relative Risk, RR, small intestinal vs. intragastric: 0.75 (95% confidence interval 0.60 to 0.93); P=0.01; I2=11%). The point estimate was similar when only studies using microbiological data were included. Duration of ventilation (weighted mean difference: -0.36 days (-2.02 to 1.30); P=0.65; I2=42%), length of ICU stay (WMD: 0.49 days, (-1.36 to 2.33); P=0.60; I2=81%) and mortality (RR 1.01 (0.83 to 1.24); P=0.92; I2=0%) were unaffected by the route of feeding. While data were limited, and there was substantial statistical heterogeneity, there was significantly improved nutrient intake via the small intestinal route (% goal rate received: 11% (5 to 16%); P=0.0004; I2=88%). CONCLUSIONS: Use of small intestinal feeding may improve nutritional intake and reduce the incidence of ICU-acquired pneumonia. In unselected critically ill patients other clinically important outcomes were unaffected by the site of the feeding tube.

Pneumonia in patients with severe head injury: incidence, risk factors, and outcomes.

OBJECT: The reported incidence of hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia in critically ill trauma patients varies from as low as 4% to as high as 87%, with fatality rates varying from 6% to 59%. Clinical studies have identified the risk factors for pneumonia. The authors undertook this retrospective study to evaluate the incidence, risk factors, and outcomes of hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia in a group of patients with severe head injuries. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of consecutive adult patients admitted to the neurosurgical ICU in the authors' hospital because of severe head injury (Glasgow Coma Scale scores ≤ 8) between January 2008 and December 2010. RESULTS: During the study period, 290 patients were admitted to the neurosurgical ICU. Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that age (HR 1.01, 95% CI 1.001-1.02), nasogastric tube insertion (HR 4.56, 95% CI 1.11-18.64), and hemiplegia or hemiparesis (HR 3.79, 95% CI 2.01-7.17) were significantly associated with the development of pneumonia. CONCLUSIONS: The authors identified 3 risk factors (age, nasogastric tube insertion, and hemiplegia or hemiparesis) associated with the development of pneumonia in patients with severe head injury. This finding constituted the basis for developing a simple screening tool that can be used to assess the risk of occurrence of pneumonia in such patients.

Does feeding tube insertion and its timing improve survival?

OBJECTIVES: To examine survival with and without a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) feeding tube using rigorous methods to account for selection bias and to examine whether the timing of feeding tube insertion affected survival. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: All U.S. nursing homes (NHs). PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-six thousand four hundred ninety-two NH residents with advanced cognitive impairment from dementia and new problems eating studied between 1999 and 2007. MEASUREMENTS: Survival after development of the need for eating assistance and feeding tube insertion. RESULTS: Of the 36,492 NH residents (88.4% white, mean age 84.9, 87.4% with one feeding tube risk factor), 1,957 (5.4%) had a feeding tube inserted within 1 year of developing eating problems. After multivariate analysis correcting for selection bias with propensity score weights, no difference was found in survival between the two groups (adjusted hazard ratio (AHR) = 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.94-1.13). In residents who were tube-fed, the timing of PEG tube insertion relative to the onset of eating problems was not associated with survival after feeding tube insertion (AHR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.86-1.20, persons with a PEG tube inserted within 1 month of developing an eating problem versus later (4 months) insertion). CONCLUSION: Neither insertion of PEG tubes nor timing of insertion affect survival.

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy versus nasogastric tube feeding for adults with swallowing disturbances.

BACKGROUND: A number of conditions compromise the passage of food along the digestive tract. Nasogastric tube (NGT) feeding is a classic, time-proven technique, although its prolonged use can lead to complications such as lesions to the nasal wing, chronic sinusitis, gastro-oesophageal reflux, and aspiration pneumonia. Another method of infusion, percutaneous endoscopy gastrostomy (PEG), is generally used when there is a need for enteral nutrition for a longer time period. There is a high demand for PEG in patients with swallowing disorders, although there is no consistent evidence about its effectiveness and safety as compared to NGT. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of PEG as compared to NGT for adults with swallowing disturbances, by updating our previous Cochrane review. SEARCH METHODS: We searched The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and LILACS from inception to September 2011, as well as contacting main authors in the subject area. There was no language restriction in the search. SELECTION CRITERIA: We planned to include randomised controlled trials comparing PEG versus NGT for adults with swallowing disturbances or dysphagia and indications for nutritional support, with any underlying diseases. The primary outcome was intervention failure (e.g. feeding interruption, blocking or leakage of the tube, no adherence to treatment). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Review authors performed selection, data extraction and evaluation of methodological quality of studies. For dichotomous and continuous variables, we used risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD), respectively with the random-effects statistical model and 95% confidence interval (CI). We assumed statistical heterogeneity when I² > 50%. MAIN RESULTS: We included nine randomised controlled studies. We did not identify new eligible studies published after our previous review literature search date (August 2009). Intervention failure occurred in 19/156 patients in the PEG group and 63/158 patients in the NGT group (RR 0.24, 95%CI 0.08 to 0.76, P = 0.01) in favour of PEG. There was no statistically significant difference between comparison groups in complications (RR 1.00, 95%CI 0.91 to 1.11, P = 0.93). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: PEG was associated with a lower probability of intervention failure, suggesting the endoscopic procedure is more effective and safe as compared to NGT. There is no significant difference of mortality rates between comparison groups, and pneumonia irrespective of underlying disease (medical diagnosis). Future studies should include previously planned and executed follow-up periods, the gastrostomy technique, and the experience of the professionals to allow more detailed subgroup analysis.

Routine nasogastric suction may be unnecessary after a pancreatic resection.

BACKGROUND: Most surgeons routinely place a nasogastric tube at the time of a pancreatic resection. The goal of the present study was to evaluate the outcome when a pancreatic resection is performed without routine post-operative nasogastric suction. METHODS: One hundred consecutive patients underwent a pancreatic resection (64 a pancreaticoduodenectomy, 98% pylorus sparing and 36 a distal pancreatectomy). In the first cohort (50 patients), a nasogastric tube was routinely placed at the time of surgery and in the second cohort (50 patients) the nasogastric was removed in the operating room. Outcomes for these two cohorts were recorded in a prospective database and compared using the χ(2) or Fisher's exact test and Wilcoxon's rank-sum test. RESULTS: Demographical, surgical and pathological details were similar between the two cohorts. A post-operative complication occurred in 22 (44%) in each group (P= 1.000). There were no statistically significant differences in the frequency or severity of complications, or length of stay between groups. The spectrum of complications experienced by the two cohorts was similar including complications that could potentially be related to the use of nasogastric suction such as delayed gastric emptying, anastomotic leak, wound dehiscence and pneumonia. There was no difference between the two groups in the number of patients who required post-operative nasogastric tube placement (or replacement) [2 (4%) vs. 4 (8%), P= 0.678]. CONCLUSION: It may be safe to place a nasogastric tube post-operatively in a minority of patients after a pancreatic resection and spare the majority the discomfort associated with routine post-operative nasogastric suction.

Understanding why patients die after gastrostomy tube insertion: a retrospective analysis of mortality.

OBJECTIVES: To understand the causes of mortality of inpatients receiving a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube compared with a survival curve predicted from a model proposed by Levine et al (2007). DESIGN: A retrospective study of patients receiving a PEG over an 18-month period. SETTING: Royal United Hospital Bath, a district general hospital in the southwest of England. PATIENTS: Fifty-five cases, with 44 found eligible for inclusion. INTERVENTIONS: A Levine score was calculated for this cohort. A survival curve after PEG was produced and compared with the Kaplan-Meier curve predicted by the Levine model. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mortality over a period of 1 year. RESULTS: The mortality at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months was 16%, 20%, 25%, and 28%, respectively. This matched the predicted death rate from the Levine model closely (Pearson's rank correlation coefficient = 0.96). CONCLUSIONS: The authors found that the mortality of patients receiving a PEG followed that predicted for a similar cohort of patients without PEGs in the Levine model. This suggests that the deaths observed were due to underlying comorbidities, can provide a baseline for mortality targets for PEG services, and is useful patient information regarding the risks and benefits of the procedure. The findings demonstrate that PEG does no harm and supports the accepted opinion that nutrition support is associated with a better outcome. Furthermore, they show that most deaths occur within the first month of placement and would support arguments for delaying placement until outcome from the underlying condition is more predictable.