Medical supervised duodenal-enteral feeding for the treatment of overweight and obesity: MESUDEFT / Nutrición duodenoenteral médicamente supervisada para el tratamiento del sobrepeso y la obesidad: MESUDEFT

Background: the development of specialised nutritional support techniques allows the maintenance of an adequate supply of nutrients in those patients in whom oral feeding is not possible or is insufficient in relation to their requirements, trying to improve the quality of life, especially in those with chronic diseases. Methods: single-center clinical study carried out in a clinical-nutritional center consisting of a medically supervised nasogastric-duodenal tube feeding treatment for overweight, obesity and increased body fat percentage in patients requiring it by means of duodeno-enteral feeding, expecting losses of more than 10 %. Results: twenty-nine patients completed the protocol (20.4 % male and 79.6 % female) with a mean age of 38 years (SD: 12.4); 87.2 kg (SD: 18.5) mean weight; 37.9 kg (SD: 4.8) mean iFat%; 32.4 (SD: 5.4) iMean body mass index (BMI); 100 cm (SD: 16.0) iMean waist; 113.6 cm (SD: 10.4) iMean hip; 33.8 cm (SD: 3.9) iMean upper arm circumference; 65.5 cm (SD: 7.5) iMean thigh circumference; 9.7 (SD: 4.8) iVisceral fat index; and 22.9 days (SD: 13.9) mean treatment. A mean of 22.9 (SD: 13.9) days of MESUDEFT influences weight loss, fat loss, visceral fat loss and decreased arm, hip and thigh circumferences (p < 0.05) (i: initial). Conclusions: MESUDEFT is shown to be an effective alternative as a sole treatment or as an adjunct prior to bariatric surgery for obesity or overweight treatment with a minimum of 10 % loss of BMI and fat mass at completion and 3-6 months follow-up.(AU)

Antecedentes: el desarrollo de técnicas especializadas de soporte nutricional permite mantener un aporte adecuado de nutrientes en aquellos pacientes en los que la alimentación oral no es posible o es insuficiente en relación a sus requerimientos, intentando mejorar la calidad de vida, especialmente de aquellos con enfermedades crónicas. Métodos: estudio clínico unicéntrico prospectivo realizado en un centro clínico-nutricional consistente en un tratamiento con alimentación por sonda nasogástrica-duodenal médicamente supervisado para el sobrepeso, la obesidad y el aumento del porcentaje de grasa corporal en pacientes que lo requieran mediante alimentación duodenoenteral, durante un mes aproximado, con previsión de pérdidas superiores al 10 % y con control posterior entre los tres y los seis meses siguientes. Resultados: veintinueve pacientes completaron el protocolo (20,4 % varones y 79,6 % mujeres) con una edad media de 38 años (DE: 12,4); 87,2 kg (DE: 18,5) iPeso medio; 37,9 kg (DE: 4,8) iGrasa% media; 32,4 (DE: 5,4) iIMC medio; 100 cm (DE: 16,0) iCintura media; 113,6 cm (DE: 10,4) iCadera media; 33,8 cm (DE: 3,9) iCircunferencia braquial media; 65,5 cm (DE: 7,5) circunferencia muslo media; 9,7 (DE: 4,8) iíndice de grasa visceral; y 22,9 días (DE: 13,9) de tratamiento medio. Una media de 22,9 (DE: 13,9) días de MESUDEFT influye en la pérdida de peso, la pérdida de grasa, la pérdida de grasa visceral y la disminución de las circunferencias del brazo, la cadera y el muslo (p < 0,05) (i: inicial). Conclusiones: MESUDEFT se muestra como una alternativa eficaz como tratamiento único o como coadyuvante previo a la cirugía bariátrica de la obesidad o tratamiento del sobrepeso con una pérdida mínima del 10 % del índice de masa corporal (IMC) y de la masa grasa al finalizar y con control durante los siguientes 3-6 meses.(AU)

Evaluation of community nurse-led traumatic tube displacements.

Home enteral tube feeding (HEF) has many benefits and is largely safe practice. Some complications have historically required intervention in the acute setting, including traumatic displacement of feeding tubes (i.e. internal bumper/balloon removed intact), and evidence to support the safe replacement of these tubes in the community is lacking. To address this, a service enabling community homecare nurses (CHN) to replace traumatically displaced feeding tubes was designed and evaluated. Adult patients presenting with a traumatically displaced feeding tube over 29 months were included in the service evaluation. Baseline characteristics and outcomes at day 1, 7 and 6 months post-replacement were recorded. A total of 71 tube replacements were performed by CHNs in 60 patients. No clinical complications were recorded at any follow-up points. A simple cost analysis estimated savings of £235 754.40. These results suggest that nurse-led replacement of traumatically displaced feeding tubes in adults in the community is low-risk and offers potential cost savings.

Oral Drug Product Administration via Enteral Feeding Tubes: In Vitro Testing.

Medication administration via enteral feeding tubes (EFT) is a necessary practice for patients unable to swallow oral dosage forms due to a medical condition or treatment that affects the ability to swallow or the function of the gastrointestinal tract. Off-label administration of oral drug products via EFT raises concerns for pharmaceutical sponsors, regulators, and healthcare practitioners (HCPs) because of the potential risks this practice introduces to both the patient and the caregiver. These risks can be mitigated by generating data-supported instructions that patients and HCPs can use to ensure safe and accurate administration of oral drug products via EFT. This commentary presents an industry perspective on the testing that should be conducted to enable development of product-specific instructions in the labeling to support or advise against administration of oral drug products via enteral feeding tube. The proposal outlined in this commentary takes a risk-based approach, addressing recommendations from both regulatory agencies as well as considerations for expanding this testing to address needs specific to neonatal and pediatric populations.

Impact of nutritional support routes on mortality in acute pancreatitis: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Nutritional administration in acute pancreatitis (AP) management has sparked widespread discussion, yet contradictory mortality results across meta-analyses necessitate clarification. The optimal nutritional route in AP remains uncertain. Therefore, this study aimed to compare mortality among nutritional administration routes in patients with AP using consistency model. METHODS: This study searched four major databases for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Two authors independently extracted and checked data and quality. Network meta-analysis was conducted for estimating risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence interval (CI) based on random-effects model. Subgroup analyses accounted for AP severity and nutrition support initiation. RESULTS: A meticulous search yielded 1185 references, with 30 records meeting inclusion criteria from 27 RCTs (n = 1594). Pooled analyses showed the mortality risk reduction associated with nasogastric (NG) (RR = 0.34; 95%CI: 0.16-0.73) and nasojejunal (NJ) feeding (RR = 0.46; 95%CI: 0.25-0.84) in comparison to nil per os. Similarly, NG (RR = 0.45; 95%CI: 0.24-0.83) and NJ (RR = 0.60; 95%CI: 0.40-0.90) feeding also showed lower mortality risk than total parenteral nutrition. Subgroup analyses, stratified by severity, supported these findings. Notably, the timing of nutritional support initiation emerged as a significant factor, with NJ feeding demonstrating notable mortality reduction within 24 and 48 h, particularly in severe cases. CONCLUSION: For severe AP, both NG and NJ feeding appear optimal, with variations in initiation timings. NG feeding does not appear to merit recommendation within the initial 24 h, whereas NJ feeding is advisable within the corresponding timeframe following admission. These findings offer valuable insights for optimizing nutritional interventions in AP.

Effect of pacifier and pacifier with dextrose in reducing pain during orogastric tube insertion in newborns: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the efficacy of pacifier use, with and without 25% dextrose, in reducing pain during orogastric tube insertion in newborns. STUDY DESIGN: In a randomized controlled trial involving 60 newborns at a public hospital from April to December 2019, participants were divided into three groups: pacifier (n = 20), pacifier with 25% dextrose (n = 20), and control (n = 20). A pacifier, with and without dextrose, was used for the experimental groups, while the control group performed a routine procedure. Neonatal infant pain scale, crying duration, heart rate (HR), and oxygen saturation (SpO2) were evaluated. RESULTS: Results indicated that the control group experienced significantly higher pain levels, elevated HRs, decreased SpO2, and prolonged crying. Conversely, the pacifier with 25% dextrose group showed a notable reduction in crying duration. CONCLUSION: A pacifier, with and without 25% dextrose, effectively reduces pain and improves physiological and behavioral parameters during orogastric tube insertion. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT05462964 CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol for this randomized controlled experimental trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. The clinical trial registration number is https://clinicaltrials.gov ; NCT05462964.

Comparison of the effect between traditional conservation and nasointestinal tube placement in adhesive small bowel obstruction: A matched case-control study.

Adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO) causes a major burden in emergency medicine. Owing to in situ decompression, nasointestinal tube (NIT) placement has been increasingly used in clinical practice compared with traditional conservation (TC); however, the indications remain controversial. This study was designed to explore the indications for each treatment in ASBOs and then suggest the optimal strategy. After propensity score matching, 128 pairs were included (the NIT and TC groups). The occurrence of severe adverse events (SAEs), peri-treatment clinical parameters, and radiological features were compared between the successful and failed treatment groups. According to different stages of the entire treatment, the independent risk factors for adverse effects for ASBO were analysed in phase I and phase II. In phase I, normal red blood cells (RBC) levels (p = 0.011) and a balanced sodium ion level (p = 0.016) positively affected the outcomes of TC treatment. In phase II, for the TC group, the successful treatment rate reached 79.5% for patients with ASBOs whose normal RBC levels (p = 0.006) or decreasing white blood cells (WBC) levels (p = 0.014) after treatment. For the NIT group, the treatment success rate was 68.1% for patients whose electrolyte imbalance could be reversed or whose neutrophil count/lymphocyte ratio (NLR) levels was lower than 4.3 (p = 0.018). TC treatment is highly recommended for patients with normal RBC counts and sodium levels pretreatment. After dynamic monitoring of the treatment process, for both the TC and NIT groups, once ASBOs had elevated inflammatory biomarkers or irreversible electrolyte disturbances, surgical interference was preferred.

Nasogastric tube placement perforating the nasopharynx causing mediastinal passage and feeding into the pleural space.

A mid-60s female with known primary progressive multiple sclerosis was admitted to our hospital with aspiration pneumonia. Due to reduced consciousness, a nasogastric (NG) tube was inserted for feeding. A chest x-ray (CXR) report from a thoracic radiologist confirmed an atypical tip position due to a hiatus hernia but concluded it was almost certainly within the stomach. However, after deteriorating on feed commencement, a CT scan of the chest confirmed the tube had perforated the nasopharynx and run parallel to the oesophagus through the mediastinum into the right pleural space. The patient subsequently developed an empyema and pneumothorax, requiring multiple therapeutic interventions and a prolonged hospital stay. This case demonstrates how the routine insertion of an NG tube can lead to serious complications. Additionally, position check CXRs can be difficult to interpret, so the decision to use the tube must be made cautiously by the clinical team.

A clinical consensus paper on jejunal tube feeding in children.

BACKGROUND: Feeding problems are common in children with complex medical problems or acute critical illness and enteral nutrition may be required. In certain situations, gastric tube feeding is poorly tolerated or may not be feasible. When feed intolerance persists despite appropriate adjustments to oral and gastric enteral regimens, jejunal tube feeding can be considered as an option for nutrition support. METHODS: A multidisciplinary expert working group of the Australasian Society of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition was convened. They identified topic questions and five key areas of jejunal tube feeding in children. Literatures searches were undertaken on Pubmed, Embase, and Medline for all relevant studies, between January 2000 and September 2022 (n = 103). Studies were assessed using National Health and Medical Research Council guidelines to generate statements, which were discussed as a group, followed by voting on statements using a modified Delphi process to determine consensus. RESULTS: A total of 24 consensus statements were created for five key areas: patient selection, type and selection of feeding tube, complications, clinical use of jejunal tubes, follow-up, and reassessment. CONCLUSION: Jejunal tube feeding is a safe and effective means of providing nutrition in a select group of pediatric patients with complex medical needs, who are unable to be fed by gastric tube feeding. Appropriate patient selection is important as complications associated with jejunal tube feeding are not uncommon, and although mostly minor, can be significant or require tube reinsertion. All children receiving jejunal tube feeding should have multidisciplinary team assessment and follow-up.

Feasibility of a low-cost magnet tracking device in confirming nasogastric tube placement at point of care, a clinical trial.

An affordable and reliable way of confirming the placement of nasogastric tube (NGT) at point-of-care is an unmet need. Using a novel algorithm and few sensors, we developed a low-cost magnet tracking device and showed its potential to localize the NGT preclinically. Here, we embark on a first-in-human trial. Six male and 4 female patients with NGT from the general ward of an urban hospital were recruited. We used the device to localize the NGT and compared that against chest X-ray (CXR). In 5 patients, with the sensors placed on the sternal angle, the trajectory of the NGT was reproduced by the tracking device. The tracked location of the NGT deviated from CXR by 0.55 to 1.63 cm, and a downward tracking range of 17 to 22 cm from the sternal angle was achieved. Placing the sensors on the xiphisternum, however, resulted in overt discordance between the device's localization and that on CXR. Short distance between the sternal angle and the xiphisternum, and lower body weight were observed in patients in whom tracking was feasible. Tracking was quick and well tolerated. No adverse event occurred. This device feasibly localized the NGT in 50% of patients when appropriately placed. Further refinement is anticipated.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05204901.

An externally validated guide to anatomical interpretation using a direct-vision ('IRIS') feeding tube.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Most of the 11.5 million feeding tubes placed annually in Europe and the USA are placed 'blind'. This carries a 1.6% risk that these tubes will enter the lung and 0.5% cause pneumothorax or pneumonia regardless of whether misplacement is identified prior to feeding. Tube placement by direct vision may reduce the risk of respiratory or oesophageal misplacement. This study externally validated whether an 'operator guide' would enable novice operators to differentiate the respiratory and alimentary tracts. METHODS: One IRIS tube was placed in each of 40 patients. Novice operators interpreted anatomical position using the built-in tube camera. Interpretation was checked from recorded images by consultant gastroenterologists and end-of-procedure checks using pH or X-ray checked by Radiologists and a consultant intensivist. RESULTS: The 40 patients were a median of 68y (IQR: 56-75), 70% male, mostly medical (65%), conscious (67.5%) and 70% had no artificial airway. Three tubes were removed due to failed placement. In the remaining 37 placements, novice operators identified the airway in 17 (45.9%) and airway + respiratory tract in 19 (51.4%), but redirected all these tubes into the oesophagus. By using direct vision to reduce the proportion of tubes near the airway or in respiratory tract from 0.514 to 0, operator discrimination between the respiratory and alimentary tracts was highly significant (0.514 vs 0: p < 0.0001, power >99.9% when significance = 0.05). In addition, organ boundaries (respiratory tract vs oesophagus, oesophagus vs stomach, stomach vs intestine) were identified in 100%. CONCLUSIONS: Novice operators, trained using the guide, identified all respiratory misplacements and accurately interpreted IRIS tube position. Guide-based training could enable widespread use of direct vision as a means to prevent tube-related complications.

Revisiting Feeding Tube Utilization in Oropharynx Cancer: 6-Year Prospective Registry Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Patients treated for oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) have historically demonstrated high feeding tube rates for decreased oral intake and malnutrition. We re-examined feeding tube practices in these patients. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of prospective cohort from 2015 to 2021. SETTING: Single-institution NCI-Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. METHODS: With IRB approval, patients with new oropharyngeal squamous cell cancer or (unknown primary with neck metastasis) were enrolled. Baseline swallowing was assessed via videofluoroscopy and Performance Status Scale for Head and Neck Cancer (PSSHN). G-tubes or nasogastric tubes (NGT) were placed for weight loss before, during, or after treatment. Prophylactic NGT were placed during transoral robotic surgery (TORS). Tube duration was censored at last disease-free follow-up. Multivariate regression was performed for G-tube placement (odds ratio [OR] [95% confidence interval [CI]) and removal (Cox hazard ratio, hazard ratio [HR] [95% CI]). RESULTS: Of 924 patients, most had stage I to II (81%), p16+ (89%), node-positive (88%) disease. Median follow-up was 2.6 years (interquartile range 1.5-3.9). Most (91%) received radiation/chemoradiation, and 16% received TORS. G-tube rate was 27% (5% after TORS). G-tube risk was increased with chemoradiation (OR 2.78 [1.87-4.22]) and decreased with TORS (OR 0.31 [0.15-0.57]) and PSSHN-Diet score ≥60 (OR 0.26 [0.15-0.45]). G-tube removal probability over time was lower for T3 to T4 tumors (HR 0.52 [0.38-0.71]) and higher for PSSHN-Diet score ≥60 (HR 1.65 [1.03-2.66]). CONCLUSIONS: In this modern cohort of patients treated for OPC, 27% received G-tubes-50% less than institutional rates 10 years ago. Patients with preserved baseline swallowing and/or those eligible for TORS may have lower G-tube risk and duration.

Mal-positioned nasogastric feeding tubes: are medical students safe to identify them?

OBJECTIVES: Nasogastric tube (NGT) placement is listed against Clinical Imaging in the upcoming Medical Licensing Assessment-compulsory for every graduating UK medical student from 2025. This study aims to establish the ability of medical students to correctly identify the position of an NGT on Chest X-ray (CXR) and to evaluate a learning tool to improve student outcome in this area. METHODS: Fourth-year (MB4) and fifth-year (MB5) medical students were invited to view 20 CXRs with 14 correctly sited and 6 mal-positioned NGT. MB5 students (Intervention) were exposed to an online interactive learning tool, with MB4 students kept as control. One week later, both groups of students were invited to view 20 more CXRs for NGT placement. RESULTS: Only 12 (4.8%) of 249 MB5 students and 5 (3.1%) of 161 MB4 students correctly identified all the NGTs on CXRs. The number of students misidentifying 1 or more mal-positioned NGT as "safe to feed" was 129 (51.8%) for MB5 and 76 (47.2%) for MB4 students. This improved significantly (P < .001) following exposure to the learning tool with 58% scoring all CXRs correctly, while 28% scored 1 or more mal-positioned NGT incorrectly. Students struggled to determine if the NGT tip had adequately passed into the stomach. However, they failed to identify an NG tube in the lung ("never event") in just one out of 1,108 opportunities. CONCLUSION: Medical students' ability to determine if the NGT was in the stomach remains suboptimal despite exposure to over 60 CXRs. Feeding NGT should be formally reported before use. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This is the first attempt at quantifying graduating medical students', and by inference junior doctors', competence in safely identifying misplaced nasogastric feeding tubes. An online, experiential learning resource significantly improved their ability.

Differences in neonatal gastric tubes during insertion into a 3D model in relation to risk of potential perforation.

OBJECTIVES: Perforation of esophagus or stomach is a potential complication during and after insertion of a gastric tube in neonates. The aim of this study was to analyze different types of gastric tubes in a three-dimensional (3D) model of neonatal esophagus and stomach regarding potential perforations. METHODS: A 3D model of esophagus and stomach was created based on computed tomography data of a term neonate. Three types of gastric tubes were inserted into the 3D model, the localization was examined by radioscopy and the behavior, stiffness and manageability of each gastric tube was evaluated. RESULTS: Insertion of gastric tubes with higher stiffness was easier. The rates of correct localization differed significantly between the gastric tubes with the highest rate of correct localization in the softest tube (48.5%) and the lowest rate in the tube with the highest stiffness (21.2%). Additionally, the softest tube showed the lowest rate of localization of its tip at the stomach wall. CONCLUSIONS: The study illustrates differences between various types of gastric tubes regarding stiffness, behavior and resiliency. Softer gastric tubes may be beneficial. These differences may be relevant in neonatal care of very immature and very sick infants.

Feeding tube use and complications in Prader-Willi syndrome: Data from the Global Prader-Willi Syndrome Registry.

Guidance on indications for, and types of, feeding tubes recommended in Prader-Willi syndrome (PWS) is needed. A Global PWS Registry survey was developed to investigate nasogastric (NG) and gastrostomy (G) tube use and associated complications. Of 346 participants, 242 (69.9%) had NG-tubes, 17 (4.9%) had G-tubes, and 87 (25.1%) had both NG- and G-tubes. Primary indication for placement was "feeding difficulties and/or poor weight gain" for both NG- (90.2%) and G-tubes (71.2%), while "aspiration/breathing difficulties" was the procedural indication for 6.4% of NG-tubes and 23.1% of G-tubes. NG-tubes were generally removed by age 6 months (NG Only: 82.9%; NG/G: 98.8%), while G-tubes were often removed by age 2 years (G Only: 85.7%; NG/G: 70.5%). The severe complication rate from G-tubes was 31.7% and from NG-tubes was 1.2%. Overall, caregivers indicated the presence of an NG- or G-tube had a positive effect on quality of life. Feeding difficulties in PWS are largely managed by NG-tube alone. The severe complication rate from G-tubes was about 25 times higher than from NG-tubes; yet, G-tube placement rates have generally increased. G-tube placement puts individuals with PWS at risk for anesthesia and surgery-related complications and should be considered judiciously by a multidisciplinary team.

Placement of Nasogastric Tubes in Pancreaticoduodenectomy Patients: Switching from Immediate Intraoperative Removal to Avoiding Unnecessary Perioperative Use.

BACKGROUND: The placement of nasogastric tubes (NGTs) in abdominal surgery has been adopted for decades to attenuate ileus and prevent aspiration pneumonia. In the recent era, the guidelines recommend not using NGT routinely, and even in pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), immediate removal of NGT in operating rooms (ORs) was suggested. However, the clinical outcome and safety of abandoning NGT during the pre-PD and intra-PD periods remain unknown. METHODS: We conducted a single-center retrospective review on adult PD patients aged between 20 and 75 years from 2013 to 2022. The study population was grouped into the NGT group (NGT was placed before PD and immediately removed in the ORs) and the non-NGT group (NGT was not placed preoperatively). Safety was evaluated by the number of adverse events. The primary aim of this study is to evaluate the need of NGT insertion in ORs among PD patients. RESULTS: The case numbers in the NGT and non-NGT groups were 391 and 578, respectively. No case in the non-NGT group needed the intraoperative insertion of NGT. The rate of pulmonary complications was 2.3% in the NGT group compared to 1.6% in the non-NGT group (P = 0.400). Furthermore, there were no significant differences in terms of rates of major complications (12.8% vs. 9.3%, P = 0.089) or mortality (1.0% vs. 1.0%, P =0.980) between the two groups. The rates of the postoperative insertion of NGT in the NGT and non-NGT groups were 2.6% and 2.8% (P = 0.840), respectively. CONCLUSION: For selected PD patients, the placement of NGT during pre-PD and intra-PD periods may be safely omitted. This primary study is considered the first foundation stone in the extension of the element of no NGT in PD.