Bedside postpyloric enteral tube placement using Kangaroo IRIS technology: a single-center case series

Blind versus endoscopy-guided postpyloric feeding tube placement in adults with ischemic stroke: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

This study compared the one-time success rate of blind and endoscopy-guided postpyloric feeding tube placement after implementing a comprehensive nursing scheme of intestinal blind placement for patients with ischemic stroke.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included 179 patients with blind bedside placement and 118 with endoscopy-guided placement. The primary outcome was the one-time success rate of radiologically confirmed postpyloric placement. The secondary endpoints included the position of the tube tip, length of insertion, time of placement, and expenses. The safety endpoints were the incidence of complications caused by placement.

RESULTS

The results showed that the method of tube placement did not significantly affect the outcome of the first tube placement (odds ratio [OR] = 0.41; 95% CI = 0.137-1.207; P = 0.105). Compared with endoscopy-guided placement, blind placement was half the cost. We also found that a history of abdominal surgery (OR = 0.003; 95% CI  = 0.000-0.059; P < 0.001) and longer intensive care unit (ICU) days (OR = 0.94; 95% CI = 0.903-0.981; P = 0.004) were inversely associated with the one-time success rate.

CONCLUSION

Our study suggested that blind intestinal feeding tube placement has an equivalent one-time success rate compared with endoscopy-guided placement in hospitalized patients with ischemic stroke if operators can be trained well. However, the expenses of endoscopy-guided placement were twice those of blind bedside methods. We also found that patients with abdominal surgery history and longer ICU stay were more likely to fail at the first placement. Further research is needed to replicate our single-center observations in a larger population of patients.

Bedside naso-jejunal placement is more difficult, but successful in patients with COVID-19 in critical care: A retrospective service evaluation of a dietitian-led service

The COVID-19 pandemic presented clinical and logistical challenges in the delivery of adequate nutrition in the critical care setting. The use of neuromuscular-blocking drugs, presence of maxilla-facial oedema, strict infection control procedures, and patients placed in a prone position complicated feeding tube placement. We audited the outcomes of dietitian-led naso-jejunal tube (NJT) insertions using the IRIS® (Kangaroo, USA) device, before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. NJT placement was successful in 78% of all cases (n = 50), and 87% of COVID-19 cases. Anaesthetic support was only required in COVID-19 patients (53%). NJT placement using IRIS was more difficult but achievable in patients with COVID-19.

Nasogastric tube insertion length measurement and tip verification in adults: a narrative review

Nasogastric feeding tube insertion is a common but invasive procedure most often blindly placed by nurses in acute and chronic care settings. Although usually not harmful, serious and fatal complications with misplacement still occur and variation in practice still exists. These tubes can be used for drainage or administration of fluids, drugs and/or enteral feeding. During blind insertion, it is important to achieve correct tip position of the tube ideally reaching the body of the stomach. If the insertion length is too short, the tip and/or distal side-openings at the end of the tube can be located in the esophagus increasing the risk of aspiration (pneumonia). Conversely, when the insertion length is too long, the tube might kink in the stomach, curl upwards into the esophagus or enter the duodenum. Studies have demonstrated that the most frequently used technique to determine insertion length (the nose-earlobe-xiphoid method) is too short a distance; new safer methods should be used and further more robust evidence is needed. After blind placement, verifying correct gastric tip positioning is of major importance to avoid serious and sometimes lethal complications.

Small bowel feeding: do you pay the price for bypassing the stomach?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Hydration and nutritional support is a vital part of medical care, thus a clear understanding of the optimal approach is vital for medical professionals. This is a particularly pertinent issue for patients admitted to a critical care setting. This article aims to define the advantages and disadvantages of gastric and postpyloric feeding in the critical care setting, thus aiding decision-making for clinicians.

RECENT FINDINGS

Within the article, the main themes covered are those relating to enteral feeding tube placement, the impact of enteral feeding route on ventilator-associated pneumonia, optimization of enteral tube feeding in critical care and the impact that a chosen route may have upon gastrointestinal function.

SUMMARY

The value of enteral feeding in critical illness is proven beyond doubt and the simplest approach has long been 'if the gut works, use it'. If gastric feeding is not able to be established or is not tolerated then jejunal feeding should be considered as a preferable alternative to parenteral nutrition. Improving access to service or techniques for postpyloric tube placement would assist in optimizing nutritional support in the critical care setting.