Gastric residual volume measurement in British neonatal intensive care units: a survey of practice

Nursing practice of routine gastric aspiration in preterm infants and its link to necrotizing enterocolitis: is the practice still clinically relevant?

The practice of routine gastric residual aspiration in preterm infants remains controversial, with conflicting evidence regarding its impact on necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC). As front-line caregivers, nurses play a vital role in gastric aspiration procedures and must be informed by evidence. This quasi-experimental nursing study aimed to assess whether gastric aspiration is clinically relevant in reducing the risk of NEC in preterm infants.A total of 250 preterm infants from two NICUs in Egypt were allocated to the gastric aspiration (n = 125) and non-aspiration (n = 125) groups. Feeding practices, gastric residuals, and incidence/severity of NEC were compared between groups according to modified Bell's criteria. Risk factors were analyzed using multivariate regression. There were no significant baseline differences between the groups. The gastric residual attributes and feeding outcomes did not differ substantially from aspiration. The overall incidence of NEC was 14-15%, with no significant differences in the odds of onset or progression of NEC by stage between the groups. Lower gestational age and birth weight emerged as stronger predictors of NEC. Routine gastric aspiration does not appear to directly prevent or reduce the severity of NEC in this population. Although gastric residuals retain clinical importance, study findings question assumptions that aspiration protects against NEC and informs nursing practice. Evidence-based feeding protocols must continually evolve through ongoing research on modifiable risk factors for this devastating intestinal disease in preterm infants.

Influence of gastric residual assessment in preterm neonates on time to achieve enteral feeding (the GRASS trial)-Multi-centre, assessor-blinded randomised clinical trial

PURPOSE

Gastric residual measurement is routinely performed in premature infants prior to feeding despite a lack of evidence of benefit. We aimed to evaluate if the exclusion of routine gastric residual measurement and evaluation has an impact on the time taken to achieve full enteral feeding in preterm neonates.

METHODS

International multi-centre randomised controlled trial. Clinically stable, appropriate for gestational age infants between 26+0 and 30+6 weeks of gestation and less than 1.5 kg birth weight were eligible. Infants were randomised to the intervention arm (no monitoring of gastric aspirates) or control arm (routine care). Primary outcome was the achievement of enteral feeds of 100 ml/kg/day by day 5 of life.

RESULTS

Ninety-five infants were recruited with 88 included in an intention-to-treat analysis, 45 in the intervention arm and 43 in the control arm. There was no imbalance in baseline characteristics. Thirty-three (73.3%) infants in the intervention group and 32 infants (74.4%) in the control group reached full feeds by day 5 of life (p = 0.91) with no difference in median time to full feeds. There were no statistically significant differences in survival or the major morbidities of prematurity.

CONCLUSION

 There was no difference in time to attainment of enteral feeds of 100 ml/kg/day in premature infants when gastric residuals were not monitored. In the absence of a clinical benefit to routine monitoring, it may be appropriate to discontinue this practice and only monitor residuals when clinical concern of feeding intolerance or gastrointestinal pathology arises in this group of patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

 NCT03111329- https://clinicaltrials.gov/ . Registered 06/04/2017.

WHAT IS KNOWN

• Previous randomized trials have shown little benefit to the performance of routine assessment of gastric residuals in preterm infants. Despite this, they continue to be performed due to concerns from observational data regarding development of NEC. Meta-analysis to date has failed to answer the question regarding NEC.

WHAT IS NEW

• In very low birth weight infants who are fed using modern feeding practice of faster feed advancement, to minimize use of central access and parenteral nutrition, exclusion of routine checks of gastric residuals did not increase the proportion of infants reaching full enteral feeds by day 5. No harm was seen when residual checks were not performed. • In the absence of a clinical benefit to the routine performance of gastric residuals in very low birth weight infants, it may be appropriate to discontinue their use and instead check residuals when clinical concern of pathology arises.

Effect of lying position on gastric residual volume in premature infants: A systematic review

Premature infants' gastric residual volume may be affected by position. This systematic review was conducted to examine the effect of lying position on the gastric residual volume of preterm newborns fed by gastric tube. Electronic databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, MEDLINE Complete, Academic Search Ultimate, CINAHL Complete, Cochrane, and Scopus) were searched for randomized controlled experimental or quasiexperimental studies in English published between 2011 and 2022 investigating the effect of one or more lying positions on gastric residual volume in premature newborns. The PICOS strategy was used in preparing and reporting the systematic review. A total of 304 articles were retrieved, and the full texts of 12 articles were evaluated for suitability. After eliminating the excluded articles, 10 articles were included in the analysis. The quality of evidence varied, with four studies judged to have poor quality whereas the remaining six were considered to range from moderate to good in quality. Based on the results obtained from the studies, it was determined that gastric residual volume was the least in the right lateral and prone positions and more in the left lateral and supine positions compared with the other two positions, with no difference between the two latter positions. The methodological differences, such as the evaluation of different positions, the timing of positioning and the duration of maintaining in the same position, and the measurement times of gastric residual volume made it difficult to reach a definitive proof. We concluded that high-evidence studies evaluating all positions are needed.

How frequent is routine use of probiotics in UK neonatal units?

OBJECTIVE

There is a lack of UK guidance regarding routine use of probiotics in preterm infants to prevent necrotising enterocolitis, late-onset sepsis and death. As practices can vary, we aimed to determine the current usage of probiotics within neonatal units in the UK.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Using NeoTRIPS, a trainee-led neonatal research network, an online survey was disseminated to neonatal units of all service levels within England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales in 2022. Trainees were requested to complete one survey per unit regarding routine probiotic administration.

RESULTS

161 of 188 (86%) neonatal units responded to the survey. 70 of 161 (44%) respondents routinely give probiotics to preterm infants. 45 of 70 (64%) use the probiotic product Lactobacillus acidophilus NCFM/Bifidobacterium bifidum Bb-06/B. infantis Bi-26 (Labinic™). 57 of 70 (81%) start probiotics in infants ≤32 weeks' gestation. 33 of 70 (47%) had microbiology departments that were aware of the use of probiotics and 64 of 70 (91%) had a guideline available. Commencing enteral feeds was a prerequisite to starting probiotics in 62 of 70 (89%) units. The majority would stop probiotics if enteral feeds were withheld (59 of 70; 84%) or if the infant was being treated for necrotising enterocolitis (69 of 70; 99%). 24 of 91 (26%) units that did not use probiotics at the time of the survey were planning to introduce them within the next 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

More than 40% of all UK neonatal units that responded are now routinely administering probiotics, with variability in the product used. With increased probiotic usage in recent years, there is a need to establish whether this translates to improved clinical outcomes.

Re-feeding versus discarding gastric residuals to improve growth in preterm infants

BACKGROUND

Routine monitoring of gastric residuals in preterm infants on tube feeds is a common practice in neonatal intensive care units used to guide initiation and advancement of enteral feeding. There is a paucity of consensus on whether to re-feed or discard the aspirated gastric residuals. While re-feeding gastric residuals may aid in digestion and promote gastrointestinal motility and maturation by replacing partially digested milk, gastrointestinal enzymes, hormones, and trophic substances, abnormal residuals may result in vomiting, necrotising enterocolitis, or sepsis.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of re-feeding when compared to discarding gastric residuals in preterm infants.  SEARCH METHODS: Searches were conducted in February 2022 in Cochrane CENTRAL via CRS, Ovid MEDLINE and Embase, and CINAHL. We also searched clinical trial databases, conference proceedings, and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected RCTs that compared re-feeding versus discarding gastric residuals in preterm infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data, in duplicate. We analysed treatment effects in individual trials and reported the risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data and the mean difference (MD) for continuous data, with respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We found one eligible trial that included 72 preterm infants. The trial was unmasked but was otherwise of good methodological quality. Re-feeding gastric residual may have little or no effect on time to regain birth weight (MD 0.40 days, 95% CI -2.89 to 3.69; 59 infants; low-certainty evidence), risk of necrotising enterocolitis stage ≥ 2 or spontaneous intestinal perforation (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.25 to 2.04; 72 infants; low-certainty evidence), all-cause mortality before hospital discharge (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.85; 72 infants; low-certainty evidence), time to establish enteral feeds ≥ 120 mL/kg/d (MD -1.30 days, 95% CI -2.93 to 0.33; 59 infants; low-certainty evidence), number of total parenteral nutrition days (MD -0.30 days, 95% CI -2.07 to 1.47; 59 infants; low-certainty evidence), and risk of extrauterine growth restriction at discharge (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.38 to 4.34; 59 infants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain as to the effect of re-feeding gastric residual on number of episodes of feed interruption lasting for ≥ 12 hours (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.52; 59 infants; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found only limited data from one small unmasked trial on the efficacy and safety of re-feeding gastric residuals in preterm infants. Low-certainty evidence suggests re-feeding gastric residual may have little or no effect on important clinical outcomes such as necrotising enterocolitis, all-cause mortality before hospital discharge, time to establish enteral feeds, number of total parenteral nutrition days, and in-hospital weight gain. A large RCT is needed to assess the efficacy and safety of re-feeding of gastric residuals in preterm infants with adequate certainty of evidence to inform policy and practice.

Routine monitoring of gastric residual for prevention of necrotising enterocolitis in preterm infants

BACKGROUND

Routine monitoring of gastric residual in preterm infants on gavage feeds is a common practice used to guide initiation and advancement of feeds. It is believed that an increase in or an altered gastric residual may be predictive of necrotising enterocolitis (NEC). Withholding monitoring of gastric residual may take away the early indicator and thus may increase the risk of NEC. However, routine monitoring of gastric residual as a guide, in the absence of uniform standards, may lead to unnecessary delay in initiation and advancement of feeds and hence might result in a delay in establishing full enteral feeds. This in turn may increase the duration of total parenteral nutrition (TPN) and central venous line usage, increasing the risk of associated complications. Furthermore, delays in establishing full enteral feeds increase the risk of extrauterine growth restriction and neurodevelopmental impairment.

OBJECTIVES

• To assess the efficacy and safety of routine monitoring versus no monitoring of gastric residual in preterm infants • To assess the efficacy and safety of routine monitoring of gastric residual based on two different criteria for interrupting feeds or decreasing feed volume in preterm infants SEARCH METHODS: We conducted searches in Cochrane CENTRAL via CRS, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL in February 2022. We also searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi- and cluster-RCTs.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected RCTs that compared routine monitoring versus no monitoring of gastric residual and trials that used two different criteria for gastric residual to interrupt feeds in preterm infants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial eligibility, risk of bias and extracted data. We analysed treatment effects in individual trials and reported risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data, and mean difference (MD) for continuous data, with respective 95% confidence intervals (CI). We calculated the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial/harmful outcome (NNTB/NNTH) for dichotomous outcomes with significant results. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five studies (423 infants) in this updated review. Routine monitoring versus no routine monitoring of gastric residual in preterm infants Four RCTs with 336 preterm infants met the inclusion criteria for this comparison. Three studies were performed in infants with birth weight of < 1500 g, while one study included infants with birth weight between 750 g and 2000 g. The trials were unmasked but were otherwise of good methodological quality. Routine monitoring of gastric residual:  - probably has little or no effect on the risk of NEC (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.46 to 2.57; 334 participants, 4 studies; moderate-certainty evidence); - probably increases the time to establish full enteral feeds (MD 3.14 days, 95% CI 1.93 to 4.36; 334 participants, 4 studies; moderate-certainty evidence); - may increase the time to regain birth weight (MD 1.70 days, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.39; 80 participants, 1 study; low-certainty evidence);  - may increase the number of infants with feed interruption episodes (RR 2.21, 95% CI 1.53 to 3.20; NNTH 3, 95% CI 2 to 5; 191 participants, 3 studies; low-certainty evidence);  - probably increases the number of TPN days (MD 2.57 days, 95% CI 1.20 to 3.95; 334 participants, 4 studies; moderate-certainty evidence); - probably increases the risk of invasive infection (RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.19; NNTH 10, 95% CI 5 to 100; 334 participants, 4 studies; moderate-certainty evidence); - may result in little or no difference in all-cause mortality before hospital discharge (RR 2.14, 95% CI 0.77 to 5.97; 273 participants, 3 studies; low-certainty evidence). Quality and volume of gastric residual compared to quality of gastric residual alone for feed interruption in preterm infants One trial with 87 preterm infants met the inclusion criteria for this comparison. The trial included infants with 1500 g to 2000 g birth weight.  Using two different criteria of gastric residual for feed interruption: - may result in little or no difference in the incidence of NEC (RR 5.35, 95% CI 0.26 to 108.27; 87 participants; low-certainty evidence);  - may result in little or no difference in time to establish full enteral feeds (MD -0.10 days, 95% CI -0.91 to 0.71; 87 participants; low-certainty evidence); - may result in little or no difference in time to regain birth weight (MD 1.00 days, 95% CI -0.37 to 2.37; 87 participants; low-certainty evidence); - may result in little or no difference in number of TPN days (MD 0.80 days, 95% CI -0.78 to 2.38; 87 participants; low-certainty evidence); - may result in little or no difference in the risk of invasive infection (RR 5.35, 95% CI 0.26 to 108.27; 87 participants; low-certainty evidence); - may result in little or no difference in all-cause mortality before hospital discharge (RR 3.21, 95% CI 0.13 to 76.67; 87 participants; low-certainty evidence).  - we are uncertain about the effect of using two different criteria of gastric residual on the risk of feed interruption episodes (RR 3.21, 95% CI 0.13 to 76.67; 87 participants; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate-certainty evidence suggests routine monitoring of gastric residual has little or no effect on the incidence of NEC. Moderate-certainty evidence suggests monitoring gastric residual probably increases the time to establish full enteral feeds, the number of TPN days and the risk of invasive infection. Low-certainty evidence suggests monitoring gastric residual may increase the time to regain birth weight and the number of feed interruption episodes, and may have little or no effect on all-cause mortality before hospital discharge. Further RCTs are warranted to assess the effect on long-term growth and neurodevelopmental outcomes.

Continuous versus Intermittent Enteral Feeding in Critically Ill Children: A Systematic Review

Administration of enteral nutrition (EN) in critically ill pediatric patients admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) constitutes a major challenge due to the increased risk of complications, as well as the lack of well-trained healthcare professionals. EN is usually delivered via cyclic, continuous, or intermittent feeding; however, a number of potential barriers have been reported in the literature regarding different feeding regimens. The purpose of this review was to assess the effectiveness of continuous and intermittent bolus feeding on critically ill children. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and a clinical trial registry up to September 2022, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in the English language. Four studies met the inclusion criteria with a total population of 288 patients admitted to the PICU. Three studies were rated with a high risk of bias and one with some concerns. There was high heterogeneity between the studies in regard to the reporting of outcomes. Three studies measured the total time needed to reach prescribed caloric intake with conflicting results, while two studies evaluated the length of stay (LOS) in PICU with no difference between the two arms. One study assessed the time weaning from mechanical ventilation, favoring the bolus group. No data were provided for gastric residual volume (GRV), anthropometric measurements, and biochemical markers. Additional randomized trials with better methodology are needed to assess the efficacy of the two enteral feeding regimens in critically ill PICU patients.

Routine prefeed gastric aspiration in preterm infants: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Despite lack of evidence, the practice of routine prefeed gastric residue aspiration before the next feed is common. Recent studies suggest that this practice might be even harmful. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the effect of avoiding routine prefeed gastric residue aspiration as compared to routine aspiration, on various clinical outcomes in preterm infants. We searched five different electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library) until March 8, 2021. Only randomized controlled trials comparing the practice of routine prefeed gastric aspiration with no routine aspiration in preterm infants were considered eligible. The random-effects meta-analysis was done using RevMan 5.3 software. Of the 894 unique records identified by our search, we included 6 studies (451 participants) in the review. There was no significant difference in the incidence of necrotizing enterocolitis (RR 0.80; 95% CI 0.31 to 2.08; 421 participants in 5 trials). Avoiding routine prefeed aspiration was associated with achieving full enteral feeds earlier (MD - 3.19 days, 95% CI - 4.22 to - 2.16), shorter duration of hospitalization (MD - 5.32 days; 95% CI - 10.25 to - 0.38), and lower incidence of late-onset sepsis (RR 0.77; 95% CI 0.60 to 0.99). Time to regain birth weight, days of total parenteral nutrition or central venous line usage, culture-positive sepsis, and all-cause mortality did not differ between the two groups.Conclusion: In the absence of other signs of feed intolerance, routine prefeed gastric residue aspiration should be avoided in preterm infants.Prospero registration number: CRD42020197657 What is Known: • Though, routine prefeed aspiration before next feed is a common practice in preterm gavage-fed infants. • Recent study suggests that the omission of routine gastric residual evaluation led to improved weight gain and earlier hospital discharge. What is New: • Low- to moderate-quality evidence suggest that avoiding routine prefeed gastric residue monitoring helps in the reduction of late-onset sepsis, achieving full enteral feeds earlier, and earlier discharge from the hospital. • Abandoning the practice of routine prefeed aspiration in absence of other signs of feed intolerance in preterm low birthweight neonates is safe.

Optimal outcome measures for a trial of not routinely measuring gastric residual volume in neonatal care: a mixed methods consensus process

BACKGROUND

Routine measurement of gastric residual volume to guide feeding is widespread in neonatal units but not supported by high-quality evidence. Outcome selection is critical to trial design.

OBJECTIVE

To determine optimal outcome measures for a trial of not routinely measuring gastric residual volume in neonatal care.

DESIGN

A focused literature review, parent interviews, modified two-round Delphi survey and stakeholder consensus meeting.

PARTICIPANTS

Sixty-one neonatal healthcare professionals participated in an eDelphi survey; 17 parents were interviewed. 19 parents and neonatal healthcare professionals took part in the consensus meeting.

RESULTS

Literature review generated 14 outcomes, and parent interviews contributed eight additional outcomes; these 22 outcomes were then ranked by 74 healthcare professionals in the first Delphi round where four further outcomes were proposed; 26 outcomes were ranked in the second round by 61 healthcare professionals. Five outcomes were categorised as 'consensus in', and no outcomes were voted 'consensus out'. 'No consensus' outcomes were discussed and voted on in a face-to-face meeting by 19 participants, where four were voted 'consensus in'. The final nine consensus outcomes were: mortality, necrotising enterocolitis, time to full enteral feeds, duration of parenteral nutrition, time feeds stopped per 24 hours, healthcare-associated infection; catheter-associated bloodstream infection, change in weight between birth and neonatal discharge and pneumonia due to milk aspiration.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

We have identified outcomes for a trial of no routine measurement of gastric residual volume to guide feeding in neonatal care. This outcome set will ensure outcomes are important to healthcare professionals and parents.