Ceruti S, Dell’Era S, Ruggiero F, Bona G, Glotta A, Biggiogero M, Tasciotti E, Kronenberg C, Lollo G, Saporito A. Nasogastric tube in mechanical ventilated patients: ETCO2 and pH measuring to confirm correct placement. A pilot study.
PLoS One 2022;
17:e0269024. [PMID:
35653380 PMCID:
PMC9162373 DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0269024]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/06/2021] [Accepted: 05/05/2022] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION
Nasogastric tube (NGT) placement is a procedure commonly performed in mechanically ventilated (MV) patients. Chest X-Ray is the diagnostic gold-standard to confirm its correct placement, with the downsides of requiring MV patients' mobilization and of intrinsic actinic risk. Other potential methods to confirm NGT placement have shown lower accuracy compared to chest X-ray; end-tidal CO2 (ETCO2) and pH analysis have already been singularly investigated as an alternative to the gold standard. Aim of this study was to determine threshold values in ETCO2 and pH measurement at which correct NGT positioning can be confirmed with the highest accuracy.
MATERIALS & METHODS
This was a prospective, multicenter, observational trial; a continuous cohort of eligible patients was allocated with site into two arms. Patients underwent general anesthesia, orotracheal intubation and MV; in the first and second group we respectively assessed the difference between tracheal and esophageal ETCO2 and between esophageal and gastric pH values.
RESULTS
From November 2020 to March 2021, 85 consecutive patients were enrolled: 40 in the ETCO2 group and 45 in the pH group. The ETCO2 ROC analysis for predicting NGT tracheal misplacement demonstrated an optimal ETCO2 cutoff value of 25.5 mmHg, with both sensitivity and specificity reaching 1.0 (AUC 1.0, p < 0.001). The pH ROC analysis for predicting NGT correct gastric placement resulted in an optimal pH cutoff value of 4.25, with mild diagnostic accuracy (AUC 0.79, p < 0.001).
DISCUSSION
In patients receiving MV, ETCO2 and pH measurements respectively identified incorrect and correct NGT placement, allowing the identification of threshold values potentially able to improve correct NGT positioning.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
NCT03934515 (www.clinicaltrials.gov).
Collapse