Global availability of parenteral nutrition: Pre- and post-COVID-19 pandemic surveys

OBJECTIVE

Parenteral nutrition represents a therapeutic option for patients with type 3 intestinal failure. If used exclusively, parenteral nutrition has to be complete to provide all essential nutrients. The aim was to assess the availability of parenteral nutrition in all parts of the world, to better comprehend the global situation, and to prepare an action plan to increase access to parenteral nutrition.

METHODS

An international survey using an electronic questionnaire was conducted in August 2019 and repeated in May 2022. An electronic questionnaire was sent to 52 members or affiliates of the International Clinical Nutrition Section of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition. Questions addressed the availability of parenteral nutrition admixtures and their components, reimbursement, and prescribing pre- and post-COVID-19 pandemic. All participating countries were categorized by their economic status.

RESULTS

Thirty-six country representatives responded, answering all questions. Parenteral nutrition was available in all countries (100%), but in four countries (11.1%) three-chamber bags were the only option, and in six countries a multibottle system was still used. Liver-sparing amino acids were available in 18 (50%), kidney-sparing in eight (22.2%), and electrolyte-free in 11 (30.5%) countries (30.5%). In most countries (n = 28; 79.4%), fat-soluble and water-soluble vitamins were available. Trace elements solutions were unavailable in four (11.1%) countries. Parenteral nutrition was reimbursed in most countries (n = 33; 91.6%). No significant problems due to the coronavirus pandemic were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the apparent high availability of parenteral nutrition worldwide, there are some factors that may have a substantial effect on the quality of parenteral nutrition admixtures. These shortages create an environment of inequality.

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.

ESPEN practical guideline: Home parenteral nutrition

This guideline will inform physicians, nurses, dieticians, pharmacists, caregivers and other home parenteral nutrition (HPN) providers, as well as healthcare administrators and policy makers, about appropriate and safe HPN provision. This guideline will also inform patients requiring HPN. The guideline is based on previous published guidelines and provides an update of current evidence and expert opinion; it consists of 71 recommendations that address the indications for HPN, central venous access device (CVAD) and infusion pump, infusion catheter and CVAD site care, nutritional admixtures, program monitoring and management. Meta-analyses, systematic reviews and single clinical trials based on clinical questions were searched according to the PICO format. The evidence was evaluated and used to develop clinical recommendations implementing Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network methodology. The guideline was commissioned and financially supported by ESPEN and members of the guideline group were selected by ESPEN.

Prevention and management of minor complications in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy

Background

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) was developed by Ponsky-Gauderer in the early 1980s. These tubes are placed through the abdominal wall mainly to administer fluids, drugs and/or enteral nutrition but can also be used for drainage or decompression. The tubes consist of an internal and external retention device. It is a generally safe technique but major or minor complications may arise during and after tube placement.

Method

A narrative review of the literature investigating minor complications after PEG placement.

Results

This review was written from a clinical viewpoint focusing on prevention and management of minor complications and documented with real cases from more than 21 years of clinical practice.

Conclusions

Depending on the literature the incidence of minor complications after gastrostomy placement can be high. To decrease associated morbidity, prevention, early recognition and popper management of these complications are important.

ESPEN practical guideline: Home enteral nutrition

This ESPEN practical guideline will inform physicians, nurses, dieticians, pharmacists, caregivers and other home enteral nutrition (HEN) providers in a concise way about the indications and contraindications for HEN, as well as its implementation and monitoring. This guideline will also inform interested patients requiring HEN. Home parenteral nutrition is not included but will be addressed in a separate ESPEN guideline. The guideline is based on the ESPEN scientific guideline published before, which consists of 61 recommendations that have been reproduced and renumbered, along with the associated commentaries that have been shorted compared to the scientific guideline. Evidence grades and consensus levels are indicated. The guideline was commissioned and financially supported by ESPEN and the members of the guideline group were selected by ESPEN.

Prevention and management of major complications in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy

Background

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy is a commonly used endoscopic technique where a tube is placed through the abdominal wall mainly to administer fluids, drugs and/or enteral nutrition. Several placement techniques are described in the literature with the ‘pull’ technique (Ponsky-Gardener) as the most popular one. Independent of the method used, placement includes a ‘blind’ perforation of the stomach through a small acute surgical abdominal wound. It is a generally safe technique with only few major complications. Nevertheless these complications can be sometimes life-threatening or generate serious morbidity.

Method

A narrative review of the literature of major complications in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy.

Results

This review was written from a clinical viewpoint focusing on prevention and management of major complications and documented scientific evidence with real cases from more than 20 years of clinical practice.

Conclusions

Major complications are rare but prevention, early recognition and popper management are important.

Endoscopic management of enteral tubes in adult patients - Part 2: Peri- and post-procedural management. European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

ESGE recommends the "pull" technique as the standard method for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) placement.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends the direct percutaneous introducer ("push") technique for PEG placement in cases where the "pull" method is contraindicated, for example in severe esophageal stenosis or in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) or esophageal cancer.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends the intravenous administration of a prophylactic single dose of a beta-lactam antibiotic (or appropriate alternative antibiotic, in the case of allergy) to decrease the risk of post-procedural wound infection.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.ESGE recommends that inadvertent insertion of a nasogastric tube (NGT) into the respiratory tract should be considered a serious but avoidable adverse event (AE).Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends that each institution should have a dedicated protocol to confirm correct positioning of NGTs placed "blindly" at the patient's bedside; this should include: radiography, pH testing of the aspirate, and end-tidal carbon dioxide monitoring, but not auscultation alone.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends confirmation of correct NGT placement by radiography in high-risk patients (intensive care unit [ICU] patients or those with altered consciousness or absent gag/cough reflex).Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends that EN may be started within 3 - 4 hours after uncomplicated placement of a PEG or PEG-J.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence.ESGE recommends that daily tube mobilization (pushing inward) along with a loose position of the external PEG bumper (1 - 2 cm from the abdominal wall) could mitigate the risk of development of buried bumper syndrome.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

Endoscopic management of enteral tubes in adult patients - Part 1: Definitions and indications. European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

ESGE recommends considering the following indications for enteral tube insertion: (i) clinical conditions that make oral intake impossible (neurological conditions, obstructive causes); (ii) acute and/or chronic diseases that result in a catabolic state where oral intake becomes insufficient; and (iii) chronic small-bowel obstruction requiring a decompression gastrostomy.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends the use of temporary feeding tubes placed through a natural orifice (either nostril) in patients expected to require enteral nutrition (EN) for less than 4 weeks. If it is anticipated that EN will be required for more than 4 weeks, percutaneous access should be considered, depending on the clinical setting.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends the gastric route as the primary option in patients in need of EN support. Only in patients with altered/unfavorable gastric anatomy (e. g. after previous surgery), impaired gastric emptying, intolerance to gastric feeding, or with a high risk of aspiration, should the jejunal route be chosen.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.ESGE suggests that recent gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding due to peptic ulcer disease with risk of rebleeding should be considered to be a relative contraindication to percutaneous enteral access procedures, as should hemodynamic or respiratory instability.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE suggests that the presence of ascites and ventriculoperitoneal shunts should be considered to be additional risk factors for infection and, therefore, further preventive precautions must be taken in these cases.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends that percutaneous tube placement (percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy [PEG], percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy with jejunal extension [PEG-J], or direct percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy [D-PEJ]) should be considered to be a procedure with high hemorrhagic risk, and that in order to reduce this risk, specific guidelines for antiplatelet or anticoagulant use should be followed strictly.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends refraining from PEG placement in patients with advanced dementia.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.ESGE recommends refraining from PEG placement in patients with a life expectancy shorter than 30 days.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence*.

Factors associated with insufficient nasogastric tube visibility on X-ray: a retrospective analysis

OBJECTIVES

Chest X-ray imaging is frequently used for verifying the position of a blindly inserted nasogastric tube. A high-quality X-ray increases the likelihood of conclusive visibility of tube tip positioning, thus avoiding risks due to a misplaced tube (e.g., pulmonary intubation, pneumothorax, small bowel insertion). Therefore, this study aims to determine patient-related and environmental factors affecting the visibility of nasogastric tubes on X-ray in adults.

METHODS

A retrospective descriptive analysis of routinely collected clinical data was performed on all included patients (N = 215) from a prospective randomized trial in a general hospital. A chest X-ray was taken of each patient needing a nasogastric feeding tube, after which visibility and positioning of the tube on X-ray was independently evaluated by 3 radiologists.

RESULTS

In 14.9% (n = 32) of all patients, image quality was insufficient, so no conclusive visibility of nasogastric tube positioning could be found. A patient-related predictor regression model (sex, age, body mass index) explained 21% of variance for an insufficient visibility of the nasogastric tube (Nagelkerke R² = 0.21). An environmental factor regression model demonstrates a guidewire being inside the tube or not during X-ray as a predictor for a conclusive visibility on X-ray.

CONCLUSIONS

High body mass index, male sex, and the absence of a guidewire inside the nasogastric tube at the time of chest X-ray are associated with a risk of insufficient visibility of the tube on X-ray. Patient profiles can be defined in which supplementary attention is needed when obtaining chest X-rays whose purpose is to confirm nasogastric tube positioning.

KEY POINTS

• The quality of chest X-rays to confirm the positioning of nasogastric tubes in adults can be improved considerably. • There are several factors influencing the confirmation of nasogastric tube positioning on X-ray. • Defining patient profiles at risk for an insufficient visibility of the tube on X-ray will indirectly contribute to an improvement of the chest X-ray quality.

ESPEN guideline on home parenteral nutrition

This guideline will inform physicians, nurses, dieticians, pharmacists, caregivers and other home parenteral nutrition (HPN) providers, as well as healthcare administrators and policy makers, about appropriate and safe HPN provision. This guideline will also inform patients requiring HPN. The guideline is based on previous published guidelines and provides an update of current evidence and expert opinion; it consists of 71 recommendations that address the indications for HPN, central venous access device (CVAD) and infusion pump, infusion line and CVAD site care, nutritional admixtures, program monitoring and management. Meta-analyses, systematic reviews and single clinical trials based on clinical questions were searched according to the PICO format. The evidence was evaluated and used to develop clinical recommendations implementing Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network methodology. The guideline was commissioned and financially supported by ESPEN and members of the guideline group were selected by ESPEN.

Comparison of Two Methods for Estimating the Tip Position of a Nasogastric Feeding Tube: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Several studies have shown that the nose-earlobe-xiphoid distance (NEX) is inadequate to estimate the insertion length of nasogastric tubes. An alternative approach tested in these studies, which leads to > 90% well-placed nasogastric tubes, used a corrected calculation of the NEX: (NEX × 0.38696) + 30.37. The primary aim of this study was to determine whether using the corrected NEX was more successful than the NEX in determining the insertion length. The secondary aim was to investigate the likelihood to successfully obtain gastric aspirate.

METHODS

Adult patients in a general hospital (N = 215) needing a nasogastric tube were randomized to the control (NEX) or intervention group (corrected NEX). Tip positioning was verified using X-ray. Correct tip positioning was defined as between 3 and 10 cm under the lower esophageal sphincter (LES).

RESULTS

In >20% of all patients, both methods underestimated the required tube length for correct positioning. The NEX showed an overestimation (17.2%) of the insertion length (>10 cm under the LES) compared with the corrected NEX (4.8%). There was no difference (P = 0.938) between the 2 groups in obtaining gastric aspirate (55.6% vs 56%). However, correct tip positioning resulted in a fourfold increase of obtaining gastric aspirate.

CONCLUSIONS

Both methods resulted in a high risk of incorrectly placed tubes due to malposition of the tip near the LES or distal esophagus. This may increase the risk of reflux and pulmonary aspiration. Based on these results, the development of more reliable methods requires consideration.