Systematic literature review regarding efficacy and complication rates of securing nasoenteral tubes with nasal bridles. Studies included: systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials or comparative studies comparing nasal bridles with one or more other method of securing nasoenteral tubes. No restriction on age, language, year of publication or methodology quality was imposed. 18 studies were included. Data extraction was conducted by one reviewer and verified by another. Outcomes evaluated included: rate of tube dislodgement, rate of tube replacement, tube dwelling time, quantified enteral nutrition, cost, complications, and PEG-related morbidity/mortality. Nasal bridling is associated with lower tube dislodgement rate, lower replacement rate and increased length of time of tube in situ, resulting in better delivery of nutrition via nasoenteral tubes secured with nasal bridles compared to conventional methods. However, there is higher incidence of epistaxis/nasal ulceration with nasal bridling compared to conventional methods. Nasal bridle is an easily inserted device that improves nasoenteral tube dwelling time and, subsequently, ability to deliver optimal nutrition.