Dual‐Purpose Gastric Decompression and Enteral Feeding Tubes Rationale and Design of Novel Nasogastric and Nasogastrojejunal Tubes

Silk, D. B. A.; Quinn, David G.

doi:10.1177/0148607114551966

Cited by 14 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…recommended that critically ill patients should be fed via an enteral access tube placed in the small bowel if they are at high risk of aspiration and intolerant of gastric feeding 44 . However, some progress has been made in implementing transpyloric feeding: the development and implementation of a tailored intervention to overcome barriers to enterally feeding critically ill patients has been described, 43 and a new generation of triple‐lumen small bowel feeding tubes that can be easily sited using a novel double introducer wire‐assisted technique has been designed 45 . The most recent guidelines for critically ill patients (2013), the Canadian Critical Care Nutrition Clinical Practice Guidelines, recommend small bowel feeding access when feasible, especially for patients who are considered at high risk of EN intolerance, regurgitation, or aspiration 46…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk‐Benefit Profile of Gastric vs Transpyloric Feeding in Mechanically Ventilated Patients

Zhao

et al. 2015

Nut in Clin Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk‐Benefit Profile of Gastric vs Transpyloric Feeding in Mechanically Ventilated Patients

Zhao

et al. 2015

Nut in Clin Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…With the assistance of imaging and fiber optic endoscopic technologies, bile drainage can be achieved clinically using a nasobiliary or nasoduodenal catheter. 33,34 Both types of catheter can be inserted and removed easily, quickly, and safely, though both also cause a certain degree of discomfort. Therefore, efficient drainage during the first 12-24 h would be recommended to significantly reduce the bodily retention of radioactivity and possible radiotoxicity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biliary and duodenal drainage for reducing the radiotoxic risk of antineoplastic ¹³¹I-hypericin in rat models

Jiang

et al. 2015

Exp Biol Med (Maywood)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Necrosis targeting radiopharmaceutical 131 I-hypericin ( 131 I-Hyp) has been studied for the therapy of solid malignancies. However, serious side effects may be caused by its unwanted radioactivity after being metabolized by the liver and excreted via bile in the digestive tract. Thus the aim of this study was to investigate two kinds of bile draining for reducing them. Thirty-eight normal rats were intravenously injected with 131 I-Hyp, 24 of which were subjected to the common bile duct (CBD) drainage for gamma counting of collected bile and tissues during 1-6, 7-12, 13-18, and 19-24 h (n ¼ 6 each group), 12 of which were divided into two groups (n ¼ 6 each group) for comparison of the drainage efficiency between CBD catheterization and duodenum intubation by collecting their bile at the first 4 h. Afterwards the 12 rats together with the last two rats which were not drained were scanned via single-photon emission computerized tomography/computed tomography (SPECT/CT) to check the differences. The images showed that almost no intestinal radioactivity can be found in those 12 drained rats while discernible radioactivity in the two undrained rats. The results also indicated that the most of the radioactivity was excreted from the bile within the first 12 h, accounting to 92% within 24 h. The radioactive metabolites in the small and large intestines peaked at 12 h and 18 h, respectively. No differences were found in those two ways of drainages. Thus bile drainage is highly recommended for the patients who were treated by 131 I-Hyp if human being and rats have a similar excretion pattern. This strategy can be clinically achieved by using a nasobiliary or nasoduodenal drainage catheter.

show abstract

“…Finally, in the assessment of the potential benefits of small bowel feeding, it is important to note that this feeding route does not obviate the need for a gastric tube; simultaneous gastric decompression is often needed with small bowel feeding. This can be accomplished with either a nasogastric/orogastric tube or a dual‐purpose gastric decompression and enteral feeding tube 69 . This practice is most indicated when a patient has decreased gastric motility; patients fed via the small bowel are still at risk for aspiration of gastric secretions and saliva 70 .…”

Section: Practical Issues and Challenges To Small Bowel Feeding Tube mentioning

confidence: 99%

Gastric Versus Small Bowel Feeding in Critically Ill Adults

Schlein

2016

Nut in Clin Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Critically ill patients often require enteral feedings as a primary supply of nutrition. Whether enteral nutrition (EN) should be delivered as a gastric versus small bowel feeding in the critically ill patient population remains a contentious topic. The Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM)/American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN), the European Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ESPEN), and the Canadian Clinical Practice Guidelines (CCPG) are not in consensus on this topic. No research to date demonstrates a significant difference between the two feeding routes in terms of patient mortality, ventilator days, or length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU); however, studies provide some evidence that there may be other benefits to using a small bowel feeding route in critically ill patients. The purpose of this paper is to examine both sides of this debate and review advantages and disadvantages of both small bowel and gastric routes of EN. Practical issues and challenges to small bowel feeding tube placement are also addressed. Finally, recommendations are provided to help guide the clinician when selecting a feeding route, and suggestions are made for future research.

show abstract

Dual‐Purpose Gastric Decompression and Enteral Feeding Tubes Rationale and Design of Novel Nasogastric and Nasogastrojejunal Tubes

Abstract: The proposed designs will lead to the development of dual-purpose nasogastric and nasojejunal tubes that will significantly improve the clinical and nutrition care of postoperative and ICU patients.

Cited by 14 publications

References 48 publications

Risk‐Benefit Profile of Gastric vs Transpyloric Feeding in Mechanically Ventilated Patients

Risk‐Benefit Profile of Gastric vs Transpyloric Feeding in Mechanically Ventilated Patients

Biliary and duodenal drainage for reducing the radiotoxic risk of antineoplastic ¹³¹I-hypericin in rat models

Gastric Versus Small Bowel Feeding in Critically Ill Adults

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Dual‐Purpose Gastric Decompression and Enteral Feeding Tubes Rationale and Design of Novel Nasogastric and Nasogastrojejunal Tubes

Abstract: The proposed designs will lead to the development of dual-purpose nasogastric and nasojejunal tubes that will significantly improve the clinical and nutrition care of postoperative and ICU patients.

Cited by 14 publications

References 48 publications

Risk‐Benefit Profile of Gastric vs Transpyloric Feeding in Mechanically Ventilated Patients

Risk‐Benefit Profile of Gastric vs Transpyloric Feeding in Mechanically Ventilated Patients

Biliary and duodenal drainage for reducing the radiotoxic risk of antineoplastic 131I-hypericin in rat models

Gastric Versus Small Bowel Feeding in Critically Ill Adults

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Biliary and duodenal drainage for reducing the radiotoxic risk of antineoplastic ¹³¹I-hypericin in rat models