What to do When Decompressive Gastrostomies and Jejunostomies are not Options? A Scoping Review of Transesophageal Gastrostomy Tubes for Advanced Malignancies

Zhu, Clara; Platoff, Rebecca; Ghobrial, Gaby; Saddemi, Jackson; Evangelisti, Taylor; Bucher, Emily; Saracco, Benjamin; Adams, Amanda; Kripalani, Simran; Atabek, Umur; Spitz, Francis R.; Hong, Young Ki

doi:10.1245/s10434-021-10667-x

Cited by 6 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The lengths of gastric tube recommended by different institutes were different, and the common clinical values include 45-55 cm, 55-65 cm, 55-68 cm, and 55-70 cm (6)(7)(8). In addition, the commonly used body surface measurement methods for the length of gastric tube in clinic include the length from nasal tip to earlobe to xiphoid process (NEX), the length from nasal tip to earlobe to navel to the midpoint of xiphoid process (NEMU), the length from hairline to xiphoid process (FX), the length from hairline to navel (FU), and the length from hairline to navel to the midpoint of xiphoid process (FMU) (9)(10)(11)(12). However, the determination of the above method is mainly based on the clinical experience of physicians and their observation of the treatment status quo, which is greatly affected by individual differences and has a large possibility of operation error.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Study on Influencing Factors Analysis of Gastric Tube Insertion Length and Construction of Estimation Method

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundInfluenced by individual differences, the depth of gastric tube placement is often different. Clinically, it is necessary to seek a simple and accurate gastric tube insertion scheme to improve the clinical efficacy of indwelling gastric tube.Materials and MethodsA total of 100 adult patients undergoing transesophageal manometry via nose were included in the study. The in vivo length (NCL) of apex-cardia was measured. At the same time, we entered our institutional database, summarized the clinical data of 100 patients, and analyzed the risk factors affecting NCL using stepwise regression analysis.ResultsThe NCL length scores of patients with different gender, age, marital status, height, weight, BMI, sitting height, sternum length, hairline-xiphoid process, nose tip-earlobe-xiphoid process and earlobe-xiphoid process were statistically significant (P < 0.05). Height, sitting height, gender, BMI and earlobe-xiphoid process were the factors that affected the NCL length score (P < 0.05). The prediction equation of the estimation method of gastric tube insertion length was as follows: NCL length score = 39.907 + 2.909× height +0.865× sitting height. Adjust R2 to 0.506. NCL was positively correlated with height and sitting height. Among them, the correlation with height (r = 0.711, P < 0.001) and sitting height (r = 0.397, P < 0.001).ConclusionHeight, sitting height, gender, BMI and earlobe-xiphoid process were the factors that affected the score of NCL length. There was a significant positive correlation between height, sitting height and NCL length. On this basis, the length of nasogastric tube insertion could be estimated.

show abstract