Limits...
Use of gel caps to aid endoscopic insertion of nasogastric feeding tubes: a comparative audit.

Upile T, Stimpson P, Christie M, Mahil J, Tailor H, Jerjes WK - Head Neck Oncol (2011)

Bottom Line: AUDIT OUTCOME: Primary outcome measures showed no significant difference between the two techniques.We found the methodology to be of no greater benefit to our patients when compared to our alternative current practice for failed blind nasogastric tube insertion.We retain this methodology in our armamentarium for difficult circumstances but have continued with our standard practice for most patients needing nasogastric tube placement.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Head and Neck Surgery, University College London Hospital, and Department of Medicine, University College London Medical School, London, UK. mrtupile@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Nutrition is crucial to successful outcomes in peri-operative head and neck cancer patients. Nasogastric feeding tubes are an accepted and safe method of providing enteral nutrition in the short-term. Many methods have been advocated for successfully inserting and securing nasogastric tubes and each practitioner will have his or her preferred technique.

Objectives: To confirm the effectiveness of using gel caps combined with the flexible nasendoscope for the insertion of nasogastric feeding tubes in head and neck cancer patients following failure of traditional methods.

Participants: Thirty-five consecutive patients requiring nasogastric feeding tubes were included in this comparative audit. All had failed traditional insertion methods after 2 attempts and were therefore eligible for inclusion. Patients were randomised to undergo attempted insertion with the flexible nasendoscope with or without the use of a gel cap (both methods have been previously described). AUDIT OUTCOME: Primary outcome measures showed no significant difference between the two techniques.

Discussion: We found the methodology to be of no greater benefit to our patients when compared to our alternative current practice for failed blind nasogastric tube insertion. We retain this methodology in our armamentarium for difficult circumstances but have continued with our standard practice for most patients needing nasogastric tube placement.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Feeding tube with the aid of the flexible nasendoscope and gel cap combined.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3108932&req=5

Figure 1: Feeding tube with the aid of the flexible nasendoscope and gel cap combined.

Mentions: Following 2 failed attempts, patients were then randomised to undergo insertion of feeding tube with the aid of the flexible nasendoscope alone (Group A) or with the flexible nasendoscope and gel cap combined (Group B), (Figure 1). Patients were randomized using a computerized random number generator (0-100) where even numbers were allocated to Group A, and odd numbers to Group B. The randomization was implemented by the clinician performing the procedure immediately before insertion (Figure 2).


Use of gel caps to aid endoscopic insertion of nasogastric feeding tubes: a comparative audit.

Upile T, Stimpson P, Christie M, Mahil J, Tailor H, Jerjes WK - Head Neck Oncol (2011)

Feeding tube with the aid of the flexible nasendoscope and gel cap combined.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3108932&req=5

Figure 1: Feeding tube with the aid of the flexible nasendoscope and gel cap combined.
Mentions: Following 2 failed attempts, patients were then randomised to undergo insertion of feeding tube with the aid of the flexible nasendoscope alone (Group A) or with the flexible nasendoscope and gel cap combined (Group B), (Figure 1). Patients were randomized using a computerized random number generator (0-100) where even numbers were allocated to Group A, and odd numbers to Group B. The randomization was implemented by the clinician performing the procedure immediately before insertion (Figure 2).

Bottom Line: AUDIT OUTCOME: Primary outcome measures showed no significant difference between the two techniques.We found the methodology to be of no greater benefit to our patients when compared to our alternative current practice for failed blind nasogastric tube insertion.We retain this methodology in our armamentarium for difficult circumstances but have continued with our standard practice for most patients needing nasogastric tube placement.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Head and Neck Surgery, University College London Hospital, and Department of Medicine, University College London Medical School, London, UK. mrtupile@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Nutrition is crucial to successful outcomes in peri-operative head and neck cancer patients. Nasogastric feeding tubes are an accepted and safe method of providing enteral nutrition in the short-term. Many methods have been advocated for successfully inserting and securing nasogastric tubes and each practitioner will have his or her preferred technique.

Objectives: To confirm the effectiveness of using gel caps combined with the flexible nasendoscope for the insertion of nasogastric feeding tubes in head and neck cancer patients following failure of traditional methods.

Participants: Thirty-five consecutive patients requiring nasogastric feeding tubes were included in this comparative audit. All had failed traditional insertion methods after 2 attempts and were therefore eligible for inclusion. Patients were randomised to undergo attempted insertion with the flexible nasendoscope with or without the use of a gel cap (both methods have been previously described). AUDIT OUTCOME: Primary outcome measures showed no significant difference between the two techniques.

Discussion: We found the methodology to be of no greater benefit to our patients when compared to our alternative current practice for failed blind nasogastric tube insertion. We retain this methodology in our armamentarium for difficult circumstances but have continued with our standard practice for most patients needing nasogastric tube placement.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus