Systematic review on bedside electromagnetic-guided, endoscopic, and fluoroscopic placement of nasoenteral feeding tubes

Background Nasoenteral tube feeding is frequently required in hospitalized patients to either prevent or treat malnutrition, but data on the optimal strategy of tube placement are lacking. Objective To compare the efficacy and safety of bedside electromagnetic (EM)-guided, endoscopic, and fluoroscopic placement of nasoenteral feeding tubes in adults. Design Systematic review of the literature. Patients Adult hospitalized patients requiring nasoenteral feeding. Interventions EM-guided, endoscopic, and/or fluoroscopic nasoenteral feeding tube placement. Main Outcome Measurements Success rate of tube placement and procedure- or tube-related adverse events. Results Of 354 screened articles, 28 studies were included. Data on 4056 patients undergoing EM-guided (n = 2921), endoscopic (n = 730), and/or fluoroscopic (n = 405) nasoenteral feeding tube placement were extracted. Tube placement was successful in 3202 of 3789 (85%) EM-guided procedures compared with 706 of 793 (89%) endoscopic and 413 of 446 (93%) fluoroscopic procedures. Reinsertion rates were similar for EM-guidance (270 of 1279 [21%] patients) and endoscopy (64 of 394 [16%] patients) or fluoroscopy (10 of 38 [26%] patients). The mean (standard deviation) procedure time was shortest with EM-guided placement (13.4 [12.9] minutes), followed by endoscopy and fluoroscopy (14.9 [8.7] and 16.2 [23.6] minutes, respectively). Procedure-related adverse events were infrequent (0.4%, 4%, and 3%, respectively) and included mainly epistaxis. The tube-related adverse event rate was lowest in the EM-guided group (36 of 242 [15%] patients), followed by fluoroscopy (40 of 191 [21%] patients) and endoscopy (115 of 384 [30%] patients) and included mainly dislodgment and blockage of the tube. Limitations Heterogeneity and limited methodological quality of the included studies. Conclusion Bedside EM-guided placement of nasoenteral feeding tubes appears to be as safe and effective as fluoroscopic or endoscopic placement. EM-guided tube placement by nurses may be preferred over more costly procedures performed by endoscopists or radiologists, but randomized studies are lacking

Feeding patients with preoperative symptoms of gastric outlet obstruction after pancreatoduodenectomy: Early oral or routine nasojejunal tube feeding?

Early oral feeding is currently considered the optimal routine feeding strategy after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). Some have suggested that patients with preoperative symptoms of gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) who undergo PD have such a high risk of developing delayed gastric emptying that these patients should rather receive routine postoperative tube feeding. The aim of this study was to determine whether clinical outcomes after PD in these patients differ between postoperative early oral feeding and routine tube feeding. We analyzed a consecutive multicenter cohort of patients with preoperative symptoms of GOO undergoing PD (2010-2013). Patients were categorized into two groups based on the applied postoperative feeding strategy (dependent on their center's routine strategy): early oral feeding or routine nasojejunal tube feeding. Of 497 patients undergoing PD, 83 (17%) suffered from preoperative symptoms of GOO. 49 patients received early oral feeding and 29 patients received routine tube feeding. Time to resumption of adequate oral intake (primary outcome; 14 vs. 12 days, p = 0.61) did not differ between these two feeding strategies. Furthermore, overall complications and length of stay were similar in both groups. Of the patients receiving early oral feeding, 24 (49%) ultimately required postoperative tube feeding. In patients with an uncomplicated postoperative course, early oral feeding was associated with shorter time to adequate oral intake (8 vs. 12 days, p = 0.008) and shorter hospital stay (9 vs. 13 days, p < 0.001). Also in patients with preoperative symptoms of GOO, early oral feeding can be considered the routine feeding strategy after P

Early oral feeding after pancreatoduodenectomy enhances recovery without increasing morbidity

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether a change in the routine feeding strategy applied after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) from nasojejunal tube (NJT) feeding to early oral feeding improved clinical outcomes. An observational cohort study was performed in 102 consecutive patients undergoing PD. In period 1 (n = 51, historical controls), the routine postoperative feeding strategy was NJT feeding. This was changed to a protocol of early oral feeding with on-demand NJT feeding in period 2 (n = 51, consecutive prospective cohort). The primary outcome was time to resumption of adequate oral intake. The baseline characteristics of study subjects in both periods were comparable. In period 1, 98% (n = 50) of patients received NJT feeding, whereas in period 2, 53% (n = 27) of patients did so [for delayed gastric empting (DGE) (n = 20) or preoperative malnutrition (n = 7)]. The time to resumption of adequate oral intake significantly decreased from 12 days in period 1 to 9 days in period 2 (P = 0.015), and the length of hospital stay shortened from 18 days in period 1 to 13 days in period 2 (P = 0.015). Overall, there were no differences in the incidences of complications of Clavien-Dindo Grade III or higher, DGE, pancreatic fistula, postoperative haemorrhage and mortality between the two periods. The introduction of an early oral feeding strategy after PD reduced the time to resumption of adequate oral intake and length of hospital stay without negatively impacting postoperative morbidit

Endoscopic versus bedside electromagnetic-guided placement of nasoenteral feeding tubes in surgical patients

Nasoenteral tube feeding is often required in surgical patients, mainly because of delayed gastric emptying. Bedside electromagnetic (EM)-guided tube placement by specialized nurses might offer several advantages (e.g., reduced patient discomfort and costs) over conventional endoscopic placement. The aim of this study was to compare the success rate of EM-guided to endoscopic placement of nasoenteral feeding tubes in surgical patients. A retrospective cohort study was performed in 267 adult patients admitted to two gastrointestinal surgical wards who received a nasoenteral feeding tube by EM-guidance or endoscopy. Eighteen patients were excluded because of insufficient data. Patients were categorized according to the primary tube placement method. Subgroup analysis was performed in patients with altered upper gastrointestinal anatomy. Primary endpoint was successful tube placement at or beyond the duodenojejunal flexure. A total of 249 patients were included, of which 90 patients underwent EM-guided and 159 patients underwent endoscopic tube placement. Both groups were comparable for baseline characteristics. Primary tube placement was successful in 74/90 patients (82 %) in the EM-guided group versus 140/159 patients (88 %) in the endoscopic group (P = 0.20). In patients with altered upper gastrointestinal anatomy, success rates were significantly lower in the EM-guided group (58 vs. 86 %, P = 0.004). There were no significant differences in tube-related complications such as dislodgement or tube blockage. Bedside EM-guided placement of nasoenteral feeding tubes by specialized nurses did not differ from endoscopic placement by gastroenterologists regarding feasibility and safety in surgical patients with unaltered upper gastrointestinal anatom

Transition-metal catalyzed synthesis of Ketoprofen

Background Exercise therapy is the cornerstone of knee osteoarthritis (OA) management. In particular muscle strengthening exercise, targeting the characteristic loss of muscle strength present in knee OA, is a key factor for the beneficial effects reported for exercise therapy. The optimal training intensity for resistance training in patients with knee OA, however, is not known to date. Besides resistance training, vitamin D supplementation in patients with vitamin deficiency may optimize muscle strength. Objectives To assess (i) whether high-intensity resistance training leads to greater improvements in muscle strength compared to moderate-intensity resistance training in patients with knee OA; and (ii) whether vitamin D supplementation in combination with strength training leads to greater improvements in muscle strength compared to placebo in combination with strength training in patients with knee OA and vitamin D deficiency (25 (OH)D level > 15 nmol/L and < 50 nmol/L (in winter) or <70 nmol/L (in summer)). Methods In a randomized controlled trial, 177 patients with a clinical diagnosis of knee OA were included. All patients were randomly allocated to a high-intensity (70-80% of the Repetition Maximum (1RM)) or a moderate-intensity (40-50% of the 1RM) resistance training program of 12 weeks. Both groups were supervised by a physical therapist twice a week and performed home exercises once a week. In addition, 50 out 177 patients had vitamin D deficiency and received supplementation of vitamin D (1200 IU vitamin D3 per day) or placebo in the 12 weeks prior to and during the resistance training program. The primary outcome measure was isokinetic (60 °/s) upper leg muscle strength (Nm/kg). In addition, the estimated 1 RM for leg press, leg curl and hip abduction were used as measures for muscle strength. Other outcome measures included severity of knee pain (NRS), self-reported and performance based activity limitations (WOMAC physical functioning (WOMAC), Get-up-and-go-test (GUG)). Measurements were performed by a blinded assessor prior to the exercise program (T0), directly after the program (T12) and at 6 months follow-up (T36). Additionally, for patients with vitamin D deficiency, measurements were also taken prior to vitamin supplementation or placebo (T-12). Results Both the high-intensity group and moderate-intensity group improved in upper leg muscle strength over time. No significant differences between groups were found for isokinetic upper leg muscle strength (p = 0.646) (see figure 1). However, when measured by the estimated 1 RM, significant differences were found between groups in favor of the high–intensity group (p = 0.001) (see figure 1). No between-group differences were found on pain (p = 0.885), or on self-reported and performance-based activity limitations (WOMAC p = 0.968; GUG p = 0.800), although both groups improved (see figure 1). An unexpected finding was that, in the (small sample of) patients with vitamin D deficiency, the placebo group showed significant greater isokinetic upper leg muscle strength over time compared to the vitamin D group (p = 0.001). Conclusion No differences between groups were found for isokinetic upper leg muscle strength. With the estimated 1 RM as a measure of muscle strength, high-intensity resistance training led to greater improvements in muscle strength compared to moderate-intensity resistance training in patients with knee OA. This did not result in greater improvements in pain and physical functioning in the high-intensity resistance group; both groups showed similar clinically important improvements. The added value of vitamin D supplementation on muscle strength in knee OA patients with vitamin D deficiency need further study