The rates of spontaneous passage of a self-propelling tube, a weighted nasoenteric tube (Ross Products Division, Columbus, OH), and a new unweighted transpyloric tube (Ross Products Division) were compared. This prospective, randomized comparison of outcome was performed at five medical centers and included 129 critically ill patients. Placement was confirmed radiologically at 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 hours. There was no significant difference between group demographics and clinical characteristics. No significant differences in location of the tubes at any time point were found when comparing the self-propelling vs weighted tubes and self-propelling vs unweighted transpyloric tubes. A significant difference was noted in transpyloric location for the unweighted transpyloric tubes vs weighted tubes at 48 hours (58% vs 29%; p = .014) and at 72 hours (62% vs 32%; p = .011).
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
1. Guenter P, Jones S, Roberts Sweed M, et al. Delivery systems and administration of enteral nutrition. In: Rombeau JL and Rolandelli RH, eds. Clinical nutrition: Enteral and tube feeding. Philadelphia:WB Saunders Co; 1997:240–67.
2.
2. Weltz CR, Morris JB, Mullen JL. Surgical jejunostomy in aspiration risk patients. Ann Surgery1992;215:140–5.
3.
3. Eisenberg P. Enteral nutrition—Indications, formulas and delivery techniques. Nursing Clinics of North America1989;24:315–38.
4.
4. Strong RM, Condon SC, Solinger MR, et al. Evaluation of aspiration rates from postpyloric and intragastric-placed small bore nasoenteric feeding tubes. A randomized prospective study. JPEN1992;16:59–63.
5.
5. Jones TN, Moore FA, Moore EE, et al. Gastrointestinal symptoms attributed to jejunostomy after major abdominal trauma—A critical analysis. Crit Care Med1989;17:1146–50.
6.
6. Roberts P, Suleiman K, Meredith JW, et al. Enteral nutrition is well tolerated in trauma patients, advantages of small bowel feeding with concentrated formulas [abstract]. Crit Care Med1995;23:A100.
7.
7. Rolandelli RH, Koruda MJ, Guenter P, et al. Technique for administering enteral nutrition in the ICU. J Crit Illness1988;3:107–12.
8.
8. Napolitano LM, Heard SO, Edwards P, et al. Endoscopic placement of nasoenteric feeding tubes in critically ill patients [abstract]Crit Care Med1994;22:A74.
9.
9. Ott DJ, Mattox HE, Gelfand DW, et al. Enteral feeding tube placement by using fluoroscopy and endoscopy. Am J Roentgenol1991;157:769–71.
10.
10. Miller KS, Sahn SA. The technique of enteral feeding tube insertion. J Crit Illness1986;1:51–8.
11.
11. Williams AJ, Fraser R, Chorley DP, et al. The cathlocator: a novel non-radiological method for the localization of enteral tubes. J Gastroenterol Hepatol1996;11:500–5.
12.
12. Rees RGP, Payne-James JJ, King C, et al. Spontaneous transpyloric passage and performance of fine bore polyurethane feeding tubes: A controlled clinical trial. JPEN1988;12:469–72.
13.
13. Silk DB, Rees RG, Keohane PP, et al. Clinical efficacy and design changes of “fine bore” nasogastric feeding tubes: a seven-year experience involving 809 intubations in 403 patients. JPEN1987;11:378–83.
14.
14. Levenson R, Turner W, Dyson A, et al. Do weighted nasoenteric feeding tubes facilitate duodenal intubation?JPEN1988;12: 135–7.
15.
15. Martin Pena G, Alvarez-Linera Prado J, Ortega del Alamo P, et al. Naso-intestinal intubation with weighted tubes. A new modification of an old technique [Translated from Spanish]. Nutr Hosp1990;5:187–9.
16.
16. Paz HL, Weinar M. Motility agents for the placement of weighted and unweighted feeding tubes in critically ill patients [abstract]. Chest1992;102:191S.
17.
17. Marian M, Rappaport W, Cunningham D, et al. The failure of conventional methods to promote spontaneous transpyloric feeding tube passage and the safety of intragastric feeding in critically ill ventilated patients. Surg Gynecol Obst1993;176:475–9.
18.
18. Zaloga GP. Bedside method for placing small bowel feeding tubes in critically ill patients. Chest1991;100:1643–6.
19.
19. Lord LM, Weiser-Maimone A, Pulhamus M, et al. Comparison of weighted vs unweighted enteral feeding tubes for efficacy of transpyloric intubation. JPEN1993;17:271–3.
20.
20. Shearer H. Post-pyloric feeding tube placement: a comparison of two methods [abstract]. Am J Crit Care1995;4:254.
21.
21. Drickamer MA, Cooney LM. A Geriatricians guide to enteral feeding. J Am Ger Soc1993;41:672–9.
22.
22. Lazarus BA, Murphy JB, Culpepper L. Aspiration associated with long term gastric vs. jejunal feeding—A critical analysis of the literature. Arch Phys Med Rehab1990;71:46–53.
23.
23. Stern MA, Wolf DC. Erythromycin as a prokinetic agent: a prospective, randomized, controlled study of efficacy in nasoenteric tube placement. Am J Gastro1994;89:2011–3.
24.
24. Welch SK, Hanlon MD, Waits M, et al. Comparison of four bedside indicators used to predict duodenal feeding tube placement with radiography. JPEN1994;18:525–30.
25.
25. Caulfield KA, Page CP, Pestana C. Technique for intraduodenal placement of transnasal feeding catheters. Nutr Clin Pract1991;6:23–6.
26.
26. Schulz MA, Santanello SA, Monk J, et al. An improved method for transpyloric placement of nasoenteric feeding tubes. Int Surg1993;78:79–82.
27.
27. Thurlow PM. Bedside enteral feeding tube placement into duodenum and jejunum. JPEN1986;10:104–5.
28.
28. Jeppsson B, Tranberg KG, Bengmark S. A new self-propelling nasoenteric feeding tube. Clin Nutr1992;11:373–5.
