Literature DB >> 1395657

Nutritional outcome and pneumonia in critical care patients randomized to gastric versus jejunal tube feedings. The Critical Care Research Team.

M A Montecalvo1, K A Steger, H W Farber, B F Smith, R C Dennis, G F Fitzpatrick, S D Pollack, T Z Korsberg, D H Birkett, E F Hirsch.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare nutritional status, gastric colonization, and rates of nosocomial pneumonia in ICU patients randomized to gastric tube feeding vs. patients fed by an endoscopically placed jejunal tube.
DESIGN: Randomized, prospective study.
SETTING: Medical and surgical ICUs at Boston City Hospital; surgical ICU at University Hospital. PATIENTS: Of the 38 study patients, 19 were randomized to gastric tube feeding and 19 were randomized to an endoscopically placed jejunal tube. The two groups were similar in age, sex, race, underlying disease, and type of surgery.
RESULTS: The two patient groups were similar in number of days fed, duration of ICU stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, days of antibiotic therapy, and days with fever. Compared with the gastric group, the jejunal group had more patients with circulatory shock on admission (79% vs. 68.4%), higher admission Acute Physiology Score (24.0 vs. 21.7), and fewer patients with pneumonia at randomization (26.3% vs. 31.6%). The jejunal group received a significantly higher percentage of their daily goal caloric intake (p = .05), and had greater increases in serum prealbumin concentrations (p < .05) than the patients with gastric tube feeding. Although the jejunal tube group had more days of diarrhea (3.3 +/- 6.6 vs. 1.8 +/- 2.9), this difference was not statistically significant. Nosocomial pneumonia was diagnosed clinically in two (10.5%) patients in the gastric tube group and in no patients in the jejunal tube group.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients fed by jejunal tube received a significantly higher proportion of their daily goal caloric intake, had a significantly greater increase in serum prealbumin concentrations, and had a lower rate of pneumonia than patients fed by continuous gastric tube feeding.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1395657     DOI: 10.1097/00003246-199210000-00004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Crit Care Med        ISSN: 0090-3493            Impact factor:   7.598


  41 in total

Review 1.  Enteral nutrition access devices.

Authors:  A Habib; D F Kirby
Journal:  Curr Gastroenterol Rep       Date:  1999-08

Review 2.  Prevention of nosocomial bacterial pneumonia.

Authors:  J L Vincent
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 9.139

3.  Endoscopic placement of enteral feeding tubes.

Authors:  Gerard P Rafferty; Tony Ck Tham
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2010-05-16

4.  A pilot study of pepsin in tracheal and oral secretions.

Authors:  Marilyn Schallom; Sally M Tricomi; Yie-Hwa Chang; Norma A Metheny
Journal:  Am J Crit Care       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 2.228

5.  Gastric and Postpyloric Total Enteral Nutrition.

Authors:  Souheil G Abou-Assi; Vikash Khurana; Mitchell L Schubert
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol       Date:  2005-04

Review 6.  A comparison of early gastric and post-pyloric feeding in critically ill patients: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kwok M Ho; Geoffrey J Dobb; Steven A R Webb
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2006-03-29       Impact factor: 17.440

7.  Clinical application of clip-assisted endoscopic method for nasoenteric feeding in patients with gastroparesis and gastroesophageal wounds.

Authors:  Chung-Jen Wu; Ping-I Hsu; Gin-Ho Lo; Chang-Bih Shie; Ching-Chu Lo; E-Ming Wang; Chiun-Ku Lin; Wen-Chi Chen; Lung-Chih Cheng; Hsien-Chung Yu; Yi-Chun Chan; Kwok-Hung Lai
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2005-06-28       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 8.  Post-pyloric feeding.

Authors:  Eva Niv; Zvi Fireman; Nachum Vaisman
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-03-21       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 9.  Enteral nutrition in the critically ill patient: a critical review of the evidence.

Authors:  D K Heyland; D J Cook; G H Guyatt
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 17.440

10.  Mesenteric blood flow, glucose absorption and blood pressure responses to small intestinal glucose in critically ill patients older than 65 years.

Authors:  Jennifer A Sim; M Horowitz; M J Summers; L G Trahair; R S Goud; A V Zaknic; T Hausken; J D Fraser; M J Chapman; K L Jones; A M Deane
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2012-10-25       Impact factor: 17.440

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.