AIM: To report the clinical experiences in the application of clip-assisted endoscopic method for nasoenteric feeding in patients with gastroparesis and patients with gastroesophageal wounds, and to compare the efficacy of nasoenteric feeding in these two indications. METHODS: From April 2002 to January 2004, 21 consecutive patients with gastroparesis or gastroesophageal wounds were enrolled and received nasoenteric feeding for nutritional support. A clip-assisted method was used to place the nasoenteric tubes. Outcomes in the two groups were compared with respect to the successful rate of enteral feeding, percentage of recommended energy intake (REI), and complication rates. RESULTS: The gastroparesis group included 13 patients with major burns (n = 7), trauma (n = 2), congestive heart failure (n = 2) and post-surgery gastric stasis syndrome (n = 2). The esophageogastric wound group included eight patients with tracheoesophageal fistula (n = 2) and wound leakage following gastric surgery (n = 6). Two study groups were similar in feeding successful rates (84.6% vs 75.0%). There were also no differences in the percentage of REI between groups (79.4% vs 78.6%). Additionally, no complications occurred in any of the study groups. CONCLUSION: Nasoenteric feeding is a useful method to provide nutritional support to most of the patients with gastroparesis who cannot tolerate nasogastric tube feeding and to the cases who need bypass feeding for esophageogastric wounds.
AIM: To report the clinical experiences in the application of clip-assisted endoscopic method for nasoenteric feeding in patients with gastroparesis and patients with gastroesophageal wounds, and to compare the efficacy of nasoenteric feeding in these two indications. METHODS: From April 2002 to January 2004, 21 consecutive patients with gastroparesis or gastroesophageal wounds were enrolled and received nasoenteric feeding for nutritional support. A clip-assisted method was used to place the nasoenteric tubes. Outcomes in the two groups were compared with respect to the successful rate of enteral feeding, percentage of recommended energy intake (REI), and complication rates. RESULTS: The gastroparesis group included 13 patients with major burns (n = 7), trauma (n = 2), congestive heart failure (n = 2) and post-surgery gastric stasis syndrome (n = 2). The esophageogastric wound group included eight patients with tracheoesophageal fistula (n = 2) and wound leakage following gastric surgery (n = 6). Two study groups were similar in feeding successful rates (84.6% vs 75.0%). There were also no differences in the percentage of REI between groups (79.4% vs 78.6%). Additionally, no complications occurred in any of the study groups. CONCLUSION: Nasoenteric feeding is a useful method to provide nutritional support to most of the patients with gastroparesis who cannot tolerate nasogastric tube feeding and to the cases who need bypass feeding for esophageogastric wounds.
Authors: T H Naber; T Schermer; A de Bree; K Nusteling; L Eggink; J W Kruimel; J Bakkeren; H van Heereveld; M B Katan Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 1997-11 Impact factor: 7.045