Small-bore Feeding Tubes Research Articles

Reducing Lung Injury from Blind Insertion of Small-Bore Feeding Tubes.

Using a blind insertion technique to insert small-bore feeding tubes can result in inadvertent placement in the lungs, leading to lung perforation and even mortality. In a Magnet-designated, 500-bed, level 2 trauma center, two serious patient safety events occurred in a four-week period due to nurses blindly inserting a small-bore feeding tube. A patient safety event review team convened and conducted an assessment of reported small-bore feeding tube insertion events that occurred between March 2019 and July 2021. The review revealed six lung perforations over this two-year period. These events prompted the creation of a multidisciplinary team to evaluate alternative small-bore feeding tube insertion practices. The team reviewed the literature and evaluated several evidence-based small-bore feeding tube placement methods, including placement with fluoroscopy, a two-step X-ray, electromagnetic visualization, and capnography. After the evaluation, capnography was selected as the most effective method to mitigate the complications of blind insertion. In this article, the authors describe a quality improvement project involving the implementation of capnography-guided small-bore feeding tube placement to reduce complications and the incidence of lung perforation. Since the completion of the project, which took place from December 13, 2021, through April 18, 2022, no lung injuries or perforations have been reported. Capnography is a relatively simple, noninvasive, and cost-effective technology that provides nurses with a means to safely and effectively insert small-bore feeding tubes, decrease the incidence of adverse events, and improve patient care.

Microbiome profile informs cleansing and storage practices for reusable feeding tube stylets in critical care.

Cleansing and storage practices for reusable feeding tube stylets are varied and lack consensus guidelines. Almost 40% of critical care nurses do not cleanse reusable stylets. Our proof-of-concept study aimed to identify potential microbial contamination of stylets before and after cleansing with 70% isopropyl alcohol to establish practice standards. This prospective, exploratory pilot study sampled reusable feeding tube stylets using three different stylet sample sets. Set 1 included human participant stylets sampled for microbiome profile precleansing, and postcleansing and reinsertion into feeding tubes (n = 4). Sets 2 and 3 included stylets stored at the bedside. Set 2 included precleansed stylets for microbiome profiles (n = 5). Set 3 included precleansed and postcleansed stylets sampled for quantitative cultures (n = 5). Careful handling and storage protocols were used. Microbiome profiling used 16s ribosomal RNA gene amplicon sequencing. Bacterial species identified on stylets were primarily common microflora and opportunistic pathogens, including Streptococcus pneumoniae, Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas fulva, Cutibacterium acnes, Prevotella melaninogenica, and Lactobacillus paracasei. Microbiological culturing of stylet samples (set 3) did not yield growth for 9/10 samples; Staphylococcus capitis was identified in one postcleansed sample. Mean bacterial species diversity (alpha diversity) decreased following alcohol cleansing (M = 2.54 pre, M = 1.5 post; P = 0.006). The abundance of several potentially opportunistic pathogens indicated plausible risk for gut contamination secondary to reinsertion of stylets into small-bore feeding tubes. Stylet cleansing with 70% isopropyl alcohol reduced bacterial burden on the stylets, although viability was unknown. Careful cleansing, handling, and storage protocols for reusable stylets are necessary to minimize contamination.

Analysis of a Novel Nasoenteral Tube Design

Abstract Tube patency is essential for patients who receive enteral nutrition via a small-bore nasoenteral feeding tube. Formation of a clog within these tubes interrupts and delays delivery of nutrition. Unfortunately, current tubes are prone to clogging. A small-bore nasoenteral feeding tube design is proposed with a gradually increasing diameter over its length, which could mitigate clog issues. Small-bore feeding tubes that increase in diameter over their length were evaluated relative to constant diameter tubes to determine if a tapered tube design could reduce the pressure required to clear an established clog in benchtop testing at pressures representative of those achieved safely in the clinical environment. Incorporating a tapered design into an 8 Fr nasal feeding tube significantly reduced the pressure to expel an established clog by 62% (p < 0.05; 279.2 kPa versus 710.8 kPa, respectively). When compared to constant diameter tubes with the same proximal outside diameter, a tapered tube design permits clearance of an established clog at lower pressure.

Small-bore feeding tube versus large-bore sump tube for early enteral nutrition in mechanically ventilated patients: A nationwide inpatient database study

When physicians start nasogastric tube feeding in mechanically ventilated patients, they have two choices of feeding tube device: a large-bore sump tube or a small-bore feeding tube. Some physicians may prefer to initiate enteral nutrition via the large-bore sump tube that is already in place, and others may prefer to use the small-bore feeding tube. However, it remains unknown whether small-bore feeding tubes or large-bore sump tubes are better for early enteral nutrition. The present study aimed to compare outcomes between these two types of feeding tubes in mechanically ventilated patients. Using the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination inpatient database from July 2010 to March 2018, we identified adult patients who underwent invasive mechanical ventilation for ≥2 days in intensive care units and received nasogastric tube feeding within 2 days of starting mechanical ventilation. We categorized these patients as receiving early enteral nutrition via small-bore feeding tube (8- to 12-Fr single-lumen tubes) or via large-bore sump tube. Propensity score-matched analyses were performed to compare 28-day in-hospital mortality and hospital-acquired pneumonia between the two groups. A total of 79,656 patients were included. Of these patients, 20,178 (25%) were in the small-bore feeding tube group. One-to-one propensity score matching created 20,061 matched pairs. Compared with those in the large-bore sump tube group, patients in the small-bore feeding tube group had significantly higher 28-day in-hospital mortality (17.0% versus 15.6%; hazard ratio, 1.08; 95% confidence interval, 1.03 to 1.14) and a significantly higher prevalence of hospital-acquired pneumonia (9.3% versus 8.5%; odds ratio, 1.11; 95% confidence interval, 1.02 to 1.21). This nationwide observational study suggests that small-bore feeding tubes may not be associated with better clinical outcomes but rather with increased mortality and hospital-acquired pneumonia. Because of the uncertainty regarding the mechanism of our findings, further studies are warranted.

Migration of Feeding Tubes Assessed by Using an Electromagnetic Device: A Cohort Study.

Bedside methods to verify placement of a feeding tube are not accurate for detecting placement within the gastrointestinal tract, increasing risk of pulmonary aspiration. Current guidelines recommend verifying placement every 4 hours, yet the rationale for this recommendation is unknown. To assess spontaneous migration of small-bore feeding tubes in critically ill adults. A prospective, repeated-measures cohort study was performed in 2 intensive care units. An electromagnetic placement device was used to assess distal feeding tube location every 24 hours for 7 days. Tube migration between zones-esophageal, gastric, and postpyloric- was considered clinically significant. Feeding tubes were analyzed in 20 patients. Interrater agreement was substantial for round 2 of a blinded analysis of insertion tracings (g = 0.78); 100% agreement was achieved after unblinding. Among 62 outcomes (migration assessments), 4 feeding tubes migrated 8 times (3 forward and 5 retrograde). All migrations occurred in the postpyloric zone and none were clinically significant. Within 24 hours of insertion, 50% of feeding tubes had migrated forward. Repeated-measures analysis showed a greater likelihood of migration in patients with an endotracheal tube (relative risk, 3.46 [95% CI, 1.14-10.53]; P = .03). No tubes migrated retrograde into the stomach or esophagus, challenging the practice of verifying placement every 4 hours. Verification every 24 hours may be adequate if migration is not suspected. Also, lack of visible anatomical structures on insertion tracings from an electromagnetic placement device make subtle changes in postpyloric placement difficult to identify accurately.

Respiratory Complications of Small-Bore Feeding Tube Insertion in Critically Ill Patients

J Acute Care Surg Vol. 5 No. 1, April 2015 28 Correspondence to: Chi-Min Park, M.D., Ph.D. Departments of Surgery and Critical Care Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, 81 Irwon-ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul 135-710, Korea Tel: +82-2-3410-1096 Fax: +82-2-3410-1669 E-mail: dr99.park@samsung.com Purpose: This study evaluates respiratory complications related to nasogastric feeding tube insertion in intensive care units (ICU). Methods: This was a retrospective, observational study undertaken in adult intensive care units between August 1, 2014 and October 31, 2014. Critically ill patients who had small-bore feeding tubes for enteral feeding inserted in ICUs comprised the study sample. Information collected by medical record review included demographics, clinical characteristics, and data related to the feeding tube insertion (mechanical ventilator, artificial airway, Glasgow Coma scale, confusion assessment method for the ICU, sedative drug use, postplacement X-ray, and complications). Results: Two hundred and seventy-six patients were included in the study sample. The median age was 64, and male patients were 67% of the sample. One hundred and eighty-nine patients (69%) were treated with a mechanical ventilator and 215 patients (78%) needed an endotracheal tube or tracheal cannula during feeding tube insertion. Twelve feeding tubes (4%) were inserted into patients’ tracheobronchial trees and four pneumothoraxes (1.4%) were checked by postplacement X-ray. Conclusion: Respiratory complications associated with feeding tube insertion are not rare. Such complications can lead to significant morbidity and mortality. Practitioners should be cognizant of the potential risks of feeding tube insertion. Standard protocol should be considered to minimize the risk. (J Acute Care Surg 2015;5:28-34)

Respiratory Complications Associated with Insertion of Small-Bore Feeding Tube in Critically Ill Patients

Small-bore flexible feeding tubes decrease the risk of ulceration of the nose, pharynx, and stomach compared with large-bore and more rigid tubes. However, small-bore feeding tubes have more respiratory system complications, such as pneumothorax, hydropneumothorax, bronchopleural fistula, and pneumonia, which are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Thus, it is important to confirm the correct position of feeding tubes. Chest X-ray is the gold standard to detect tracheal malpositioning of the feeding tube. We present three cases in which intubated patients exhibited an altered mental state. An assistant guide wire was used at the insertion of small-bore feeding tubes. These conditions are thought to be potential risk factors for tracheobronchial malpositioning of feeding tubes.

Verification of an Electromagnetic Placement Device Compared With Abdominal Radiograph to Predict Accuracy of Feeding Tube Placement

Use of an electromagnetic placement device (EMPD) facilitates placement of feeding tubes at the bedside. Standard practice for verification of feeding tube placement is via radiographic confirmation. The purpose of this research study was to assess the accuracy of placement of small-bore feeding tubes (SBFTs) as determined by EMPD interpretation compared with that of abdominal radiograph verification by a radiologist. This multicenter prospective study enrolled patients requiring bedside feeding tube placement. SBFTs were placed by an experienced investigator using the EMPD. Two abdominal radiographs were then obtained: one after initial SBFT placement and an additional radiograph after injection of contrast. Documentation of location based on clinician interpretation using the EMPD was then compared with radiologist interpretation. The final sample size was 194 patients, including 18 pediatric patients. Patient age ranged from 12 days to 102 years. Median time for tube placement was 12 minutes. Of the 194 patients, only 1 patient had data showing discrepancies between the original EMPD verification and the final abdominal radiograph interpretation, providing a 99.5% agreement. No patient experienced complications during SBFT placement, and 15 patients had inadvertent airway placement that was avoided with the use of the EMPD. There was a high percentage of agreement between EMPD and radiologic interpretation after contrast injection. The EMPD aided in avoiding inadvertent airway placement, with no patient complications. This device can be used safely at the bedside to facilitate placement of feeding tubes, leading to the delivery of early enteral nutrition.

Care of the Patient With Enteral Tube Feeding

Care of patients with enteral feeding tubes often is based on tradition and textbook guidance rather than best evidence. Care practices can vary widely both between and within institutions, and this was the case at a northeastern military medical center that served as the site for this evidence-based protocol development and implementation project. The purpose of this study was to describe the development and implementation of an evidence-based clinical protocol for care of patients with enteral feeding tubes. This was an evidence-based implementation project with pretest-posttest measures. Protocol data collection occurred both before and after implementation of the protocol. Data collection tools were based on the literature review and included three domains: (a) documentation of patient procedures, (b) nursing knowledge of each of the specific procedures, and (c) environment of care. Descriptive statistics and data were analyzed using independent samples t tests. Overall staff knowledge of enteral feedings and methods used to unclog both large- and small-bore feeding tubes differed significantly before and after implementation (p < .05). Staff knowledge regarding the danger of using blue dye in feeding solution was significant (p < .001). There was improvement also in administration of medications separately rather than mixed together and in head of bed elevation of patients with feeding tubes. There was a 10% improvement in documentation of patient family education and a 15% improvement in recording fluid flushes during medication administration. After implementation, environment of care data collection showed 100% of patients with head of bed elevated and with functioning suction available, an improvement over levels before implementation. Care must be taken in the interpretation of these findings because it was generally not the same nurses who answered both surveys. High staff turnover within this military hospital also affected sustainment of the protocol implementation. Maintenance activities must be constant and visible within the organization. A champion for evidence-based practice greatly enhances uptake and maintenance of nursing practice change.

Removal of self-knotted nasogastric tube Technical Note

Placement of nasogastric tubes (NGTs) for feeding and gastric decompression is common in major head and neck surgical cases, surgical wards and intensive care units, and rarely results in complications. Knotting of an NGT occurs infrequently with small-bore feeding tubes. This report shows that this can occur even with large-bore feeding tubes. Risk factors and ways to avoid this in both awake and anaesthetized patients are discussed. A novel way of removing a knotted NGT is presented.

Evaluation of Delivery of Enteral Nutrition in Critically Ill Patients Receiving Mechanical Ventilation

Published reports consistently describe incomplete delivery of prescribed enteral nutrition. Which specific step in the process delays or interferes with the administration of a full dose of nutrients is unclear. To assess factors associated with interruptions in enteral nutrition in critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation. An observational prospective study of 59 consecutive patients who required mechanical ventilation and were receiving enteral nutrition was done in an 18-bed medical intensive care unit of an academic center. Data were collected prospectively on standardized forms. Steps involved in the feeding process from admission to discharge were recorded, each step was timed, and delivery of nutrition was quantified. Patients received approximately 50% (mean, 1106.3; SD, 885.9 Cal) of the prescribed caloric needs. Enteral nutrition was interrupted 27.3% of the available time. A mean of 1.13 interruptions occurred per patient per day; enteral nutrition was interrupted a mean of 6 (SD, 0.9) hours per patient each day. Prolonged interruptions were mainly associated with problems related to small-bore feeding tubes (25.5%), increased residual volumes (13.3%), weaning (11.7%), and other reasons (22.8%). Placement and confirmation of placement of the small-bore feeding tube were significant causes of incomplete delivery of nutrients on the day of admission. Delivery of enteral nutrition in critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation is interrupted by practices embedded in the care of these patients. Evaluation of the process reveals areas to improve the delivery of enteral nutrition.

Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia

Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia

Use of small-bore feeding tubes: successes and failures

Early enteral nutrition is the preferred option for feeding patients who cannot meet their nutrient requirements orally. This article reviews complications associated with small-bore feeding tube insertion and potential methods to promote safe gastric or postpyloric placement. We review the available bedside methods to check the position of the feeding tube and identify inadvertent misplacements. Airway misplacement rates of small feeding tubes are considerable. Bedside methods (auscultation, pH, aspirate appearance, air bubbling, external length of the tube, etc.) to confirm the position of a newly inserted small-bore feeding tube have limited scientific basis. Radiographic confirmation therefore continues to be the most accurate method to ascertain tube position. Fluoroscopic and endoscopic methods are reliable but costly and are not available in many hospitals. Rigid protocols to place feeding tubes along with new emerging technology such as CO2 colorimetric paper and tubes coupled with signaling devices are promising candidates to substitute for the blind placement method. The risk of misplacement with blind bedside methods for small-bore feeding tube insertion requires a change in hospital protocols.

Indicators of Tubesite During Feedings

Nurses are forced to make decisions about feeding tube position at regular intervals during the delivery of tube feedings; failure to detect an improperly positioned feeding tube can have serious consequences. This study was designed to determine the extent to which specific indicators could singularly and collectively differentiate between gastric and small-bowel placement in patients with nasally or orally inserted small-bore feeding tubes. Indicators were the length of tubing extending from the tube's insertion site as well characteristics of aspirates withdrawn from the feeding tube (volume, appearance, and pH). A total of 201 critically ill tube-fed patients participated in the study for a period of 2-3 days. Among the inclusion criteria were an order for the blind insertion of a small-bore feeding tube, orders to start continuous feedings, and radiographic confirmation of tube location. Five times daily, the following variables were measured: (a) length of tubing extending from the insertion site, (b) volume of aspirate from the feeding tube, (c) appearance of the aspirate, and (d) pH of the aspirate. At the time of entry into the study, 85 patients had gastric feeding tubes and 116 patients had small-bowel feeding tubes. A total of 2,754 concurrent measurements of the variables were attempted; sufficient fluid for pH testing and color description was obtained in 74.2% of the attempts from gastric tubes and in 62.2% of the attempts from small-bowel tubes. Univariate analysis showed that all four of the variables described above were able to differentiate between gastric and small bowel tube sites. A multivariate, forced entry, logistic regression model was able to correctly classify tube site in 81% of the predictions. A variety of easy-to-use bedside methods can be used with a moderate degree of confidence to distinguish between gastric and small-bowel tube placement during continuous feedings.

The Role of Gastric pH Testing With Small-Bore Feeding Tubes

In this observational study, we sought to assess the usefulness of pH values from residuals in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with small-bore feeding tubes. A review of the literature demonstrated that most critically ill patients were excluded in previous studies on gastric pH testing, suggesting that pH testing in critical care is not warranted. Our results demonstrated that 21% of intestinal testing and 64% of gastric testing yielded potential misinformation to the bedside nurse with regards to possible tube location. In conclusion, pH testing for small-bore tube placement and maintenance was not deemed meaningful in our critical care unit.

The percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube. medical and ethical issues in placement.

Offering and recommending PEG tube placement to patients has been a topic of considerable interest in the medical literature. The role of individual health care professionals in the decision making process is poorly defined. PEG tubes are often placed inappropriately because of unrealistic and inaccurate expectations of what they can accomplish in patients unable to tolerate adequate oral intake. We have developed an algorithm for PEG placement for the geriatric, oncology, and neurology patients based on a critical review of current literature. An extensive review of the literature was performed focusing on PEG tube placement in oncology, neurology, and geriatric patients. This algorithm was developed to provide both the primary care provider and the specialist with appropriate indications for PEG placement in these patient populations. Appropriate indications for PEG placement are 1) Esophageal obstruction (e.g., esophageal cancer), 2) Neurologic etiology of dysphagia without obstruction (e.g., status post cerebrovascular accident, pseudobulbar palsy), 3) Prolonged refusal to swallow without evidence of concomitant terminal illness (e.g., protracted pseudodementia due to severe depression), 4) Supplemental nutrition for patients undergoing chemotherapy or radiation therapy. If no physiologic benefit is expected with PEG placement (anorexia-cachexia syndrome), the health care team has no obligation to offer or perform an intervention. This same principle would apply if intervention improves physiologic states but has no effect on quality of life (e.g., permanent vegetative state). Small-bore feeding tubes are cost effective and relatively safe for enteral feedings of up to 6-8 weeks. This is especially pertinent in the population with acute neurological deficits, in which prognostication on extent of impairment is best estimated by communication with neurologist. In the geriatric population there is no proved benefit in weight gain or markers of nutrition (albumin, prealbumin) in patients with malnutrition due to impaired oral intake.

Risk factors for aspiration.

There are numerous risk factors for aspiration in tube-fed critically ill patients. However, there is confusion about the extent to which these factors actually contribute to aspiration. The purpose of this literature review was to summarize findings from selected research studies. A nonexhaustive literature search was conducted to identify risk factors for aspiration in tube-fed, critically ill patients. The most commonly cited factors were decreased level of consciousness, supine position, presence of a nasogastric tube, tracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation, bolus or intermittent feeding delivery methods, high-risk disease and injury conditions, and advanced age. Many studies of aspiration risk factors have relatively small sample sizes and used equivocal definitions of aspiration. Although some addressed aspiration as an outcome, others considered gastroesophageal reflux or pneumonia as outcomes. Despite these variations, authors almost uniformly agree that a decreased level of consciousness and a sustained supine position are major risk factors for aspiration. There is less agreement regarding the effect of a nasogastric tube (or its size) on aspiration and on the effect of various formula delivery methods. A decreased level of consciousness is a major risk factor for aspiration, as is a sustained supine position. Although some authors favor using small-bore feeding tubes to prevent aspiration, there seems to be insufficient data to warrant this action. Although strong data are lacking regarding feeding delivery methods, there are more data to support continuous feedings than bolus/intermittent feedings in high-risk patients.

PH and concentration of bilirubin in feeding tube aspirates as predictors of tube placement.

Currently available bedside methods for determining feeding tube placement often provide inconclusive results. Therefore, additional data are needed to assist nurses in making decisions regarding tube location. To describe the usual concentration of bilirubin in aspirates from newly inserted feeding tubes and to determine the extent to which these measures can contribute to pH alone in correctly predicting feeding tube location. Gastrointestinal samples for concurrent pH and bilirubin testing were obtained from adult, acutely ill patients with newly inserted small-bore feeding tubes (nasogastric, n = 209; nasointestinal, n = 228) within 5 minutes of radiographs taken to determine tube location. Respiratory samples were tested (tracheobronchial, n = 126; pleural, n = 24). pH was measured with a pH meter, and bilirubin content was assayed spectrophotometrically. Results from the pH and bilirubin tests were compared with tube location as determined by radiography. Mean pH levels in the lung (7.73) and intestine (7.35) were significantly higher than the mean pH level in the stomach (3.90; p < .001 for each comparison). Mean bilirubin levels in the lung (.08 mg/dl) and stomach (1.28 mg/dl) were significantly lower than the mean bilirubin level in the intestine (12.73 mg/dl; p < .001 for each). By visually inspecting distribution overlap and mean differences by tube site, results were dichotomized so that a combination of pH and bilirubin values could be used to develop a predictive algorithm. A pH of >5 and a bilirubin value of <5 mg/dl correctly identified all respiratory cases, whereas a pH >5 coupled with a bilirubin level of > or =5 mg/dl correctly identified three fourths of the intestinal cases. A pH of < or =5 coupled with a bilirubin value of <5 correctly identified more than two thirds of the gastric cases. Preliminary laboratory-based data indicate that appropriate use of the proposed algorithm could significantly reduce the number of x-rays needed to exclude respiratory placement and to distinguish between gastric and intestinal placement.

What type of nasogastric tube should we use in the intensive care unit?

A recent review of nasogastric feeding practice was carried out in Hull Royal Infirmary Intensive Care Unit (ICU). As part of this remit the use of nasogastric tubes was considered; specifically the advantages/disadvantages of using small bore feeding tubes, as indicated by relevant literature and experience. The findings are reported here. No attempt is made to discuss the use of jejunal feeding tubes or gastrostomy tubes.

Equipment Guide: How to Aspirate Fluid from Small-Bore Feeding Tubes

E I 'C ou've tried and tried to aspirate fluid from that small-bore feeding tube, but for some reason you can't. Frustrated, you may be tempted to give up. It is possible to aspirate fluid from any type of tube, large or small-but it does take patience and a systematic approach. Small-bore, flexible tubes are notoriously difficult to aspirate. In one study, staff nurses were successful less than