Abstract:This study describes the advantages and disadvantages of several forms of enteral nutrition for patients with severe head injury (Glasgow Coma Scale Score [GCS], <12). Included in the study are nasoenteric nutrition delivery using blind, endoscopic, percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and PEG with jejeunostomy (PEG/J), and open jejeunostomy tube placement methods. These methods are compared with parenteral delivery of nutrition. The study constituted a retrospective analysis of the success rate of early enteral feedings by blind, endoscopic PEG and PEG/J and by open jejeunostomy placement of small-bowel feeding tubes for 57 patients with severe head injury. The delivery cost of enteral nutrition per intensive care unit day was compared to the delivery cost of parenteral nutrition per intensive care unit day in the same group of patients. Fifty-three percent of patients were adequately maintained nutritionally with nasoenteric delivery alone and did not require parenteral feeding. The average number of days for initiation of either enteral or parenteral feedings was 1.8 +/- 0.2 days from injury [standard error of mean (SEM); range, 0-10 days]. An average of 3.3 days (range, 0-23 days) was required for feeding tube placement in all patients. For 70% of patients, tube placement was completed within 48 h after injury. Full-strength, full-rate enteral feedings were achieved by a mean of 4.9 days after injury. A total of 128 feeding tubes were placed while the patients were in the intensive care unit (ICU; 2.2 +/- 0.2 tubes per patient). Blind placement of feeding tubes into the small bowel was rarely achieved without repositioning. Endoscopic tube placement into the duodenum was achieved in 50% of patients, into the jejunum for 33% of patients, and into the stomach for 18% of patients. While in the intensive care unit, patients received an average of 77 +/- 2% of their measured energy expenditure (range, 57-114%). Eleven percent of patients experienced severe gastrointestinal problems. Other problems were associated with the inability to achieve or maintain access: dislodged tubes (30%), clogged or kinked tubes (21%), and mechanical access problems (7 %). Seventy-one percent of patients in barbiturate coma were able to tolerate early nasoenteric feedings. Aspiration pneumonitis occurred equally among patients fed nasogastrically and those fed nasoenterically. The overall aspiration rate was 14%. The cost of acute enteral feeding was $170 per day and that for parenteral feeding, $308 per day. We conclude that blind transpyloric feeding tube placement is difficult to achieve in patients with severe head injury; endoscopically guided placement is a better option. Endoscopic feeding tube placement most consistently allows for early enteral nutritional support in severe head injured patients. Limitations include the inability to establish and/or maintain enteral access, increased intracranial pressure, unstable cervical spinal injuries, facial fractures, and dedication of the physician to tube placement and monitoring.

Experience of post-pyloric feeding in seriously ill patients in clinical practice

Endoscopic Nasojejunal Feeding Tube Placement in Patients with Severe Hepatopancreatobiliary Diseases: a Retrospective Study of 184 Patients.

Comparison of Postpyloric Tube Feeding and Gastric Tube Feeding in Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Meta-Analysis

Effect of gastric versus post-pyloric feeding on the incidence of pneumonia in critically ill patients: observations from traditional and Bayesian random-effects meta-analysis.

A randomised controlled comparison of early post-pyloric versus early gastric feeding to meet nutritional targets in ventilated intensive care patients

Postpyloric enteral feeding costs for patients with severe head injury: blind placement, endoscopy, and PEG/J versus TPN

The application of electromagnetically guided post-pyloric feeding tube placement in critically ill patients.

Gastric-tube versus post-pyloric feeding in critical patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of pulmonary aspiration- and nutrition-related outcomes

Post-pyloric feeding tube placement in critically ill patients: Extending the scope of practice for Australian dietitians

A novel technique for post-pyloric feeding tube placement in critically ill patients: a pilot study

Bedside post-pyloric tube placement using direct visualisation in mechanically ventilated patients: A single centre case series

A Descriptive Study of enteral tube feeding among adults in an acute care tertiary hospital-patient selection, characteristics and complications

Clinical Significance of Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy for Patients with Severe Craniocerebral Injury

Enteral tube feeding in adults

Gastroenteric tube feeding: techniques, problems and solutions

Replaceable Jejunal Feeding Tubes in Severely Ill Children

Experience in Bedside Placement, Clinical Validity, and Cost-Efficacy of a Self-Propelled Nasojejunal Feeding Tube

Feasibility and safety of needle catheter jejunostomy for enteral nutrition in surgically treated severe acute pancreatitis

The provision of a percutaneously placed enteral tube feeding service

Severity of illness influences the efficacy of enteral feeding route on clinical outcomes in patients with critical illness

Gastrointestinal tract access for enteral nutrition in critically ill and trauma patients: indications, techniques, and complications