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.

The Route of Enteral Feeding in Patients with Acute Cervical Spinal Cord Injury: A Retrospective Study

Clinical Observation of Short Term Prognosis of Acute Severe Stroke Patients with Early Enteral and Parenteral Nutrition

The Effectiveness of Intermittent Nasogastric Feeding on Enteral Nutrition of Critical Patients：a Meta-analysis

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

Comparison of nutritional effectiveness and complication rate between early nasojejunal and nasogastric tube feeding in patients with an intracerebral hemorrhage

Application of naso-jejunal tube in patients with severe craniocerebral injury: a comparative study on timing of enteral nutrition

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

Comparative study on application of nasojejunal feeding combined with nasogastric tube decompression in patients with large area of cerebral infarction

Outcomes among patients with direct enteral vs nasogastric tube placement after acute stroke.

Time Course and Characteristics of the Nutritional Conditions in Acute Traumatic Cervical Spinal Cord Injury

Effect of Intermittent Oro-Esophageal Tube Feeding in Bulbar Palsy After Ischemic Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Study

Effects of different preoperative enteral nutrition feeding routes on the duration of gastrointestinal decompression after definitive surgery for small intestinal fistula

The application effect of bedside blinding method of active indwelling of nasojejunal tube combined with the nasogastric tube gastrointestinal decompression for patients with severe stroke

Effect of two kinds of nasal feeding in acute stroke patients with dysphagia

Nasointestinal Tube in Mechanical Ventilation Patients is More Advantageous

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy versus nasogastric tube feeding for patients with head and neck cancer: a systematic review

Semi-automated ultrasound guidance applied to nasogastrojejunal tube replacement for enteral nutrition in critically ill adults

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

Multivariate analysis of factors associated with the successful prediction of initial blind placement of a nasointestinal tube in the stomach based on X-ray imaging: a retrospective, single-center study

Nasoenteric feeding tubes in critically ill patients (fluoroscopy versus blind)

Early Enteral Nutrition Could Be Associated with Improved Survival Outcome in Cardiac Arrest