13
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Endoscopic management of enteral tubes in adult patients – Part 2: Peri- and post-procedural management. European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Main recommendations

          ESGE recommends the “pull” technique as the standard method for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) placement.

          Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

          ESGE recommends the direct percutaneous introducer (“push”) technique for PEG placement in cases where the “pull” method is contraindicated, for example in severe esophageal stenosis or in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) or esophageal cancer.

          Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

          ESGE recommends the intravenous administration of a prophylactic single dose of a beta-lactam antibiotic (or appropriate alternative antibiotic, in the case of allergy) to decrease the risk of post-procedural wound infection.

          Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.

          ESGE recommends that inadvertent insertion of a nasogastric tube (NGT) into the respiratory tract should be considered a serious but avoidable adverse event (AE).

          Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

          ESGE recommends that each institution should have a dedicated protocol to confirm correct positioning of NGTs placed “blindly” at the patient’s bedside; this should include: radiography, pH testing of the aspirate, and end-tidal carbon dioxide monitoring, but not auscultation alone.

          Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

          ESGE recommends confirmation of correct NGT placement by radiography in high-risk patients (intensive care unit [ICU] patients or those with altered consciousness or absent gag/cough reflex).

          Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

          ESGE recommends that EN may be started within 3 – 4 hours after uncomplicated placement of a PEG or PEG-J.

          Strong recommendation, high quality evidence.

          ESGE recommends that daily tube mobilization (pushing inward) along with a loose position of the external PEG bumper (1 – 2 cm from the abdominal wall) could mitigate the risk of development of buried bumper syndrome.

          Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

          Related collections

          Most cited references158

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: indications, technique, complications and management.

          Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is the preferred route of feeding and nutritional support in patients with a functional gastrointestinal system who require long-term enteral nutrition. Besides its well-known advantages over parenteral nutrition, PEG offers superior access to the gastrointestinal system over surgical methods. Considering that nowadays PEG tube placement is one of the most common endoscopic procedures performed worldwide, knowing its indications and contraindications is of paramount importance in current medicine. PEG tubes are sometimes placed inappropriately in patients unable to tolerate adequate oral intake because of incorrect and unrealistic understanding of their indications and what they can accomplish. Broadly, the two main indications of PEG tube placement are enteral feeding and stomach decompression. On the other hand, distal enteral obstruction, severe uncorrectable coagulopathy and hemodynamic instability constitute the main absolute contraindications for PEG tube placement in hospitalized patients. Although generally considered to be a safe procedure, there is the potential for both minor and major complications. Awareness of these potential complications, as well as understanding routine aftercare of the catheter, can improve the quality of care for patients with a PEG tube. These complications can generally be classified into three major categories: endoscopic technical difficulties, PEG procedure-related complications and late complications associated with PEG tube use and wound care. In this review we describe a variety of minor and major tube-related complications as well as strategies for their management and avoidance. Different methods of percutaneous PEG tube placement into the stomach have been described in the literature with the "pull" technique being the most common method. In the last section of this review, the reader is presented with a brief discussion of these procedures, techniques and related issues. Despite the mentioned PEG tube placement complications, this procedure has gained worldwide popularity as a safe enteral access for nutrition in patients with a functional gastrointestinal system.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            ESPEN guideline clinical nutrition in neurology.

            Neurological diseases are frequently associated with swallowing disorders and malnutrition. Moreover, patients with neurological diseases are at increased risk of micronutrient deficiency and dehydration. On the other hand, nutritional factors may be involved in the pathogenesis of neurological diseases. Multiple causes for the development of malnutrition in patients with neurological diseases are known including oropharyngeal dysphagia, impaired consciousness, perception deficits, cognitive dysfunction, and increased needs. The present evidence- and consensus-based guideline addresses clinical questions on best medical nutrition therapy in patients with neurological diseases. Among them, management of oropharyngeal dysphagia plays a pivotal role. The guideline has been written by a multidisciplinary team and offers 88 recommendations for use in clinical practice for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, Parkinson's disease, stroke and multiple sclerosis.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Gastroenteric tube feeding: techniques, problems and solutions.

              Gastroenteric tube feeding plays a major role in the management of patients with poor voluntary intake, chronic neurological or mechanical dysphagia or gut dysfunction, and patients who are critically ill. However, despite the benefits and widespread use of enteral tube feeding, some patients experience complications. This review aims to discuss and compare current knowledge regarding the clinical application of enteral tube feeding, together with associated complications and special aspects. We conducted an extensive literature search on PubMed, Embase and Medline using index terms relating to enteral access, enteral feeding/nutrition, tube feeding, percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy/jejunostomy, endoscopic nasoenteric tube, nasogastric tube, and refeeding syndrome. The literature showed common routes of enteral access to include nasoenteral tube, gastrostomy and jejunostomy, while complications fall into four major categories: mechanical, e.g., tube blockage or removal; gastrointestinal, e.g., diarrhea; infectious e.g., aspiration pneumonia, tube site infection; and metabolic, e.g., refeeding syndrome, hyperglycemia. Although the type and frequency of complications arising from tube feeding vary considerably according to the chosen access route, gastrointestinal complications are without doubt the most common. Complications associated with enteral tube feeding can be reduced by careful observance of guidelines, including those related to food composition, administration rate, portion size, food temperature and patient supervision.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Endoscopy
                Endoscopy
                Georg Thieme Verlag KG
                0013-726X
                1438-8812
                January 27 2021
                February 2021
                December 21 2020
                February 2021
                : 53
                : 02
                : 178-195
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatopancreatology, and Digestive Oncology, CUB Hôpital Erasme, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium
                [2 ]Royal Free Unit for Endoscopy and Centre for Gastroenterology, UCL Institute for Liver and Digestive Health, The Royal Free Hospital, London, United Kingdom
                [3 ]Department of Gastroenterology and Therapeutic Endoscopy, Evangelisches Krankenhaus Düsseldorf, Germany
                [4 ]Nutrition Support Team, AZ Nikolaas Hospital, Moerlandstraat 1, 9100, Sint-Niklaas, Belgium
                [5 ]Department of Upper Digestive Diseases, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
                [6 ]Division of Surgery, Department of Clinical Science, Intervention and Technology (CLINTEC), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
                [7 ]Department of Gastroenterology, Bernhoven Hospital, Uden, the Netherlands
                [8 ]Department of Gastroenterology, Iuliu Hatieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, Romania
                [9 ]Academic Unit of Gastroenterology, Royal Hallamshire Hospital & University of Sheffield, United Kingdom
                [10 ]Department of Medicine (Solna), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
                [11 ]Department of Medicine, Ersta Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
                [12 ]Université Côte d’Azur, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nice, Gastroentérologie et Nutrition, Nice, France
                [13 ]Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
                Article
                10.1055/a-1331-8080
                33348410
                e82aed53-d7d1-4611-afb7-5093b1ea51a5
                © 2021
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article