Fluoroscopically guided nasoenteric feeding tube placement versus bedside placement.
In debilitated patients, establishment of adequate nutritional status is important to decrease morbidity and mortality. The objective of this study is to compare the relative benefits and costs of bedside placement of enteric feeding tubes to fluoroscopic placement. We did a 4-year retrospective study of 328 nasoenteric feeding tube placements. Radiology department computer and chart reviews were done to identify patients, determine the time to successful placement of the tube, and define when adequate nutritional intake was obtained through the enteric feeding tube. We evaluated relative costs, time to placement, repeat rate, and complications. Our findings show that fluoroscopic placement of nasoenteric tubes had fewer complications and allowed earlier feeding. For patients in whom immediate nutritional supplementation is needed and for whom the risk of aspiration is high, fluoroscopically placed feeding tubes are more cost effective, quicker, and more successful than blind bedside placement.
Hillard
A E
AE
Department of Radiology, University of Missouri Hospital and Clinics, Columbia 65212, USA.
Waddell
J J
JJ
Metzler
M H
MH
McAlpin
D
D
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D004750:Enteral Nutrition / Q000191:economics*; D005260:Female; D005471:Fluoroscopy; D006801:Humans; D007441:Intubation, Gastrointestinal / Q000191:economics* / Q000379:methods; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D010362:Patients' Rooms; D011860:Radiography, Abdominal; D012189:Retrospective Studies