KSPEN
KSSMN
ASSMN
Search
- Page Path
- HOME > Search
Review Article
- Selection of the Enterostomy Feeding Route in Enteral Nutrition
- Dong-Seok Han
- Ann Clin Nutr Metab 2022;14(2):50-54. Published online December 1, 2022
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.15747/ACNM.2022.14.2.50
-
Abstract
PDF
ePub - Enteral nutrition has several physiologic advantages. For example, it can reduce complications, result in immunological improvement, and prevent bacterial translocation by maintaining the integrity of the intestinal barrier. Enteral tube feeding has a major role in nutritional support of patients with swallowing disorders caused by stroke or other neurologic disorders, neoplasms of the upper digestive tract, and benign esophageal stricture. This review article aimed to present the current knowledge on the clinical application of enteral tube feeding. Especially, based on a literature search on PubMed using the index terms of enteral tube feeding; the indications, advantages, and disadvantages; and insertion methods of various enteral tubes were identified.
- 11 View
- 1 Download
Original Article
- The Utility of Open Gastrostomy Using Local Anesthesia and a Gastrostomy Tube for Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy
- Jae Kyun Park, Chang In Choi, Dae Hwan Kim
- Surg Metab Nutr 2020;11(1):22-26. Published online June 30, 2020
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.18858/smn.2020.11.1.22
-
Abstract
PDFePub
- Purpose: The purpose of this study is to introduce the technical details of open gastrostomy using local anesthesia and a gastrostomy tube for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy, and to evaluate the safety and utility of the procedure.
Materials and Methods: Between January 2011 and December 2015, a total of 46 patients who underwent open gastrostomy using local anesthesia and a gastrostomy tube for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (open group, n=25) or laparoscopic gastrostomy (laparoscopy group, n=21) were enrolled in this retrospective study. We analyzed the clinical data and the perioperative data.
Results: There were no significant differences in the clinical characteristics of the two groups. However, the patients with a high anesthetic risk (American Society of Anesthesiologists [ASA] grade 3 or more) were significantly more prevalent in the open group than in the laparoscopic group (96.0% vs. 66.7%, respectively, P=0.013). The operation time (31.8±6.6 vs. 67.9±15.7 minutes, respectively, P<0.001) and the time to first tubal feeding (1.3±0.6 vs. 2.7±1.3 days, respectively, P<0.001) was significantly shorter in the open group than that in the laparoscopic group. Postoperative complications were more frequent in the laparoscopic group (4 cases, 19%) than that in the open group (1 case, 4%), but there was no statistically significant difference.
Conclusion: Open gastrostomy using local anesthesia and a gastrostomy tube for PEG is a safe and feasible method for treating patients with a high anesthetic risk.
- 5 View
- 0 Download
First
Prev
