Safety and Efficacy of Nasogastric Tube Placement Prior to Long Tube Placement for the Conservative Management of Adhesive Small Bowel Obstruction: A Retrospective Analysis.

IF 1.5 Q4 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Journal of the Anus Rectum and Colon Pub Date : 2026-07-25 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.23922/jarc.2026-013
Sakuya Katakai, Kengo Kasuga, Tatsuya Kouga, Ayaki Isshiki, Ayako Matsui, Keisuke Iizuka, Shingo Ishihara, Takashi Ueno, Xing Hua Ma, Takashige Masuo, Yoji Takeuchi, Toshio Uraoka
{"title":"Safety and Efficacy of Nasogastric Tube Placement Prior to Long Tube Placement for the Conservative Management of Adhesive Small Bowel Obstruction: A Retrospective Analysis.","authors":"Sakuya Katakai, Kengo Kasuga, Tatsuya Kouga, Ayaki Isshiki, Ayako Matsui, Keisuke Iizuka, Shingo Ishihara, Takashi Ueno, Xing Hua Ma, Takashige Masuo, Yoji Takeuchi, Toshio Uraoka","doi":"10.23922/jarc.2026-013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO) without strangulation or ischemia is typically treated conservatively. Compared to nasogastric tube (NGT) placement, long tube (LT) placement has shown lower surgery rates, but it is more invasive and may be poorly tolerated in frail patients. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of initial NGT placement followed by LT placement in ASBO.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively analyzed 337 ASBO-related admissions between 2019 and 2023. Analyses were performed on an admission-level basis. After exclusions, admissions were categorized into the NGT group (initial NGT placement, n=135), and the LT group (initial LT placement, n=60). Admissions requiring LT placement after NGT placement were defined as the NGT+LT group (n=63). Clinical characteristics, treatment outcomes, and adverse events were compared between groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Admissions in the NGT group involved older patients and a poorer performance status than the LT group; similar differences were observed between the NGT+LT and LT groups. LT placement time was significantly shorter in the NGT+LT group compared with the LT group (18 vs. 24 minutes, p < 0.001). No statistically significant differences were observed between the NGT+LT and LT groups in surgery rates (13% vs. 12%), hospital stay, mortality, or adverse events. In admissions treated with NGT alone, the surgery rate was 4%, and clinical outcomes were favorable.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Initial NGT placement followed by selective LT insertion appears to be a reasonable stepwise treatment strategy in real-world clinical practice, associated with a lower proportion of admissions requiring LT placement and shorter LT insertion time.</p>","PeriodicalId":56349,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Anus Rectum and Colon","volume":"10 3","pages":"437-445"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13423450/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Anus Rectum and Colon","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23922/jarc.2026-013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO) without strangulation or ischemia is typically treated conservatively. Compared to nasogastric tube (NGT) placement, long tube (LT) placement has shown lower surgery rates, but it is more invasive and may be poorly tolerated in frail patients. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of initial NGT placement followed by LT placement in ASBO.

Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 337 ASBO-related admissions between 2019 and 2023. Analyses were performed on an admission-level basis. After exclusions, admissions were categorized into the NGT group (initial NGT placement, n=135), and the LT group (initial LT placement, n=60). Admissions requiring LT placement after NGT placement were defined as the NGT+LT group (n=63). Clinical characteristics, treatment outcomes, and adverse events were compared between groups.

Results: Admissions in the NGT group involved older patients and a poorer performance status than the LT group; similar differences were observed between the NGT+LT and LT groups. LT placement time was significantly shorter in the NGT+LT group compared with the LT group (18 vs. 24 minutes, p < 0.001). No statistically significant differences were observed between the NGT+LT and LT groups in surgery rates (13% vs. 12%), hospital stay, mortality, or adverse events. In admissions treated with NGT alone, the surgery rate was 4%, and clinical outcomes were favorable.

Conclusions: Initial NGT placement followed by selective LT insertion appears to be a reasonable stepwise treatment strategy in real-world clinical practice, associated with a lower proportion of admissions requiring LT placement and shorter LT insertion time.

鼻胃管先于长管保守治疗粘连性小肠梗阻的安全性和有效性:回顾性分析。
目的:粘连性小肠梗阻(ASBO)无绞窄或缺血的典型保守治疗方法。与鼻胃管(NGT)放置相比,长管(LT)放置的手术率较低,但它更具侵入性,并且在虚弱的患者中可能耐受性差。本研究评估了ASBO患者最初放置NGT后再放置LT的安全性和有效性。方法:回顾性分析2019年至2023年间337例与asbo相关的入院患者。分析是在入院水平的基础上进行的。排除后,入院者被分为NGT组(初始NGT放置,n=135)和LT组(初始LT放置,n=60)。在接受NGT治疗后需要接受LT治疗的患者被定义为NGT+LT组(n=63)。比较两组间的临床特征、治疗结果和不良事件。结果:NGT组入院患者年龄较大,表现状况较差;在NGT+LT组和LT组之间观察到类似的差异。与LT组相比,NGT+LT组LT放置时间显著缩短(18分钟vs 24分钟,p < 0.001)。NGT+LT组和LT组在手术率(13% vs 12%)、住院时间、死亡率或不良事件方面没有统计学上的显著差异。在单独接受NGT治疗的住院患者中,手术率为4%,临床结果良好。结论:在现实世界的临床实践中,初始NGT放置然后选择性LT插入似乎是一种合理的逐步治疗策略,与需要LT放置的入院比例较低和LT插入时间较短相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of the Anus Rectum and Colon
Journal of the Anus Rectum and Colon GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
自引率
7.10%
发文量
37
审稿时长
18 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书