{"title":"猫狗鼻食管与鼻胃管置入术相关并发症发生率:随机对照试验","authors":"F. Camacho, K. Humm","doi":"10.1111/jsap.13729","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>To determine the rate of accidental placement of nasoenteric tubes into the respiratory tract. To compare the methods of checking correct tube placement. To compare the complication rates between nasoesophageal and nasogastric tubes.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Animals requiring nasoenteric feeding tubes were prospectively randomised to have either nasoesophageal or nasogastric tube placement. Various techniques for assessing tube position were compared with thoracic radiographic findings. Complications during placement and use were recorded.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Ninety-seven animals (82 dogs and 15 cats) were studied. The tube was misplaced into the respiratory tract in three (3.1%) cases. No technique for checking placement was completely concordant with radiography but the presence of negative pressure at the thoracic inlet during placement was consistent with the presence of the tube in the oesophagus in 86.2% cases, while capnography can be considered to confirm tracheal placement. The overall rate of complications during tube placement was 25.8%, with mostly minor clinical complications reported. There was no significant difference in the new-onset regurgitation/vomiting rate, or complications while the tube was in situ between the nasoesophageal and nasogastric groups.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Clinical Significance</h3>\n \n <p>Misplacement of nasoenteric tubes is uncommon but a consistent alternative test to radiography for checking correct nasoenteric tube placement was not demonstrated. The choice of placement of either a nasoesophageal or nasogastric tube should be guided by clinician preference, and clients should be warned about possible complications during placement and while the nasoenteric tube is in situ.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":17062,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Small Animal Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jsap.13729","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Complication rates associated with nasoesophageal versus nasogastric feeding tube placement in dogs and cats: a randomised controlled trial\",\"authors\":\"F. Camacho, K. Humm\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jsap.13729\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objectives</h3>\\n \\n <p>To determine the rate of accidental placement of nasoenteric tubes into the respiratory tract. To compare the methods of checking correct tube placement. To compare the complication rates between nasoesophageal and nasogastric tubes.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>Animals requiring nasoenteric feeding tubes were prospectively randomised to have either nasoesophageal or nasogastric tube placement. Various techniques for assessing tube position were compared with thoracic radiographic findings. Complications during placement and use were recorded.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Ninety-seven animals (82 dogs and 15 cats) were studied. The tube was misplaced into the respiratory tract in three (3.1%) cases. No technique for checking placement was completely concordant with radiography but the presence of negative pressure at the thoracic inlet during placement was consistent with the presence of the tube in the oesophagus in 86.2% cases, while capnography can be considered to confirm tracheal placement. The overall rate of complications during tube placement was 25.8%, with mostly minor clinical complications reported. There was no significant difference in the new-onset regurgitation/vomiting rate, or complications while the tube was in situ between the nasoesophageal and nasogastric groups.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Clinical Significance</h3>\\n \\n <p>Misplacement of nasoenteric tubes is uncommon but a consistent alternative test to radiography for checking correct nasoenteric tube placement was not demonstrated. The choice of placement of either a nasoesophageal or nasogastric tube should be guided by clinician preference, and clients should be warned about possible complications during placement and while the nasoenteric tube is in situ.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17062,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Small Animal Practice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jsap.13729\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Small Animal Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jsap.13729\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"VETERINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Small Animal Practice","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jsap.13729","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Complication rates associated with nasoesophageal versus nasogastric feeding tube placement in dogs and cats: a randomised controlled trial
Objectives
To determine the rate of accidental placement of nasoenteric tubes into the respiratory tract. To compare the methods of checking correct tube placement. To compare the complication rates between nasoesophageal and nasogastric tubes.
Materials and Methods
Animals requiring nasoenteric feeding tubes were prospectively randomised to have either nasoesophageal or nasogastric tube placement. Various techniques for assessing tube position were compared with thoracic radiographic findings. Complications during placement and use were recorded.
Results
Ninety-seven animals (82 dogs and 15 cats) were studied. The tube was misplaced into the respiratory tract in three (3.1%) cases. No technique for checking placement was completely concordant with radiography but the presence of negative pressure at the thoracic inlet during placement was consistent with the presence of the tube in the oesophagus in 86.2% cases, while capnography can be considered to confirm tracheal placement. The overall rate of complications during tube placement was 25.8%, with mostly minor clinical complications reported. There was no significant difference in the new-onset regurgitation/vomiting rate, or complications while the tube was in situ between the nasoesophageal and nasogastric groups.
Clinical Significance
Misplacement of nasoenteric tubes is uncommon but a consistent alternative test to radiography for checking correct nasoenteric tube placement was not demonstrated. The choice of placement of either a nasoesophageal or nasogastric tube should be guided by clinician preference, and clients should be warned about possible complications during placement and while the nasoenteric tube is in situ.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Small Animal Practice (JSAP) is a monthly peer-reviewed publication integrating clinical research papers and case reports from international sources, covering all aspects of medicine and surgery relating to dogs, cats and other small animals. These papers facilitate the dissemination and implementation of new ideas and techniques relating to clinical veterinary practice, with the ultimate aim of promoting best practice. JSAP publishes high quality original articles, as well as other scientific and educational information. New developments are placed in perspective, encompassing new concepts and peer commentary. The target audience is veterinarians primarily engaged in the practise of small animal medicine and surgery.
In addition to original articles, JSAP will publish invited editorials (relating to a manuscript in the same issue or a topic of current interest), review articles, which provide in-depth discussion of important clinical issues, and other scientific and educational information from around the world.
The final decision on publication of a manuscript rests with the Editorial Board and ultimately with the Editor. All papers, regardless of type, represent the opinion of the authors and not necessarily that of the Editor, the Association or the Publisher.
The Journal of Small Animal Practice is published on behalf of the British Small Animal Veterinary Association and is also the official scientific journal of the World Small Animal Veterinary Association