出生住院出院 患儿胃造口术与鼻胃管喂养 的比较。

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
American journal of perinatology Pub Date : 2025-10-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-04 DOI:10.1055/a-2550-5510
Hartlee Lidsky, Emily Anderson, Neal A deJong, Adriana Herrera, Ashley G Sutton
{"title":"出生住院出院 患儿胃造口术与鼻胃管喂养 的比较。","authors":"Hartlee Lidsky, Emily Anderson, Neal A deJong, Adriana Herrera, Ashley G Sutton","doi":"10.1055/a-2550-5510","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Many infants, particularly those born premature or with medical complexity, require supplemental enteral nutrition upon discharge from birth hospitalization. Recent literature supports the safety of discharging infants with nasogastric tube (NG) feeding. However, further evidence is needed to characterize populations suited for home NG feeding compared to gastrostomy tube (GT) placement. This study aimed to describe demographic and clinical differences between infants discharged from birth hospitalization with NG versus GT feeding.This retrospective cohort study included infants discharged from birth hospitalization with NG or GT feeding between April 2014 and December 2022 at a single quaternary care hospital with a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Routinely collected health data were used to investigate associations between patient characteristics and discharge feeding modality, as well as assess feeding outcomes 12 months after discharge.Of 346 infants, 72 (20.8%) were discharged with NG and 274 (79.2%) with GT. Infants with GT were more often discharged from the NICU (71.2 vs. 26.4%) with lower birth weights (median 2.40 vs. 2.92 kg) and longer hospitalizations (median 84 vs. 51.5 days). Twelve months after discharge, 77.4% of NG infants achieved full oral feeding compared to 16.6% of GT infants with earlier tube discontinuation in NG infants (19 vs. 236 days).Home NG feeding is a viable, less invasive alternative to GT for selected infants, particularly those with less medical complexity. Prospective studies are needed to further delineate optimal discharge feeding modalities for various infant subpopulations. · Infants discharged with gastrostomies had lower birth weights.. · More NG tube infants achieved oral feeding than gastrostomy infants.. · NG tubes were removed much sooner than GT.. · Home NG feeding is an alternative to gastrostomy for less medically complex infants..</p>","PeriodicalId":7584,"journal":{"name":"American journal of perinatology","volume":" ","pages":"1897-1907"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Infants Discharged from Birth Hospitalization with Gastrostomy versus Nasogastric Feeding Tube.\",\"authors\":\"Hartlee Lidsky, Emily Anderson, Neal A deJong, Adriana Herrera, Ashley G Sutton\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2550-5510\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Many infants, particularly those born premature or with medical complexity, require supplemental enteral nutrition upon discharge from birth hospitalization. Recent literature supports the safety of discharging infants with nasogastric tube (NG) feeding. However, further evidence is needed to characterize populations suited for home NG feeding compared to gastrostomy tube (GT) placement. This study aimed to describe demographic and clinical differences between infants discharged from birth hospitalization with NG versus GT feeding.This retrospective cohort study included infants discharged from birth hospitalization with NG or GT feeding between April 2014 and December 2022 at a single quaternary care hospital with a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Routinely collected health data were used to investigate associations between patient characteristics and discharge feeding modality, as well as assess feeding outcomes 12 months after discharge.Of 346 infants, 72 (20.8%) were discharged with NG and 274 (79.2%) with GT. Infants with GT were more often discharged from the NICU (71.2 vs. 26.4%) with lower birth weights (median 2.40 vs. 2.92 kg) and longer hospitalizations (median 84 vs. 51.5 days). Twelve months after discharge, 77.4% of NG infants achieved full oral feeding compared to 16.6% of GT infants with earlier tube discontinuation in NG infants (19 vs. 236 days).Home NG feeding is a viable, less invasive alternative to GT for selected infants, particularly those with less medical complexity. Prospective studies are needed to further delineate optimal discharge feeding modalities for various infant subpopulations. · Infants discharged with gastrostomies had lower birth weights.. · More NG tube infants achieved oral feeding than gastrostomy infants.. · NG tubes were removed much sooner than GT.. · Home NG feeding is an alternative to gastrostomy for less medically complex infants..</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7584,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American journal of perinatology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1897-1907\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American journal of perinatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2550-5510\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/3/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of perinatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2550-5510","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:许多婴儿,特别是那些早产或医疗复杂性,需要补充肠内营养从出生出院住院。最近的文献支持出院婴儿鼻胃管(NG)喂养的安全性。然而,与胃造口管(GT)放置相比,需要进一步的证据来确定适合家庭NG喂养的人群。本研究的目的是描述出生后出院的婴儿在NG和GT喂养方面的人口学和临床差异。研究设计:本回顾性队列研究纳入了2014年4月至2022年12月间在一家设有新生儿重症监护病房(NICU)的单一四级护理医院接受NG或GT喂养的出生住院婴儿。常规收集的健康数据用于调查患者特征与出院喂养方式之间的关系,并评估出院后12个月的喂养结果。结果:在346名婴儿中,72名(20.8%)因NG出院,274名(79.2%)因GT出院。GT婴儿因出生体重较低(中位2.40 kg对2.92 kg)和住院时间较长(中位84天对51.5天)而出院的新生儿重症监护病房(71.2%对26.4%)较多。出院12个月后,77.4%的NG婴儿实现了完全的口服喂养,而NG婴儿早期停用管的GT婴儿为16.6%(19天对236天)。结论:对于选定的婴儿,特别是那些医疗复杂性较低的婴儿,家庭NG喂养是一种可行的、侵入性较小的替代方法。需要前瞻性研究来进一步描述各种婴儿亚群的最佳出院喂养方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of Infants Discharged from Birth Hospitalization with Gastrostomy versus Nasogastric Feeding Tube.

Many infants, particularly those born premature or with medical complexity, require supplemental enteral nutrition upon discharge from birth hospitalization. Recent literature supports the safety of discharging infants with nasogastric tube (NG) feeding. However, further evidence is needed to characterize populations suited for home NG feeding compared to gastrostomy tube (GT) placement. This study aimed to describe demographic and clinical differences between infants discharged from birth hospitalization with NG versus GT feeding.This retrospective cohort study included infants discharged from birth hospitalization with NG or GT feeding between April 2014 and December 2022 at a single quaternary care hospital with a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Routinely collected health data were used to investigate associations between patient characteristics and discharge feeding modality, as well as assess feeding outcomes 12 months after discharge.Of 346 infants, 72 (20.8%) were discharged with NG and 274 (79.2%) with GT. Infants with GT were more often discharged from the NICU (71.2 vs. 26.4%) with lower birth weights (median 2.40 vs. 2.92 kg) and longer hospitalizations (median 84 vs. 51.5 days). Twelve months after discharge, 77.4% of NG infants achieved full oral feeding compared to 16.6% of GT infants with earlier tube discontinuation in NG infants (19 vs. 236 days).Home NG feeding is a viable, less invasive alternative to GT for selected infants, particularly those with less medical complexity. Prospective studies are needed to further delineate optimal discharge feeding modalities for various infant subpopulations. · Infants discharged with gastrostomies had lower birth weights.. · More NG tube infants achieved oral feeding than gastrostomy infants.. · NG tubes were removed much sooner than GT.. · Home NG feeding is an alternative to gastrostomy for less medically complex infants..

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
American journal of perinatology
American journal of perinatology 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
302
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Perinatology is an international, peer-reviewed, and indexed journal publishing 14 issues a year dealing with original research and topical reviews. It is the definitive forum for specialists in obstetrics, neonatology, perinatology, and maternal/fetal medicine, with emphasis on bridging the different fields. The focus is primarily on clinical and translational research, clinical and technical advances in diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment as well as evidence-based reviews. Topics of interest include epidemiology, diagnosis, prevention, and management of maternal, fetal, and neonatal diseases. Manuscripts on new technology, NICU set-ups, and nursing topics are published to provide a broad survey of important issues in this field. All articles undergo rigorous peer review, with web-based submission, expedited turn-around, and availability of electronic publication. The American Journal of Perinatology is accompanied by AJP Reports - an Open Access journal for case reports in neonatology and maternal/fetal medicine.
×
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