• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

ENFit 和 legacy 喂养管之间的重力流速比较。

Comparison of Gravity Flow Rates Between ENFit and Legacy Feeding Tubes.

机构信息

Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, Metabolism, and Nutrition, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.

Division of General Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.

出版信息

JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2018 Mar;42(3):522-528. doi: 10.1177/0148607117703959. Epub 2017 Dec 12.

DOI:10.1177/0148607117703959
PMID:28406738
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Misconnections between enteral supplies and other access devices have led to significant morbidity and mortality. To reduce misconnections, a standard small-bore connector has been developed (International Organization for Standards 80369-8; ENFit). The full impact of transition to this connector is not known, however.

METHOD

Working with major manufacturers and Food and Drug Administration, we obtained ENFit and comparative legacy tubes of variable sizes (low-profile, 14F, 18F, 20F, and 24F balloon gastrostomies). Gravity enteral feeding was simulated with an empty bolus syringe attached to the feeding tube to be tested. The tube was clamped and filled to the 60-mL mark with liquid (water, Jevity 1 Cal, Isosource HN, Isosource 1.5 Cal, Two Cal HN, and Nourish). The clamp was released, and time for formula to leave the syringe was recorded.

RESULTS

There was no difference in flow rate between the aggregate legacy and ENFit tubes for the low-profile, 18F, and 20F sizes. The ENFit 14F tubes had a lower flow rate vs the legacy tubes, largely due to the low flow rates seen with the 1 ENFit tube. Similarly, 24F ENFit tubes with some formulas yielded lower flow rates as opposed to legacy.

CONCLUSION

Overall, for the low-profile, 18F, and 20F sizes, the ENFit tubes had similar flow rates when compared with the legacy tubes. For the 14F and 24F sizes, the flow rate of ENFit tubes was significantly lower, which could result in longer EN delivery for patients who are using these tubes to provide gravity feeding.

摘要

背景

肠内供给品与其他接入设备之间的错误连接导致了重大的发病率和死亡率。为了减少错误连接,已经开发出一种标准的小口径连接器(国际标准化组织 80369-8;ENFit)。然而,完全过渡到这种连接器的影响尚不清楚。

方法

与主要制造商和食品药品监督管理局合作,我们获得了 ENFit 和不同尺寸的传统管(低轮廓,14F,18F,20F 和 24F 球囊胃造口术)。用连接到要测试的喂养管的空弹丸注射器模拟重力肠内喂养。将管夹上并将液体(水,Jevity 1 Cal,Isosource HN,Isosource 1.5 Cal,Two Cal HN 和 Nourish)填充至 60 毫升标记。释放夹子,记录配方离开注射器的时间。

结果

对于低轮廓、18F 和 20F 尺寸,传统管和 ENFit 管的总体流速没有差异。ENFit 14F 管的流速低于传统管,这主要是由于 1 个 ENFit 管的流速较低。同样,与传统管相比,一些配方的 24F ENFit 管的流速较低。

结论

总体而言,对于低轮廓、18F 和 20F 尺寸,ENFit 管的流速与传统管相似。对于 14F 和 24F 尺寸,ENFit 管的流速明显较低,这可能导致使用这些管提供重力喂养的患者的 EN 输送时间更长。

相似文献

1
Comparison of Gravity Flow Rates Between ENFit and Legacy Feeding Tubes.ENFit 和 legacy 喂养管之间的重力流速比较。
JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2018 Mar;42(3):522-528. doi: 10.1177/0148607117703959. Epub 2017 Dec 12.
2
Comparison of Syringe Compression Force Between ENFit and Legacy Feeding Tubes.ENFit 和 legacy 喂养管的注射器压缩力比较。
JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2019 Jan;43(1):107-117. doi: 10.1002/jpen.1174. Epub 2018 May 30.
3
Gravity Flow in Proposed Enteral Tube Small-Bore Connectors.拟用肠内营养管小口径连接器中的重力流
Nutr Clin Pract. 2017 Apr;32(2):189-192. doi: 10.1177/0884533616679141. Epub 2016 Dec 5.
4
In Vitro Performance Testing of Legacy and ENFit Gastrostomy Tube Devices Under Gravity Flow Conditions.重力流条件下 Legacy 和 ENFit 胃管装置的体外性能测试。
JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2018 Nov;42(8):1334-1341. doi: 10.1002/jpen.1159. Epub 2018 Apr 27.
5
Impact of Design Changes in Gastrostomy Tube (G-tube) Devices for Patients Who Rely on Home-Based Blenderized Diets for Enteral Nutrition.经口胃管(G 管)器械设计变更对依赖家庭自制匀浆饮食进行肠内营养患者的影响。
J Am Coll Nutr. 2019 May-Jun;38(4):311-317. doi: 10.1080/07315724.2018.1509247. Epub 2019 Mar 1.
6
Increased Force Required With Proposed Standardized Enteral Feed Connector in Blenderized Tube Feeding.在匀浆管饲中使用建议的标准化肠内喂养连接器时所需的力增加。
Nutr Clin Pract. 2016 Dec;31(6):795-798. doi: 10.1177/0884533616639126. Epub 2016 Jul 10.
7
Synthesis of research on ENFit gastrostomy tubes with potential implications for US patients using these devices.使用这些器械的美国患者相关的 ENFit 胃造口管的潜在影响的研究综述。
Nutr Clin Pract. 2022 Aug;37(4):752-761. doi: 10.1002/ncp.10829. Epub 2022 Feb 14.
8
Feasibility of International Proposed Standardized Enteral Connector for Semi-Solid Formula Feeding.半固体配方喂养国际建议标准化肠内连接器的可行性。
Ann Nutr Metab. 2018;73(3):169-176. doi: 10.1159/000492674. Epub 2018 Sep 4.
9
Evaluation of various gastrojejunostomy tube constructs for enteral support of small animal patients.评估用于小动物患者肠内支持的各种胃空肠造口管构造。
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2018 May 15;252(10):1239-1246. doi: 10.2460/javma.252.10.1239.
10
[INFLUENCE OF THE NUTRITIONAL COMPOSITION OF DIFFERENT FIBER-ENRICHED ENTERAL NUTRITION FORMULAS ON THE ADMINISTRATION TIME BY GRAVITY AND THE RISK OF TUBE FEEDING OBSTRUCTION].[不同富含纤维的肠内营养配方的营养成分对重力输注时间及管饲阻塞风险的影响]
Nutr Hosp. 2015 Aug 1;32(2):683-90. doi: 10.3305/nh.2015.32.2.9199.

引用本文的文献

1
Synthesis of research on ENFit gastrostomy tubes with potential implications for US patients using these devices.使用这些器械的美国患者相关的 ENFit 胃造口管的潜在影响的研究综述。
Nutr Clin Pract. 2022 Aug;37(4):752-761. doi: 10.1002/ncp.10829. Epub 2022 Feb 14.
2
Assessing dosing errors in legacy and low dose tip ENFit syringes.评估legacy 和低剂量 tip ENFit 注射器中的给药错误。
J Clin Pharm Ther. 2022 Feb;47(2):218-227. doi: 10.1111/jcpt.13559. Epub 2021 Oct 29.
3
Technical considerations for medical device manufacturers when designing gastrostomy tubes (G-tubes) using the new ISO 80369-3 connector.
设计使用新 ISO 80369-3 接头的胃造口管(G 管)时,医疗器械制造商的技术考虑因素。
PLoS One. 2020 Jul 30;15(7):e0236644. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0236644. eCollection 2020.
4
Comparison of Syringe Compression Force Between ENFit and Legacy Feeding Tubes.ENFit 和 legacy 喂养管的注射器压缩力比较。
JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2019 Jan;43(1):107-117. doi: 10.1002/jpen.1174. Epub 2018 May 30.