• 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

PEG 管放置后早期与晚期管饲启动:喂养时间是否重要?

Early versus late tube feeding initiation after PEG tube placement: Does time to feeding matter?

机构信息

Morehouse School of Medicine, Department of Surgery, 720 Westview Drive SW, Atlanta, GA 30310, USA.

Emory School of Medicine, Department of Surgery, 69 Jesse Hill Jr. Dr. SE, 102, Atlanta, GA 30303, USA.

出版信息

Injury. 2021 May;52(5):1198-1203. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2021.03.002. Epub 2021 Mar 4.

DOI:10.1016/j.injury.2021.03.002
PMID:33726922
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Variation exists in the timing of tube feed initiation after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube placement. The aim of our study was to review outcomes of early tube feed (ETF) versus late tube feed (LTF) initiation after PEG tube placement.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of all trauma patients who underwent PEG tube placement from 1/2014 to 12/2018. ETF was defined as initiation < 24 h and LTF > 24 h after placement. The primary outcome measure was feeding intolerance and secondary outcomes included post-operative complications. All statistical analyses were performed using standard statistical methods (e.g. Pearson's Chi-squared, Fisher's exact and Mann Whitney-U tests).

RESULTS

There were 295 patients (164 ETF and 131 LTF) that received a PEG tube at our level 1 trauma center. There was no difference with feeding intolerance at 12 h (5% vs. 4%; p = 0.88), 24 h (1% vs. 2%; p = 1.00), and 48 h (4% vs. 4%; p = 1.00). There was no difference when comparing intolerance symptoms such as nausea and vomiting (1% vs. 2%; p = 0.79), abdominal tenderness (2% vs. 3%; p = 0.76), high gastric residuals (2% vs. 2%; p = 1.00) and aspiration (0% vs. 2%; p = 0.39). There was no difference when comparing post-operative complications (4% vs. 8%; p = 0.21).

CONCLUSIONS

Early tube feeding after PEG placement is safe and equivalent to late tube feeding in the adult trauma population. Future prospective studies are warranted to establish the optimal timing for initiation of tube feeds after PEG tube placement.

摘要

背景

经皮内镜胃造口术(PEG)置管后开始管饲的时间存在差异。我们的研究目的是回顾 PEG 管放置后早期管饲(ETF)与晚期管饲(LTF)的结果。

方法

我们对 2014 年 1 月至 2018 年 12 月期间接受 PEG 管放置的所有创伤患者进行了回顾性分析。ETF 定义为置管后<24 小时开始,LTF 定义为置管后>24 小时开始。主要观察指标为喂养不耐受,次要观察指标包括术后并发症。所有统计分析均采用标准统计方法(如 Pearson 卡方检验、Fisher 确切检验和 Mann-Whitney-U 检验)。

结果

在我们的一级创伤中心,有 295 例患者(164 例 ETF 和 131 例 LTF)接受了 PEG 管。在 12 小时(5%比 4%;p=0.88)、24 小时(1%比 2%;p=1.00)和 48 小时(4%比 4%;p=1.00)时,不耐受的发生率没有差异。在比较不耐受症状(恶心和呕吐 1%比 2%;p=0.79)、腹痛(2%比 3%;p=0.76)、胃残留量高(2%比 2%;p=1.00)和吸入(0%比 2%;p=0.39)时,也没有差异。术后并发症的发生率也没有差异(4%比 8%;p=0.21)。

结论

PEG 置管后早期管饲是安全的,在成年创伤患者中与晚期管饲等效。未来需要前瞻性研究来确定 PEG 管放置后开始管饲的最佳时机。

相似文献

1
Early versus late tube feeding initiation after PEG tube placement: Does time to feeding matter?PEG 管放置后早期与晚期管饲启动:喂养时间是否重要?
Injury. 2021 May;52(5):1198-1203. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2021.03.002. Epub 2021 Mar 4.
2
Early Versus Late Feeding After Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Placement in Trauma and Burn.创伤和烧伤患者经皮内镜胃造瘘术后早期与晚期喂养的比较。
J Surg Res. 2024 Mar;295:112-121. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2023.10.012. Epub 2023 Nov 25.
3
The protocol for a randomised-controlled trial of the evaluation of the tolerance and safety of early enteral nutrition in children after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy placement. (protocol version 09.01.2015).经皮内镜下胃造口术后儿童早期肠内营养耐受性和安全性评估的随机对照试验方案。(方案版本:2015年1月9日)
BMC Pediatr. 2016 Oct 7;16(1):163. doi: 10.1186/s12887-016-0705-8.
4
Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Placement in Trauma Patients: Early vs Delayed Initiation of Enteral Feeding.创伤患者经皮内镜胃造口术置管:肠内喂养的早期与延迟启动。
Am Surg. 2023 Jul;89(7):3336-3338. doi: 10.1177/00031348231157880. Epub 2023 Feb 16.
5
Tolerability and safety of early enteral nutrition in children after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy placement: A multicentre randomised controlled trial.经皮内镜胃造口置管术后儿童早期肠内营养的耐受性和安全性:一项多中心随机对照试验。
Clin Nutr. 2019 Aug;38(4):1544-1548. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2018.08.018. Epub 2018 Aug 28.
6
When Is It Safe to Feed After Surgical Feeding Tube Placement? A Survey of EAST Members.手术置入喂养管后何时开始喂养安全?一项对东部创伤外科学会成员的调查。
J Surg Res. 2022 Jul;275:218-224. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2022.01.006. Epub 2022 Mar 17.
7
Analysis of frequency and risk factors for complications of enteral nutrition in children in Poland after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy placement.经皮内镜胃造瘘术后波兰儿童肠内营养并发症的频率及危险因素分析。
Nutrition. 2021 Sep;89:111265. doi: 10.1016/j.nut.2021.111265. Epub 2021 Apr 15.
8
Early feeding after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement in patients who require trauma and surgical intensive care: A retrospective cohort study.经皮内镜胃造瘘术后早期喂养在创伤和外科重症监护患者中的应用:一项回顾性队列研究。
JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2022 Jul;46(5):1160-1166. doi: 10.1002/jpen.2303. Epub 2022 Jan 27.
9
Postpyloric enteral feeding costs for patients with severe head injury: blind placement, endoscopy, and PEG/J versus TPN.重度颅脑损伤患者幽门后肠内营养喂养的成本:盲插置管、内镜检查以及经皮内镜下胃造口术/空肠造口术与全胃肠外营养的比较
J Neurotrauma. 1999 Mar;16(3):233-42. doi: 10.1089/neu.1999.16.233.
10
Immediate-use strategy is as safe and effective as delayed-use strategy following percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement: A retrospective cohort study.即刻使用策略与经皮内镜胃造口管放置后的延迟使用策略一样安全有效:一项回顾性队列研究。
JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2024 Jan;48(1):120-127. doi: 10.1002/jpen.2575. Epub 2023 Nov 27.

引用本文的文献

1
American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on gastrostomy feeding tubes: methodology and review of evidence.美国胃肠内镜学会胃造口喂养管指南:方法与证据综述
VideoGIE. 2024 Nov 28;10(1):1-23. doi: 10.1016/j.vgie.2024.09.014. eCollection 2025 Jan.
2
Early Tube Feeding after Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (PEG): An Observational Study.经皮内镜胃造瘘术后早期管饲:一项观察性研究。
Nutrients. 2023 Feb 25;15(5):1157. doi: 10.3390/nu15051157.