Wu Hong-Yun, Shan Xiao-Feng, Cai Zhi-Gang, Zhang Jing, Li Pei-Jun, Zhang Lei, Yang Yue
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology and National Center of Stomatology, Beijing, China.
Peking University School of Nursing, Beijing, China.
Laryngoscope. 2023 Jun;133(6):1382-1387. doi: 10.1002/lary.30435. Epub 2022 Oct 6.
Determine the safety and effectiveness of a nasogastric tube removal plan designed to shorten nasogastric tube indwelling time after oral cancer surgery plus free flap reconstruction.
A parallel randomized clinical trial was conducted from May 2021 to December 2021 at Peking University School of Stomatology. Volunteers (n = 128) were separated into four groups: non-tracheostomy control and intervention groups and tracheostomy control and intervention groups. Control patients received the conventional nasogastric tube removal plan. Non-tracheotomy intervention patients were asked to swallow 5 ml of water on the first postoperative day. If there was no coughing, they were allowed progressively increasing amounts of water for the following 2 days. The nasogastric tube was removed only after ensuring level I/II performance on the Watian water swallowing test, no "wet voice" after drinking water, no marked decrease in blood oxygen saturation after drinking, and satisfactory daily oral nutritional intake. Tracheotomy intervention patients received the same protocol plus an additional Watian water swallowing test after tracheal tube removal.
Nasogastric tube removal time was earlier in the intervention subgroups than in control subgroups: 5.0 ± 2.3 days versus 7.8 ± 3.9 days (p = 0.001) in non-tracheostomy patients and 9.8 ± 1.1 days versus 16.2 ± 13.0 days (p = 0.049) in tracheostomy patients. Incidence of wound complications and daily food intake were comparable between the groups. The incidence of pneumonia was lower in the tracheostomy intervention group than in the tracheostomy control group (12.5% vs. 3.1%, p = 0.162). Pharyngeal pain score was lower in tracheotomy intervention patients than in tracheotomy control patients (p = 0.029). Postoperative hospital stay was shorter in tracheotomy intervention patients than in tracheotomy control patients (p = 0.005).
On the basis of ensuring safety and effectiveness, patients undergone free flap reconstruction for oral cancer could be offered oral intake early after surgery, which will not increase the incidence of wound complications and pneumonia or adversely affecting the oral intake of the patients; it can also help minimize pharyngeal pain and shorten postoperative hospital stay of patients with a tracheotomy.
2 Laryngoscope, 133:1382-1387, 2023.
确定一项旨在缩短口腔癌手术加游离皮瓣重建术后鼻胃管留置时间的鼻胃管拔除计划的安全性和有效性。
2021年5月至2021年12月在北京大学口腔医学院进行了一项平行随机临床试验。志愿者(n = 128)被分为四组:非气管切开对照组和干预组以及气管切开对照组和干预组。对照组患者接受传统的鼻胃管拔除计划。非气管切开干预组患者在术后第一天吞咽5毫升水。如果没有咳嗽,在接下来的2天里允许逐渐增加饮水量。只有在确保洼田饮水试验达到Ⅰ/Ⅱ级表现、饮水后无“湿啰音”、饮水后血氧饱和度无明显下降且每日口服营养摄入满意后,才拔除鼻胃管。气管切开干预组患者接受相同方案,并且在拔除气管导管后额外进行一次洼田饮水试验。
干预亚组的鼻胃管拔除时间早于对照组亚组:非气管切开患者为5.0±2.3天对7.8±3.9天(p = 0.001),气管切开患者为9.8±1.1天对16.2±13.0天(p = 0.049)。各组间伤口并发症发生率和每日食物摄入量相当。气管切开干预组的肺炎发生率低于气管切开对照组(12.5%对3.1%,p = 0.162)。气管切开干预组患者的咽痛评分低于气管切开对照组患者(p = 0.029)。气管切开干预组患者的术后住院时间短于气管切开对照组患者(p = 0.005)。
在确保安全性和有效性的基础上,接受口腔癌游离皮瓣重建的患者术后可早期经口进食,这不会增加伤口并发症和肺炎的发生率,也不会对患者的经口摄入产生不利影响;还可有助于减轻咽痛并缩短气管切开患者的术后住院时间。
2 《喉镜》,133:1382 - 1387,2023年。