Background High‐output double enterostomies (DESs) and enteroatmospheric fistulas (EAFs) of the small bowel account for substantial patient morbidity and mortality. Management may include parenteral nutrition (PN) and prolonged admissions, at high cost. Reinfusion of chyme into the distal bowel is a proposed therapeutic alternative when the distal DES limb is accessible; however, standardized information on this technique is required. This review aimed to critically assess the literature regarding chyme reinfusion (CR) to define its current status and future directions. Methods A systematic search of medical databases was conducted for articles investigating CR in adults. Articles reporting indications, methods, benefits, technical issues, and complications resulting from CR were reviewed. A narrative synthesis of the retrieved data was undertaken. Results In total, 24 articles reporting 481 cases of CR were identified, although articles were heterogeneous in their structure and reporting. CR was most frequently performed for remediation of high‐output DES and intestinal failure and for proximally located DES. Effluent output collection was commonly manual, with distal reinfusion more commonly automated, and with few dedicated systems. Multiple benefits attributed to CR were reported, encompassing weight gain, cessation of PN, and improvements in liver function. Technical problems included distaste, labor‐intensive methods, reflux of contents, and tube dislodgement. No serious AEs or mortality directly attributable to CR were reported. Conclusions CR appears to be a promising, safe and well‐validated intervention for small bowel DES and EAF. However, more efficient and acceptable methods are required to promote greater adoption of the practice of CR.
Introduction: High-output double enterostomies (DESs) and enteroatmospheric fistulas (EAFs) of the small bowel account for substantial patient morbidity and mortality. Management may include parenteral nutrition (PN) and prolonged admissions, at high cost. Reinfusion of chyme into the distal bowel is a proposed therapeutic alternative when the distal DES limb is accessible; however, standardized information on this technique is required. This review aimed to critically assess the literature regarding chyme reinfusion (CR) to define its current status and future directions. Methods: A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) compliant systematic search of the MEDLINE (OVID), EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Library and CINAHL databases was conducted for articles investigating CR in adults (≥18 years) with a DES or EAF of the small bowel. Articles reporting indications, methods, benefits, technical issues, and complications resulting from CR were reviewed. A narrative synthesis of the retrieved data was undertaken. Results: In total, 24 articles reporting 481 cases of CR were identified, although articles were heterogeneous in their structure and reporting. CR was most frequently performed for remediation of high-output DES and intestinal failure and for proximally located DES. Effluent output collection was commonly manual, with distal reinfusion more commonly automated, and with few dedicated systems. Multiple benefits attributed to CR were reported, encompassing weight gain, cessation of PN, and improvements in liver function. Technical problems included distaste, labour-intensive methods, reflux of contents, and tube dislodgement. No serious adverse events or mortality directly attributable to CR were reported. Conclusions: CR appears to be a promising, safe and well-validated intervention for small bowel DES and EAF. However, more efficient and acceptable methods are required to promote greater adoption of the practice of CR.
Introduction: Intestinal failure (IF) in neonatal and paediatric patients is associated with substantial morbidity. Management of IF includes the formation of a double enterostomy (DES) of the small bowel. Parenteral nutrition (PN) is frequently required, which is expensive. Recycling chyme from the proximal DES limb distally is an alternative therapy, but standardized data on this intervention is lacking. This review systematically evaluated the existing literature on chyme recycling (CR) in neonatal and paediatric populations. Methods: This systematic review conformed to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The MEDLINE (OVID), EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane library and CINAHL electronic databases were systematically searched for articles reporting CR in neonatal and paediatric populations (<18 years old). Articles documenting CR indications, methods, clinical outcomes, benefits and adverse events (AEs) were reviewed. A narrative synthesis was performed on the extracted data.Results: This review identified 20 full-text articles, in which 289 patients received CR, most commonly following necrotizing enterocolitis (n = 117 patients). The most common motivators for CR were proximally located DES (N = 7 articles) and to support nutrition and growth (N = 7 articles). Proximal DES output collection was predominantly manual (N = 11 articles), whereas distal CR was mostly automated (n = 12 articles), using customized peristaltic or syringe infusion pumps. Clinical benefits encompassed PN reduction (n = 19 patients) or cessation (n = 122 patients), weight gain, normalization of fluid balance, improvement in liver function tests and distal gut maturation. Technical problems commonly included tube dislodgement, leakage and effluent reflux (N = 9 articles). AEs included intestinal perforation (n = 3 patients) and haemorrhage (n = 1 patient). Conclusions: From the limited available data, CR is demonstrated as an effective therapeutic intervention for small bowel DES in paediatric and neonatal patients. However, standardized methods that improve the delivery of and minimise AEs associated with the intervention are needed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.