Limitations and drawbacks of ‘fine bore’ nasogastric feeding tubes

Randomised comparison of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy and nasogastric tube feeding in patients with persisting neurological dysphagia.

“…No of patients 14 Before the trial the mean (SE) weight for the nasogastric group was higher than that of the gastrostomy group (50 4 (2 5) v 44 0 (3-1) kg), but this difference was not significant. After the first week the gastrostomy group had gained significantly more weight (1)(2)(3)(4) (05) kg) than the nasogastric group (0-6 (0 1) kg; p<005) (table IV).…”

Enteral feeding: techniques of administration.

“…These aims may be difficult to achieve using enteral nutrition2 as positive nitrogen balance may not be established consistently throughout a course. 3 This finding has little to do with the formulation of the diet itself as up to one third of a prescribed diet may never reach the patient.2 4 Although much emphasis has been placed on the absorption characteristics of various substrates used in enteral feeds, their full potential can only be achieved if proper attention is paid to the more mundane subject of their administration. It is essential that the complete volume prescribed reaches the small bowel while minimising feed related complications such as vomiting, aspiration, diarrhoea and ostomy losses.…”

Management of neurological dysphagia

“…Two-thirds of the treatment failures in the NG group were caused by tube dislodgement, in keeping with other studies showing displacement rates of 25-67%. [44][45][46] The PEG group received more feed, and gained more weight, though there were two aspiration pneumonias and one wound infection, giving an overall complication rate of 6%.…”