2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2008.04.005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Percutaneous feeding tube replacement in the ED—are confirmatory x-rays necessary?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
1
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This technique is suitable for obese patients with a thick abdominal wall and saves on confirmatory radiology or endoscopy. 3 Additionally, the loop and lock make tube dislodgement, usually a common problem, unlikely. The author has used it in five adult patients.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This technique is suitable for obese patients with a thick abdominal wall and saves on confirmatory radiology or endoscopy. 3 Additionally, the loop and lock make tube dislodgement, usually a common problem, unlikely. The author has used it in five adult patients.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Factors that may delay tract maturity and increase risk for tract disruption include age, gender, nutrition status, prior exposure to corticosteroids, underlying diagnoses, chemotherapy, or radiation therapy, 18 immunocompromised status, and ascites 17 . Trauma to the tract during insertion such as by using an obturator for device insertion, especially for initial tube exchange contributes to tract dehiscence or disruption 15,18,20 …”
Section: Background (Available Knowledge)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Full or partial separation can result in fluid, medication, and/or feeding being delivered into the subcutaneous tissue or peritoneal cavity. Two issues recognized as contributing to complications associated with G tube replacement are trauma to the tract during insertion and tract immaturity 15 . Various factors influence the maturity of the tract itself, mandating the need for consideration for safe timing when it may not be safe to attempt percutaneous replacement.…”
Section: Background (Available Knowledge)mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations