Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2014 Jul 14;20(26):8505-24.
doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i26.8505.

Gastroenteric tube feeding: techniques, problems and solutions

Affiliations
Review

Gastroenteric tube feeding: techniques, problems and solutions

Irina Blumenstein et al. World J Gastroenterol. .

Abstract

Gastroenteric tube feeding plays a major role in the management of patients with poor voluntary intake, chronic neurological or mechanical dysphagia or gut dysfunction, and patients who are critically ill. However, despite the benefits and widespread use of enteral tube feeding, some patients experience complications. This review aims to discuss and compare current knowledge regarding the clinical application of enteral tube feeding, together with associated complications and special aspects. We conducted an extensive literature search on PubMed, Embase and Medline using index terms relating to enteral access, enteral feeding/nutrition, tube feeding, percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy/jejunostomy, endoscopic nasoenteric tube, nasogastric tube, and refeeding syndrome. The literature showed common routes of enteral access to include nasoenteral tube, gastrostomy and jejunostomy, while complications fall into four major categories: mechanical, e.g., tube blockage or removal; gastrointestinal, e.g., diarrhea; infectious e.g., aspiration pneumonia, tube site infection; and metabolic, e.g., refeeding syndrome, hyperglycemia. Although the type and frequency of complications arising from tube feeding vary considerably according to the chosen access route, gastrointestinal complications are without doubt the most common. Complications associated with enteral tube feeding can be reduced by careful observance of guidelines, including those related to food composition, administration rate, portion size, food temperature and patient supervision.

Keywords: Buried bumper syndrome; Colocutaneous fistulae; Enteral nutrition; Enteral tube feeding; Nasoenteral tubes; Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy; Refeeding syndrome.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Management of diarrhea in enteral tube-fed patients. Adapted from reference[212].

References

    1. Cockfield A, Philpot U. Feeding size 0: the challenges of anorexia nervosa. Managing anorexia from a dietitian’s perspective. Proc Nutr Soc. 2009;68:281–288. - PubMed
    1. Zuercher JN, Cumella EJ, Woods BK, Eberly M, Carr JK. Efficacy of voluntary nasogastric tube feeding in female inpatients with anorexia nervosa. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2003;27:268–276. - PubMed
    1. Freeman C, Ricevuto A, DeLegge MH. Enteral nutrition in patients with dementia and stroke. Curr Opin Gastroenterol. 2010;26:156–159. - PubMed
    1. Gomes CA, Lustosa SA, Matos D, Andriolo RB, Waisberg DR, Waisberg J. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy versus nasogastric tube feeding for adults with swallowing disturbances. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;(11):CD008096. - PubMed
    1. Al-Zubeidi D, Rahhal RM. Safety techniques for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement in Pierre Robin Sequence. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2011;35:343–345. - PubMed

MeSH terms