Related Experiment Videos
Enteral feeding tubes: placement by using fluoroscopy and endoscopy.
D J Ott1, H E Mattox, D W Gelfand
1Department of Radiology, Bowman Gray School of Medicine, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, NC 27103.
AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology
|October 1, 1991
Summary
Fluoroscopy and endoscopy are effective for enteral feeding tube placement. Fluoroscopic placement achieved a 90% success rate, with endoscopy serving as a successful alternative for failed fluoroscopic attempts.
Area of Science:
- Gastroenterology
- Medical Imaging
Background:
- Fluoroscopy and endoscopy are established methods for guiding enteral feeding tube placement.
- Comparative analysis of their advantages and limitations is needed.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the effectiveness and efficiency of fluoroscopic versus endoscopic guidance for enteral feeding tube placement.
- To evaluate success rates, procedural times, and tube positioning for both methods.
Main Methods:
- A study of 104 consecutive patients undergoing primary fluoroscopic placement of a Frederick-Miller feeding catheter.
- Fluoroscopic placement success, times (fluoroscopic and room), and tube position were recorded.
- Unsuccessful fluoroscopic placements were immediately followed by endoscopic attempts.
Main Results:
- Fluoroscopic placement success rate was 90% (94/104), with jejunal placement in 53% and duodenal in 47%.
- Mean fluoroscopic time for successful placements was 8.6 min; mean room time was 21.7 min.
- Endoscopic placement was successful in all 7 patients with prior fluoroscopic failure, with jejunal placement in 29% and duodenal in 71%.
Conclusions:
- Both fluoroscopic and endoscopic methods are highly effective for enteral feeding tube placement.
- Fluoroscopic placement is efficient, with successful cases typically under 15 min.
- Endoscopy provides a successful alternative following failed fluoroscopic attempts.