Comparison of continuous versus intermittent enteral feeding in dogs

In humans, continuous intragastric feeding has been suggested to cause fewer gastrointestinal (GI) adverse effects, better weight gain and nitrogen balance, and less glucose intolerance than bolus feeding. The aim of this study was to compare the GI adverse effects and the metabolic and nutritional consequences of intragastric feeding of an enteral formula (Jevity; Ross Laboratories, Columbus, OH) intermittently or continuously to dogs. Using a cross-over study design, 10 healthy dogs were randomly assigned to be fed Jevity via gastrostomy tube either continuously (CF) or in 3 bolus meals/day (IF) for 10 days. The dogs were weighed daily. Serum chemistry and glucose tolerance tests (GTT) were performed before and after each 10-day trial period. Fecal dry matter (FDM), serum osmolality (sOsm), and serum electrolytes (sElec) were determined 5 times during each 10 day trial period. Urine specific gravity was checked intermittently. Hydrogen breath tests were performed on days 0, 3, and 10. During the last 6 days of each trial period, nitrogen balance and digestibility of the Jevity were determined. There were no GI adverse effects noted on either protocol, and no significant (P > .05) differences in body weights, serum chemistry results, sElec, sOsm, GTT, hydrogen breath tests, digestibility trials, or nitrogen balance. There was a significant (P < .05) decrease in FDM over time for both protocols, and a significant (P < .05) increase in urine volume for IF compared with CF. In summary, there were no significant differences between treatments in weight maintenance, GI adverse effects, GTT, nitrogen balance, or feed digestibility. Changes in FDM suggest that the dogs received excess water. In conclusion, this study of healthy dogs provides no support for the preferential use of continuous intragastric feeding over bolus feeding.