ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2016
Clinical Burden of Laparoscopic Feeding Jejunostomy Tubes.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Surgical management of severe refractory gastroparesis: outcomes of jejunostomy tube placement.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Complications of feeding jejunostomy placement: a single-institution experience.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Jejunostomy Tube Insertion for Enteral Nutrition: Comparison of Outcomes after Laparoscopic versus Radiologic Insertion.Journal of vascular and interventional radiology : JVIR · 2020Article
- Endoscopically Guided Laparoscopic Gastrojejunostomy Tube Placement for Patients with Distal Esophageal Stents.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2017Article
- Laparoscopic Witzel jejunostomy.Journal of minimal access surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFeeding jejunostomies (J tubes) provide enteral nutrition when oral and gastric routes are not options. Despite their prevalence, there is a paucity of literature regarding their efficacy and clinical burden.
methodsAll laparoscopic J tubes placed over a 5-year period were retrospectively reviewed. Clinical burden was measured by number of clinical contact events (tube-related clinic visits, phone calls, ED visits) and morbidity (dislodgement, clogging, tube fracture, infection, other). Tube replacements were also recorded.
resultsOne hundred fifty-one patients were included. Fifty-nine percent had associated malignancy, and 35 % were placed for nutritional prophylaxis. Mean time to J tube removal was 146 days. J tubes were expected to be temporary in >90 % but only 50 % had sufficient oral intake for removal. Tubes were removed prematurely due to patient intolerance in 8 %. Mortality was 0 %. Morbidity was 51 % and included clogging (12 %), tube fracture (16 %), dislodgement (25 %), infection (18 %) and "other" (leaking, erosion, etc.) in 17 %. The median number of adverse events per J tube was 2(0-8). Mean number of clinic phone calls was 2.5(0-22), ED visits 0.5(0-7), and clinic visits 1.4(0-13), with 82 % requiring more than one J tube-related clinic visit. Unplanned replacements occurred in 40 %.
conclusionWhile necessary for some patients, J tubes are associated with high clinical burden.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26895952What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.