ArticleJournal of intensive care2023
Stomach position evaluated using computed tomography is related to successful post-pyloric enteral feeding tube placement in critically ill patients: a retrospective observational study.
Article in Journal of intensive care, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPost-pyloric enteral feeding reduces respiratory complications and shortens the duration of mechanical ventilation. Blind placement of post-pyloric enteral feeding tubes (EFT) in patients with critical illnesses is often the first-line method because endoscopy or fluoroscopy cannot be easily performed at bedside; however, difficult placements regularly occur. We reported an association between the stomach position caudal to spinal level L1-L2, evaluated by abdominal radiographs after placement, and difficult placement; however, this method could not indicate difficulty before EFT placement. The aim of our study was to evaluate the association between stomach position, estimated using computed tomography (CT) images taken before the blind placement of the post-pyloric EFT, and the difficulty of EFT placement.
methodsData from patients aged ≥ 20 years who underwent post-pyloric EFT in our intensive care unit were obtained retrospectively. Logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the association between successful initial EFT placement and explanatory variables, including stomach position estimated by CT. Two cut-off values were used: caudal to L1-L2 based on a previous study and the best cut-off value calculated by the receiver operating characteristic curve. Variable selection was performed backward stepwise using Akaike's Information Criterion.
resultsOf the total of 453 patients who were enrolled, the success rate of the initial EFT placement was 43.5%. The adjusted odds ratio for successful initial EFT placement of the stomach position caudal to L1-L2 was 0.61 (95% confidence interval: 0.41-1.07). Logistic regression analysis, including the stomach position caudal to L2-L3, calculated as the best cut-off value, indicated that stomach position was an independent factor for failure of initial EFT placement (adjusted odds ratio, 0.55; 95% confidence interval: 0.33-0.91).
conclusionsStomach position evaluated using CT images was associated with successful initial post-pyloric EFT placement. The best cut-off value of the greater curvature of the stomach to predict the success or failure of the first attempt was spinal level L2-L3. Trial registration University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000046986; February 28, 2022). https://center6.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000052151.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.