ArticleBMJ open2025
Prospective randomised controlled trial of the use of nasogastric tubes in patients with adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO): protocol for the NASBO study.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionNasogastric tubes (NGTs) are standard practice in the management of adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO). Their insertion can be associated with significant patient discomfort and complications. Current research suggests that patients with ASBO managed with NGTs may experience poorer outcomes and higher rates of operative intervention compared with those managed without. However, to date, there are no prospective clinical trials evaluating this. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study will be designed as a single centre, prospective, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial to determine if the avoidance of an NGT is non-inferior to its use in ASBO. Patients meeting inclusion criteria will be randomised to either receive an NGT or no NGT for ASBO management. The primary outcome will be the rate of operative intervention as determined by review of medical records at day 30 post discharge. Secondary outcomes will include rate of bowel resection or bowel ischaemia, length of hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) stay, time to operative intervention, rate of ICU admission, incidence of postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo classification), quality of life scores (European Quality of Life 5 Dimension 5 Level: EQ-5D-5L) at admission, day 30 and day 90, 90-day mortality, incidence of pulmonary complications (Melbourne Group Scale), rate of NGT specific complications and rate of Gastrografin use. The study will be powered at 80% to detect a clinically relevant difference of 10% between groups receiving an NGT compared with no NGT, requiring a total of 490 study participants. Statistical analysis will follow intention to treat principles. Differences between treatment arms will be summarised using mean differences, 95% CIs and p values. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the Hunter New England Human Research Ethics Committee (2023/ETH00296). Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This study has been registered prospectively in the Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12623000341628).
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.