ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Clinical value of the water injection, dilution, and drainage method for blind nasoenteric tube placement in patients receiving sequential enteral nutrition support after major thoracic surgery.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of a blind nasoenteric tube placement technique based on water injection, dilution, and drainage in patients receiving sequential enteral nutrition support after major thoracic surgery. Methods: Eighty patients who underwent major thoracic surgery were enrolled and equally assigned to an observation group and a control group. The control group received conventional blind nasoenteric tube placement using gas injection, whereas the observation group received the water injection, dilution, and drainage method. The evaluated outcomes included catheterization success rate, catheterization time, length of hospital stay, nutritional indicators, serum nutritional markers, inflammatory response markers, immune function markers, quality of life, and incidence of adverse events. Results: Compared with the control group, the observation group showed significantly shorter catheterization time and hospital stay, as well as a significantly higher catheterization success rate (P < 0.05). After the intervention, both groups demonstrated improvements in body mass index (BMI), triceps skinfold thickness (TSF), mid-arm muscle circumference (MAMC), hemoglobin, serum albumin, transferrin levels, and quality of life scores. These improvements were more pronounced in the observation group than in the control group (P < 0.05). In addition, after the intervention, the observation group had significantly lower levels of inflammatory markers, including C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin (PCT), and interleukin-6 (IL-6), and significantly higher levels of immune function markers, including CD3 Conclusion: The blind nasoenteric tube placement protocol based on water injection, dilution, and drainage is associated with improved catheterization success and procedural efficiency in patients receiving sequential enteral nutrition support after major thoracic surgery. The observed improvements in nutritional status, inflammatory markers, immune function, and quality of life are likely indirect and should not be attributed to the catheterization technique itself. Given the presence of multiple co-interventions and the lack of intervention isolation, these findings should be interpreted as associative and hypothesis-generating rather than causal.
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.