Ch. 98: Feeding Tubes

Question 1

Brunet JFMS 2022

Use of feeding tubes in 112 cats in an internal medicine referral service (2015–2020)

• % NE vs. E tubes?
• % complications?
• what assoc. w/ survival?

Answer 1

112 cats, 118 cases
- 83% NE tubes
- 17% esophagostomy tubes

Complications following tube placement: 22/118 cases (18%)

Voluntary food intake was positively associated with survival (OR 15.17). Appetite returned earlier for cats with NE tubes.

Question 2

Perondi JSAP 2021

Esophagostomy tube complications in azotemic dogs: 139 cases (2015-2019)

• % complications?
• risk factors for complications?

Answer 2

tube-related complications in 53%
(90% were minor and 10% major)

indwelling tube time and hemodialysis were risk factors for complications

Question 3

Craven JVIM 2022
CASE REPORT

Repurposing medical devices as “button” esophagostomy tubes for extended nutritional support

Answer 3

Both products performed extremely and equally well as low profile E-tubes in this clinical patient, enhancing patient freedom and comfort by eliminating external tubing, skin sutures, and bandaging.

The dual port G-J tube allows medication delivery (eg, sucralfate) to the entire esophagus, but for safety alone (ie, to avoid aspiration), the single port J-tube appears the best device for client-owned patients.

Question 4

Liao JVECC 2023

Description of a novel ultrasound-guided percutaneous dilatational esophagostomy tube placement in dog cadavers

• success?
• 2 phases for tube placement?

Answer 4

successful development of a novel technique for esophagostomy tube placement using ultrasound guidance and serial percutaneous dilatation of the stoma in canine cadavers

There are 2 phases for the percutaneous dilatation esophagostomy tube placement:
1. percutaneous catheterization of the esophagus
2. serial dilatation of the stoma, followed by feeding tube placement

Question 5

Elmenhorst JSAP 2020

Retrospective study of complications associated with surgically-placed gastrostomy tubes in 43 dogs with septic peritonitis

• two types of tubes
• major vs. minor complications?
• median time of starting feeding?

Answer 5

15 dogs had a Foley gastrostomy tube placed & 28 had a de Pezzer gastrostomy tube placed

There were no major complications related to the gastrostomy tube; minor complications occurred in 11 (26%) patients

median time from surgery to the start of enteral nutrition was 16 hours

Question 6

Griffin Vet Sx 2020

Percutaneous radiologically guided gastrostomy tubes: Procedural description and biomechanical comparison in a canine model

• procedure time PEG vs. PRG?
• construct strength PEG vs. PRG?
• downside to PRG?

Answer 6

Gastrostomy tube placement time was longer for the PEG group vs the low-profile PRG

Peak construct strength was lower for the PEG group vs the low-profile PRG

downside = radiation exposure

Question 7

Hinden JVECC 2020

Evaluation of a novel non-surgical post-pyloric feeding technique in dogs with severe acute kidney injury

• how placed?
• displacement?
• tube length reco?

Answer 7

PPF, an 8-Fr jejunal (J) tube was introduced through a standard 18-Fr E-tube and advanced endoscopically through the pylorus

oral displacement observed in 3/10 dogs (30%)

Pyloric tube length of at least 1 cm per kg BW proved appropriate for this tip to reach at least the ascending duodenum