Format

Send to

Choose Destination
World J Surg. 2019 Jun 3. doi: 10.1007/s00268-019-05045-4. [Epub ahead of print]

Nasogastric Tube on Demand is Rarely Necessary After Pancreatoduodenectomy Within an Enhanced Recovery Pathway.

Author information

1
Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Rikshospitalet, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway. dyrekleive@hotmail.com.
2
Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. dyrekleive@hotmail.com.
3
Department of Surgery N1, Yerevan State Medical University After M. Heratsi, Yerevan, Armenia.
4
Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Rikshospitalet, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
5
Institute of Clinical Medicine, The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Evidence-based guidelines for enhanced recovery (ERAS) pathways after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) are available. Routine use of nasogatric tube (NGT) after PD is not recommended. This study aims to evaluate the need for NGT reinsertion after PD performed within an ERAS setting.

METHODS:

It is a prospective observational study of all patients undergoing PD in a tertiary referral hospital within the study period from 2015 throughout 2016. Pre- and postoperative variables were collected. Patients requiring NGT reinsertion were identified. Comparative analysis of patients with and without a NGT reinsertion was performed, as well as multivariate analysis for risk factors for on-demand NGT reinsertion.

RESULTS:

Two-hundred and one patients were included. In total, 45 (22.4%) patients required NGT reinsertion after PD. A total of 32 (15.9%) patients underwent a relaparotomy. Reinsertion of NGT in patients not undergoing a relaparotomy occurred in 26 (15.4%) patients. The presence of a major postoperative complication was a risk factor for reinsertion of NGT, OR 5.27 (2.54-10.94, p = 0.001). Patients with the need for a NGT reinsertion had a higher frequency of major postoperative complications and relaparotomy compared to patients without the need of a NGT reinsertion, 26 (57.8%) versus 32 (20.5%), p < 0.001 and 19 (42.2%) versus 13 (8.3%), p < 0.001, respectively.

CONCLUSION:

Routine use of NGT after PD is not justified within an ERAS setting. Immediate removal of the NGT after the procedure can be performed safely, and reinsertion on demand is rarely necessary in uncomplicated courses.

PMID:
31161355
DOI:
10.1007/s00268-019-05045-4

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Springer
Loading ...
Support Center