Search

Introduction Early postpyloric nasoenteric nutrition is considered an accepted method of nutritional support in critically ill patients. Both endoscopy and fluoroscopy placement of postpyloric nasoenteric tubes (PNTs) have the highest percentages of placement success rate. We aimed to evaluate the differences in efficacy and safety between endoscopy and fluoroscopy methods for the placement of PNTs in critically ill patients. Method We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and electronic databases of Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We included randomized controlled trials comparing endoscopy and fluoroscopy placement of PNTs in critically ill patients. Two reviewers assessed the quality of each study and collected data independently. We performed the meta-analysis with Cochrane Collaboration RevMan 5.3. Results Three randomized controlled trials involving 243 patients were included. There were no significant differences in the placement success rate (RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.93, 1.06; z = 0.20, P = .84,) or procedure time (standardized mean difference, − 0.08; 95% CI, − 6.93, 6.77; z = 0.02, P = .98) between the 2 groups. No severe complications (digestive tract hemorrhage, perforation, respiratory problems, hemodynamic instability, or death) were noted in the three studies. There was a slight difference in the incidence of minor complications (RR, 8.12; 95% CI, 1.07, 61.53; z = 2.03, P = .04) between the 2 groups. Conclusions Endoscopy and fluoroscopy placement of PNTs can be accurately and safely performed in critically ill patients. Endoscopy may be at least equally as safe as fluoroscopy for the placement of PNTs.

The use of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) for the treatment of many diseases has gained increasing popularity. In the present meta-analysis, we aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of HFNCs compared with conventional oxygen therapy (COT) in adult postextubation cardiac surgical patients.We reviewed the Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Wanfang databases, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure. Two investigators independently collected the data and assessed the quality of each study. RevMan 5.3 was used for the present meta-analysis.We included 495 adult postextubation cardiac surgical patients. There was no significant heterogeneity among the studies. Compared with COT, HFNCs were associated with a significant reduction in the escalation of respiratory support (risk ratio, 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46-0.82; z = 3.32, P.001). There were no significant differences in the reintubation rate (risk ratio, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.04-24.84; z = 0.02, P = .98) or length of intensive care unit stay (weighted mean difference, 0.13; 95% CI, -0.88 to 7.92; z = 1.57, P = .12) between the 2 groups. No severe complications were reported in either group.The HFNC could reduce the need for escalation of respiratory support compared with COT, and it could be safely administered in adult postextubation cardiac surgical patients.