Nasoduodenal versus nasogastric feeding in the very low birthweight infant. An investigation into the benefits of resiting nasoenteric feeding tubes. Randomized controlled trial of slow vs rapid enteral feeding advancements on the clinical outcomes of preterm infants with birth weight 750-1250 g.
The practicality, effectiveness, and safety of feeding very low birthweight infants (less than 1,300 gm) by continuous nasoduodenal infusion was assessed by comparison with continuous nasogastric feeding. The nasoduodenal group appeared to have a clear advantage over the nasogastric group for the overall period in terms of caloric intake (131 cal/kg/day vs. 106 cal/kg/day), average weight gain (16 gm/day vs. 10 gm/day), and safety. This advantage was even more striking in the first two weeks of life. A caloric intake of 120 cal/kg/day could be reached within 48 to 72 hours after tube placement in the nasoduodenal group but only after a week in the nasogastric group. Nasoduodenal feeding resulted in faster weight gain than comparable published data on conventional feeding, peripheral intravenous alimentation, and parenteral alimentation. There were no cases of aspiration associated with tubes placed in the duodenum whereas two cases of aspiration pneumonia were associated with tubes placed in the stomach. With the tip of the catheter in the duodenum, none of the complications reported with nasojejunal tubes (intussusception, perforation, or necrotizing enterocolitis) were seen, either in the initial pilot study reported here or in 50 additional infants. Partial nasal obstruction in preterm infants increases the airway resistance. In spite of this, nasal feeding tubes are often used, if only because oral tubes are difficult to secure. A palatal appliance has been devised that maintains the position of oroenteric feeding tube(s) and is not associated with local complications. In order to assess the effects of resiting feeding tubes, two related studies were carried out. The first study, a trial, included respiratory monitoring of 29 infants on the third and/or seventh day after either the appliance and oroenteric tubes had been inserted, or, in the control group, after the nasoenteric tubes had been passed. After seven days, the infants using the palatal appliance had significantly less periodic breathing, central apnea, and movement than the control group. The second study showed that the removal of feeding tubes that had been in situ for several days reduced apnea rates and produced a significant increase in transcutaneous PO2. To evaluate the effect of slow vs rapid rates of advancement of enteral feed volumes on the clinical outcomes in preterm infants with 750-1250 g birth weight.
                A total of 92 stable neonates 750-1250 g and gestational age <32 weeks were randomly allocated to enteral feeding advancement of 20 mL/kg/d (n = 46) or 30 mL/kg/d (n = 46). The primary outcome was days to reach full enteral feeding, defined as 180 mL/kg/d. Secondary outcomes included rates of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) and culture-proven sepsis, days of parenteral nutrition (PN), length of hospital stay, and growth end points.
                Neonates in the rapid-feeding advancement group achieved full enteral volume of feedings earlier than the slower advancement group. They received significantly fewer days of PN, exhibited a shorter time to regain birth weight, and had a shorter duration of hospital stay. The incidence of NEC and the number of episodes of feeding intolerance were not significantly different between the groups, whereas the incidence of culture-proven late-onset sepsis was significantly less in infants receiving a rapid feeding advancement. Excluding infants who were small for gestational age at birth, the incidence of extrauterine growth restriction was significantly reduced in the rapid-advancement group at 28 days and at hospital discharge.
                Rapid enteral feeding advancements in 750-1250 g birth weight infants reduce the time to reach full enteral feeding and the use of PN administration. Rapid-advancement enteral feed also decreases extrauterine growth restriction with improved short-term outcomes for these high-risk infants.
There are insufficient data available to inform practice. A large randomised controlled trial would be required to determine if the use of naso- versus oro-enteric feeding tubes affects feeding, growth and development, and the incidence of adverse events in preterm or low birth weight infants.