Intraoperative Placement of the Nasoenteric Feeding Tube: A Practical Alternative?

Gordon L. Jensen, George Sporay, Susan Whitmire, Robert Taraszewski, Mary J. Reed

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

14 Scopus citations


Background: The provision of early postoperative enteral feeding may be enhanced by the placement of enteral feeding access during celiotomy, but surgeons are often reluctant to pursue this option because of the extra effort required. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of our 2-year experience with 60 sequential intraoperative nasoenteric feeding-tube placements and included data on demographics, diagnosis, surgery, type of feeding tube, formula, tolerance, and complications. Our surgeons placed intraoperative nasoenteric feeding tubes at their discretion in a variety of subjects who were undergoing elective or urgent celiotomies. Results: The surgeries largely involved the upper gastrointestinal tract, and feeding-tube placements were readily accomplished. The majority of patients received enteral feedings within 3 postoperative days and achieved feeding rates of 50 mL/h or greater. The average duration of feeding-tube use was 1 week, accounting for 399 feeding days overall. There were no serious complications attributable to feeding-tube placement or use, but inadvertent tube removal by patients or staff was a limitation. Conclusions: Intraoperative placement of the nasoenteric feeding tube may be a reasonable option for treating the surgical patient at nutritional risk who faces a limited course of impaired oral intake postoperatively. (Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition 19:244-247, 1995).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)244-247
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition
Issue number3
StatePublished - May 1995

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Medicine (miscellaneous)
  • Nutrition and Dietetics


Dive into the research topics of 'Intraoperative Placement of the Nasoenteric Feeding Tube: A Practical Alternative?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this