Tag Archives: aspiration

Which kids who aspirate need a gastrostomy tube?

Posted on by

While some may think all children who aspirate should have a gastrostomy tube, a recent study (ME McSweeney et al. J Pediatr 2016; 170: 79-84) indicates a more selective approach is appropriate.

This retrospective review of 114 patients (2006-2013) compared patients fed by gastrostomy tube (g-tube) and those who were fed orally.  In their introduction, the authors note, “there has been a practice shift at many institutions away from g-tube placement and more toward continuing to feed children with aspiration orally.”  All patients in the study had aspiration and/or penetration with thin liquids and/or nectar thick liquids on a videofluoroscopic swallow study (VFSS).

There were 61 who aspirated only thin liquids and 53 who aspirated thin and nectar thick liquids.  All patients were divided into two groups: a g-tube group which did not have a preoperative trial of thickened feeds and an orally-fed group.  Patients who had a fundoplication or post-pyloric feeds were excluded from this study.

Key findings:

  • There were no significant differences in admissions among those who aspirated thins compared with those that aspirated thin & nectar thick liquids.
  • Patients fed by gastrostomy were hospitalized more frequently (median 2 times compared to once with orally-fed) and for longer duration (median 24 days compared with median 2 days for orally-fed)
  • No differences in total pulmonary admissions were noted between gastrostomy-fed and orally-fed group

The authors advocate a trial of oral feeding in all children cleared to take nectar or honey thick liquids prior to g-tube placement.

 

While the authors note that g-tube placement did not result in fewer pulmonary admissions, in their discussion, they also reviewed studies which showed that fundoplication (with g-tube) was not associated with a reduced risk of respiratory complications and in fact, had higher rehospitalizations.

This current study, and previous studies, are limited by their design.  Patients were not randomized and g-tube-fed patients may have had more comorbidities, biasing the results.  The authors note that there were 11 children who failed oral thickening trials and needed g-tube placement.  At the same time, there are substantial numbers of children whose swallow function improve.  Also, the authors note that thickening agents have not been shown to lead to dehydration risk.

My take: the widespread availability of swallow studies has likely led to some children undergoing g-tube placement who may have been fine with ongoing orally-thickened feeds.  Avoiding g-tube placement for children who can tolerate and thrive on thickened feeds is worthwhile.

Related blog posts:

Walnut Street Bridge & Tennessee River

Walnut Street Bridge & Tennessee River

Antibiotics and Growth in India

Posted on by

A recent study (Rogawski ET, et al. J Pediatr 2015; 167: 1096-102) examined a prospective observational cohort of 497 children in India (from “semi-urban slums”).  The authors found that early exposure to antibiotics were not associated with increased or decreased growth.

“There are several potential explanations for the lack of a growth-promoting effect.  Most of the previous studies showing increased weight gain or risk of obesity associated with antibiotics were conducted in high-income countries with Western diets.”

My take: This was a negative study on antibiotics and obesity.  This suggests that the effects of antibiotics with regard to weight gain may be limited and/or modified by diet.

Also noted: Wakamoto H, et al. J Pediatr 2015; 167: 1136-42.  This study showed that Krebs von den Lungen-6 (KL-6) which is abundant on type II alveolar pneumoctyes and respiratory epithelial cells is a fairly good serum biomarker for chronic aspiration in this study of children with severe motor and intellectual disabilities.  Figure 1 shows the distribution of KL-6 among the 37 with aspiration and the 29 without aspiration.  The median in the former was 344 vs 207 in the later, though there was overlapping results.

Related blog posts:

Sandy Springs

Sandy Springs

Chronic Care Mode: GJ tube Data

Posted on by

A lot has changed in the field of pediatric gastroenterology since I completed my training 16 years ago.  One technology that is used frequently now is the gastrojejunal (GJ) tube for feeding neurologically-impaired children.  Previously, GJ tubes were used as a temporary solution.  Part of the rational for short-term usage was that these tubes were often difficult to maintain; they could easily become dislodged or clogged.

A recent study documents the more frequent usage of GJ tubes and their indefinite usage to treat complex feeding issues (JPGN 2013; 56: 523-27).

This retrospective chart review encompassed a 10 year period (1999-2009) at a single academic center.  In total 33 patients were treated with GJ tubes with 160 placements.  The mean age at initial placement was 6 years and the mean weight 19.4 kg. 76% of the patients had cerebral palsy/neurologic disorder, 21% had congenital heart disease, and 9% had chronic lung disease.

Common indications for replacement: dislodgment, obstruction, coiling into stomach, and broken tubing.

Three techniques were used:

  1. Fluoroscopy with guide wire and subsequent GJ
  2. Gastroduodenscopy via gastrostomy site to place guidewire for GJ placement
  3. Tube placement during esophagogastroduodenoscopy

Most procedures (85%) did not require sedation.

Outcomes:

  • 13 (39%) maintained on GJ throughout study period
  • 10 (30%) converted to gastric or oral feeds
  • 5 (15%) surgical intervention
  • 5 (15%) deceased
  • Duration of tube survival: mean 91 days for Mic-Key GJ (low profile) and 177 days for  coaxial PEG-PEJ (e.g. 16 French Corflo gastric tube with 6 French jejunal tube)

When reading the study, it is hard to ignore Figure 3 which shows more than 30 placements per year after 2007 whereas the number was about two per year before 2001. In the discussion, the authors do not focus on how this technology has been embraced so widely.  It is mostly a discussion on the indications, methods, and complications.  Indications included high aspiration risk, intractable vomiting, failed Nissen fundoplication, and gastroparesis.  “Our study showed that long-term jejunal feeding via GJ tubes is possible and safe.”

My preference is generally to avoid GJ feedings as a primary intervention for long-term feeding problems.  That is, when patients need gastrostomy tube feeds but are prone to vomiting, most often a fundoplication is worthwhile.  When a patient has had a fundoplication that is no longer effective, a GJ tube should be considered.

Related blog links: