一项前瞻性随机试验,比较早产儿间歇鼻十二指肠喂养与间歇鼻胃喂养

Hui Lu, Xindong Xue, Jiaxiang Zhang, Pengfei Li
{"title":"一项前瞻性随机试验,比较早产儿间歇鼻十二指肠喂养与间歇鼻胃喂养","authors":"Hui Lu, Xindong Xue, Jiaxiang Zhang, Pengfei Li","doi":"10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.0578-1310.2002.04.105","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective To compare and evaluate the effects of intermittent nasoduodenal feeding (INDF) and intermittent nasogastric feeding (INGF) on nutrient intake, physical growth, gut transit time and whole gastrointestinal transit time and feeding related complications at the early time after birth in premature infants Methods Forty premature infants (birth weights ranged from 1 050 g to 1 920 g) were randomized into INDF and INGF groups and fed with the same formula Intake of fluid (including both intravenous and oral), caloric intake, protein intake, variation of physical growth parameters (e g, body weight, length and head circumference), stool characters, and relevant complications were recorded; gut transit time and whole gastrointestinal transit time were monitored Results Within a week after feeding, milk input was (67 2±38 8) ml/(kg·d), (55 7±36 6) ml/(kg·d), respectively, in INDF and INGF groups The caloric intake and the protein intake supplied by milk were (217 1±125 5) kJ/(kg·d) vs (188 7±126 4) kJ/(kg·d) and (1 62±0 9) g/(kg·d) vs (1 22±0 82) g/(kg·d) The nutrient intake in INDF group was significantly higher than that in INGF group ( P 0 001) The time of reaching 418 4 kJ/(kg·d) by enteral feeding were respectively (9 3±1 9) d and (13 9±7 4) d , the birth weight regaining time were (8 4±1 8) d vs (10 2±2 5) d; all these parameters in INDF group were significantly lower than those in INGF group ( P 0 05) There was no significant difference in the increase of length and head circumference between the two groups ( P 0 05) The gut transit time [INDF, (53 3±14 0) h] was significantly shorter than the whole gastrointestinal transit time [INGF, (63 2±14 9) h], but there was no such complications as diarrhea, in the two groups The morbidities of such complications as apnea and pneumonia caused by aspiration, vomiting, gastric residue were lower in INDF group than those in INGF group, but the difference was not statistically significant ( P 0 05) However, the morbidity of hyperbilirubinemia was significantly lower in INDF than that in INGF group ( P 0 01) Conclusion Nasoduodenal feeding was more tolerable than nasogastric feeding in the initial feeding of premature infants","PeriodicalId":416525,"journal":{"name":"Chinexe Journal of Pediatrics","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A prospective randomized trial comparing intermittent nasoduodenal with intermittent nasogastric feedings in premature infants\",\"authors\":\"Hui Lu, Xindong Xue, Jiaxiang Zhang, Pengfei Li\",\"doi\":\"10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.0578-1310.2002.04.105\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective To compare and evaluate the effects of intermittent nasoduodenal feeding (INDF) and intermittent nasogastric feeding (INGF) on nutrient intake, physical growth, gut transit time and whole gastrointestinal transit time and feeding related complications at the early time after birth in premature infants Methods Forty premature infants (birth weights ranged from 1 050 g to 1 920 g) were randomized into INDF and INGF groups and fed with the same formula Intake of fluid (including both intravenous and oral), caloric intake, protein intake, variation of physical growth parameters (e g, body weight, length and head circumference), stool characters, and relevant complications were recorded; gut transit time and whole gastrointestinal transit time were monitored Results Within a week after feeding, milk input was (67 2±38 8) ml/(kg·d), (55 7±36 6) ml/(kg·d), respectively, in INDF and INGF groups The caloric intake and the protein intake supplied by milk were (217 1±125 5) kJ/(kg·d) vs (188 7±126 4) kJ/(kg·d) and (1 62±0 9) g/(kg·d) vs (1 22±0 82) g/(kg·d) The nutrient intake in INDF group was significantly higher than that in INGF group ( P 0 001) The time of reaching 418 4 kJ/(kg·d) by enteral feeding were respectively (9 3±1 9) d and (13 9±7 4) d , the birth weight regaining time were (8 4±1 8) d vs (10 2±2 5) d; all these parameters in INDF group were significantly lower than those in INGF group ( P 0 05) There was no significant difference in the increase of length and head circumference between the two groups ( P 0 05) The gut transit time [INDF, (53 3±14 0) h] was significantly shorter than the whole gastrointestinal transit time [INGF, (63 2±14 9) h], but there was no such complications as diarrhea, in the two groups The morbidities of such complications as apnea and pneumonia caused by aspiration, vomiting, gastric residue were lower in INDF group than those in INGF group, but the difference was not statistically significant ( P 0 05) However, the morbidity of hyperbilirubinemia was significantly lower in INDF than that in INGF group ( P 0 01) Conclusion Nasoduodenal feeding was more tolerable than nasogastric feeding in the initial feeding of premature infants\",\"PeriodicalId\":416525,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Chinexe Journal of Pediatrics\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2002-04-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Chinexe Journal of Pediatrics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.0578-1310.2002.04.105\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chinexe Journal of Pediatrics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.0578-1310.2002.04.105","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的比较和评价间歇鼻十二指肠喂养(INDF)和间歇鼻胃喂养(INGF)对仔猪营养摄入、体格生长、生理功能和生理功能的影响。方法将出生体重1 050 g ~ 1 920 g的40例早产儿随机分为INDF组和INGF组,采用相同的喂养配方,分别饲喂液体(包括静脉和口服)、热量摄入、蛋白质摄入、身体生长参数(如体重、体长、头围)变化、粪便性状、并记录相关并发症;结果饲喂后1周内,泌乳量分别为(67 2±38 8)ml/(kg·d)、(55 7±36 6)ml/(kg·d);INDF和INGF团体提供的卡路里摄入量和蛋白质摄入牛奶(217 125±5)kJ /(公斤·d)与(188±126 4)kJ /(公斤·d)和(1 62±0 9)g /(公斤·d)与(1 22±0 82)g /(公斤·d)的营养摄入INDF组显著高于INGF组(P 0 001)达到418的时候4 kJ /(公斤·d)分别由肠内喂养(3±1 9 9)d和d(13 9±7 4),出生体重的恢复时间(8 4±1 8)d和d(10 2±2 5);INDF组中的所有这些参数均明显低于INGF组(P 0 05)没有显著差异的增加长度和两组之间的头围(P 0 05)肠道通过时间(INDF(53 3±14 0)h]明显短于整个胃肠道渡越时间[INGF(63±2 14 9)h),但是没有腹泻等并发症的发病率的两组并发症如呼吸暂停和肺炎引起的愿望,呕吐、胃残渣发生率INDF组低于INGF组,差异无统计学意义(P < 0.05),但高胆红素血症发生率INDF组明显低于INGF组(P < 0.01)。结论初喂早产儿鼻十二指肠喂养比鼻胃喂养更耐受
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A prospective randomized trial comparing intermittent nasoduodenal with intermittent nasogastric feedings in premature infants
Objective To compare and evaluate the effects of intermittent nasoduodenal feeding (INDF) and intermittent nasogastric feeding (INGF) on nutrient intake, physical growth, gut transit time and whole gastrointestinal transit time and feeding related complications at the early time after birth in premature infants Methods Forty premature infants (birth weights ranged from 1 050 g to 1 920 g) were randomized into INDF and INGF groups and fed with the same formula Intake of fluid (including both intravenous and oral), caloric intake, protein intake, variation of physical growth parameters (e g, body weight, length and head circumference), stool characters, and relevant complications were recorded; gut transit time and whole gastrointestinal transit time were monitored Results Within a week after feeding, milk input was (67 2±38 8) ml/(kg·d), (55 7±36 6) ml/(kg·d), respectively, in INDF and INGF groups The caloric intake and the protein intake supplied by milk were (217 1±125 5) kJ/(kg·d) vs (188 7±126 4) kJ/(kg·d) and (1 62±0 9) g/(kg·d) vs (1 22±0 82) g/(kg·d) The nutrient intake in INDF group was significantly higher than that in INGF group ( P 0 001) The time of reaching 418 4 kJ/(kg·d) by enteral feeding were respectively (9 3±1 9) d and (13 9±7 4) d , the birth weight regaining time were (8 4±1 8) d vs (10 2±2 5) d; all these parameters in INDF group were significantly lower than those in INGF group ( P 0 05) There was no significant difference in the increase of length and head circumference between the two groups ( P 0 05) The gut transit time [INDF, (53 3±14 0) h] was significantly shorter than the whole gastrointestinal transit time [INGF, (63 2±14 9) h], but there was no such complications as diarrhea, in the two groups The morbidities of such complications as apnea and pneumonia caused by aspiration, vomiting, gastric residue were lower in INDF group than those in INGF group, but the difference was not statistically significant ( P 0 05) However, the morbidity of hyperbilirubinemia was significantly lower in INDF than that in INGF group ( P 0 01) Conclusion Nasoduodenal feeding was more tolerable than nasogastric feeding in the initial feeding of premature infants
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Differential diagnostic significance of cytokines in cerebrospinal fluid of children with acute central nervous system infections A prospective randomized trial comparing intermittent nasoduodenal with intermittent nasogastric feedings in premature infants Analysis of clinical date of 620 very low birth weight infants Survey of β-Mediterranean anemia (β-TA) prevalence in ethnic minority She of the southwest area in Zhejiang province Analysis of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid components in children with chronic cough and wheezy diseases
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1