Skip to content

Feeding Children Nasogastrically Versus Nasojejunally While Receiving Noninvasive Positive Pressure Ventilation

The Efficacy and Safety of Gastric Feeding in Critically Ill Pediatric Patients Receiving Non-invasive Positive Pressure Ventilation: A Pilot Study

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01301352
Acronym
FeedNIV
Enrollment
30
Registered
2011-02-23
Start date
2011-02-28
Completion date
2014-06-30
Last updated
2014-07-16

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Nutrition Disorders, Pneumonia, Aspiration, Respiratory Insufficiency

Keywords

Critical Care, Intubation, gastrointestinal, Child, Infant, Adolescent, Continuous positive airway pressure, Enteral Nutrition

Brief summary

The investigators are studying whether it is safe and effective to provide enteral nutrition to critically ill children via the nasogastric route, as opposed to the nasojejunal route, while they are receiving noninvasive positive pressure ventilation.

Detailed description

It has been our experience that the placement of post-pyloric tubes can be difficult, and that these tubes frequently become obstructed and are difficult to replace, resulting in lost caloric intake for the patient. The population where this is most relevant is children receiving Noninvasive Positive Pressure Ventilation (NPPV). NPPV has become increasingly popular in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU) population, due to its perception as a safe and effective alternative to mechanical ventilation via an endotracheal tube. Historically, NPPV has been used in children with chronic respiratory insufficiency, but its application for acute respiratory compromise is increasing. It has been shown to be effective in disease states associated with hypoventilation, and is now also being applied to respiratory problems leading to decreased oxygenation. Infants and children receiving noninvasive ventilation for respiratory failure, which is often infectious in origin, have significant caloric needs. However, it is our practice not to allow gastric feeding in these patients due to the fear of gastric distension and vomiting, which carries a risk of aspiration. There is no data available on the question of efficacy and safety of gastric feeding in critically-ill children supported by noninvasive ventilation. Given the ease of (re)placement, and the potential nutritional benefit of earlier feeding provided by gastric feeding, it seems clinically important to question the bias against this route of enteral nutrition in noninvasively ventilated patients. The investigators therefore propose a pilot randomized trial of gastric versus post-pyloric feeds in patients on NPPV.

Interventions

OTHERRoute of feeding (nasogastric vs. nasojejunal)

Safety and efficacy of feeding nasogastrically vs. nasojejunally while receiving noninvasive positive pressure ventilation

Sponsors

McGill University Health Centre/Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
No minimum to 17 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Age under 18 years old * Acute respiratory failure as the indication for non-invasive ventilatory support * Signed consent from parent or guardian * Patients with a feeding tube in place who have not been fed in \> 12 hours

Exclusion criteria

* Immediate postoperative cardiac surgery * Chronic ventilatory support * Admission diagnosis of aspiration pneumonia * Known history of frequent aspiration (more than 2 previous admissions for this diagnosis) * Contraindication to feeding tube placement (e.g. basal skull fracture) * Imminent need for endotracheal intubation * Percutaneous gastric tube in place * History of Nissen fundoplication * Contraindication to study nutritional formulas (e.g. galactosemia) * Allergy to metoclopramide * No signed consent from parent or guardian * Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) with or without pressure support administered via an endotracheal tube * Corrected gestational age under 38 weeks * Patients with a feeding tube in place who have been fed within the last 12 hours * Patients with a feeding tube in place in whom the PICU staff do not wish to change the position of the feeding tube (i.e. do not agree to randomize the patient's feeding tube position)

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
The percent goal enteral calories received while receiving NPPVDaily up to 14 daysDaily percent goal calories are recorded. Also total percent goal calories over entire NPPV course.

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
The time required to achieve goal calories while on NPPVHours (estimated up to 48 hours)
The length of stay in ICU and in hospitalDays (estimated up to 14 and 28 days, respectively)
Episodes of clinically important gastric aspirationEpisodes (number - up to 1 per subject)

Countries

Canada

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026