Search

Background: Correct placement of nasogastric tubes provide proper functionality and maximize benefit and minimize risk. The Nose-Ear-Xiphoid (NEX) body surface estimate method is a long-lasting technique, and this study was conducted to evaluate the correlation between NEX method and the secure insertion depth of nasogastric tube. Materials and Methods: Thirty patients with nasogastric tube insertion who received whole body positron emission tomography with computerized tomography scan (PET-CT) were recruited. All data were gathered in the image center, which included Nose-Ear (NE), Ear-Xiphoid (EX), Nose-Ear-Xiphoid (NEX), glabella-xiphoid (GX) and glabella-umbilicus (GU) lengths. The distances of the inserted portion of the nasogastric tube between the cardiac and the nostril were measured by multiplanar reconstruction algorithm. Results: Only one patient successfully placed all side-holes into the stomach while using NEX method to estimate inserting depth. Twenty-nine patients (96.7%) failed to place correctly. Fourteen participants had one or more side-holes in both the esophagus and the stomach sides. Fifteen patients could not pass through any side-hole across the gastroesophageal junction. They had shorter EX distances (p = 0.02), but no difference among the NE distances. Body height had the highest statistical correlation with nasogastric tube length (adjusted R2 = 0.459), as compared with the NEX, GX and GU body surface methods. Conclusion: This study suggests that NEX method is inappropriate for adult patients to estimate the ideal inserting length of nasogastric tube. Physicians should realize these underinsertions with any side-hole above the gastroesophageal junctions may increase the potential risk of complications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To compare the variation patterns of ADC and T2 values in different age and intervertebral disc (IVD) levels, thus to identify their sensitivities in assessing age and disc level related IVDs changes. Materials and Methods: The T2 and ADC values were recorded from 345 IVDs of 69 volunteers. Kendall's correlation analysis was used to identify the relationship between age and T2/ADC mean values respectively. The one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with post hoc analysis was then applied to test the differences of T2 and ADC values among different IVD levels and age groups, followed by linear regression analysis between age (<45 and >45 years) and T2/ADC mean values. This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and the Peking Union Medical College Hospital. Results: Significant negative correlation was observed between age and T2/ADC mean values. The T2 and ADC values showed significant differences among IVD levels and among age groups except for T2 values in age group 1 (25–34 years) and group 2 (35–44 years), and for ADC values at L1–2 level. Both T2 and ADC values showed significant differences between young (age<45 years) and elderly group (age>45 years) at each IVD level. A linear relationship was observed between age and T2/ADC mean values in the elderly group as well as in the young group for the ADC mean values, while no such tendency was identified in the young group for the T2 mean values. Conclusions: ADC values may be a more sensitive parameter than T2 in assessing age and disc level related intervertebral disc changes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]