M Aasim Yusuf, Faisal Zeb, M Qayyum Khan, Syed Raza Hussain, Hala Mansoor, M Adnan Masood, Arif Jamshed and Waleed Zafar
Background: Prophylactic nutritional support of head and neck cancer patients being treated with chemoradiation through placement of either a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube or a nasogastric (NG) tube is well-established in clinical care. There is, however, little scientific evidence to support one over the other.
Methods: We planned to conduct a randomized controlled trial to compare the effects of PEG tube or NG tube on nutritional status and quality of life of patients; the rates of clinical complications; and the cost of care. The trial was conducted at a tertiary care cancer specialist center in Lahore, Pakistan.
Results: The study was closed early because of refusal of eligible patients to be randomly assigned to the NG arm of the study. 7 patients were assessed for eligibility of whom 2 withdrew from the study after one week in the NG arm and 5 refused to be randomized to the NG arm.
Conclusion: We concluded that NG tube placement is not an appropriate first-line option for prophylactic nutritional support among head and neck cancer patients at our center and should not be offered.
इस लेख का हिस्सा
English 
Spanish 
Chinese 
Russian 
German 
French 
Japanese 
Portuguese 
Telugu 