Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Transitioning from gavage to full oral feeds in premature infants: When should we discontinue the nasogastric tube?

Journal of Perinatology volume 39, pages 1257–1262 (2019)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Background

The optimal timing for discontinuation of nasogastric (NG) tube in premature infants transitioning to oral feeding is not known.

Objective

To determine whether early removal of NG-tube is appropriate in low-risk premature infants.

Methods

Prospectively collected data of premature infants started on oral feeds at ≤34 weeks gestation were reviewed. Infants were categorized into ‘early’ or ‘late’ NG-removal groups based on the proportion of oral intake in the preceding 2-days, i.e., 60–79% or 80–100% of the total volume, respectively.

Results

In total 50 infants in early group vs. 43 in late group. Both groups had similar oral intake and weight change in the subsequent 2-days post-NG removal. The days from NG-removal to target oral volume, and to hospital discharge trended shorter in early vs. late group.

Conclusions

Discontinuing NG-tube when the oral feeding competency reaches ~75% of prescribed feeding volume is safe and appropriate in low-risk premature infants.

Access through your institution
Buy or subscribe

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Access through your institution

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Newborn AAoPCoFa. Hospital discharge of the high-risk neonate. Pediatrics. 2008;122:1119–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Jadcherla SR, Wang M, Vijayapal AS, Leuthner SR. Impact of prematurity and co-morbidities on feeding milestones in neonates: a retrospective study. J Perinatol. 2010;30:201–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Pickler RH, Reyna BA, Wetzel PA, Lewis M. Effect of four approaches to oral feeding progression on clinical outcomes in preterm infants. Nurs Res Pract. 2015;2015:716828.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Walsh MC, Bell EF, Kandefer S, Saha S, Carlo WA, D’angio CT, et al. Neonatal outcomes of moderately preterm infants compared to extremely preterm infants. Pedia Res. 2017;82:297–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Lainwala S, Kosyakova N, Power K, Hussain N, Moore JE, Hagadorn JI, et al. Delayed achievement of oral feedings is associated with adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes at 18 to 26 months follow-up in preterm infants. Am J Perinatol. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0039-1681059. [Epub ahead of print]

  6. Lau C, Smith EO, Schanler RJ. Coordination of suck-swallow and swallow respiration in preterm infants. Acta Paediatr. 2003;92:721–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Kirk AT, Alder SC, King JD. Cue-based oral feeding clinical pathway results in earlier attainment of full oral feeding in premature infants. J Perinatol. 2007;27:572–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Kamitsuka MD, Nervik PA, Nielsen SL, Clark RH. Incidence of nasogastric and gastrostomy tube at discharge is reduced after implementing an oral feeding protocol in premature (< 30 weeks) infants. Am J Perinatol. 2017;34:606–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Davidson E, Hinton D, Ryan-Wenger N, Jadcherla S. Quality improvement study of effectiveness of cue-based feeding in infants with bronchopulmonary dysplasia in the neonatal intensive care unit. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2013;42:629–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Greenspan JS, Wolfson MR, Holt WJ, Shaffer TH. Neonatal gastric intubation: differential respiratory effects between nasogastric and orogastric tubes. Pedia Pulmonol. 1990;8:254–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Bohnhorst B, Cech K, Peter C, Doerdelmann M. Oral versus nasal route for placing feeding tubes: no effect on hypoxemia and bradycardia in infants with apnea of prematurity. Neonatology. 2010;98:143–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Shiao SY, Youngblut JM, Anderson GC, DiFiore JM, Martin RJ. Nasogastric tube placement: effects on breathing and sucking in very-low-birth-weight infants. Nurs Res. 1995;44:82–88.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Peter CS, Wiechers C, Bohnhorst B, Silny J, Poets CF. Influence of nasogastric tubes on gastroesophageal reflux in preterm infants: a multiple intraluminal impedance study. J Pediatr. 2002;141:277–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Murthy SV, Funderburk A, Abraham S, Epstein M, DiPalma J, Aghai ZH. Nasogastric feeding tubes may not contribute to gastroesophageal reflux in preterm infants. Am J Perinatol. 2018;35:643–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Rogers SP, Hicks PD, Hamzo M, Veit LE, Abrams SA. Continuous feedings of fortified human milk lead to nutrient losses of fat, calcium and phosphorous. Nutrients. 2010;2:230–40.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Petersen SM, Greisen G, Krogfelt KA. Nasogastric feeding tubes from a neonatal department yield high concentrations of potentially pathogenic bacteria- even 1 d after insertion. Pediatr Res. 2016;80:395–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Jadcherla SR, Dail J, Malkar MB, McClead R, Kelleher K, Nelin L. Impact of process optimization and quality improvement measures on neonatal feeding outcomes at an all-referral neonatal intensive care unit. JPEN J Parent Enter Nutr. 2016;40:646–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Lau C. Development of infant oral feeding skills: what do we know? Am J Clin Nutr. 2016;103:616S–621S.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Latal-Hajnal B, von Siebenthal K, Kovari H, Bucher HU, Largo RH. Postnatal growth in VLBW infants: significant association with neurodevelopmental outcome. J Pediatr. 2003;143:163–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Fucile S, Phillips S, Bishop K, Jackson M, Yuzdepski T, Dow K. Identification of a pivotal period in the oral feeding progression of preterm infants. Am J Perinatol. 2019;36:530–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, Nationwide Children’s Hospital, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA

    Sreekanth Viswanathan & Sudarshan Jadcherla

  2. Neonatal and Infant Feeding Disorders Research Program, Center for Perinatal Research, The Research Institute at Nationwide Children’s Hospital, Columbus, OH, USA

    Sreekanth Viswanathan & Sudarshan Jadcherla

Authors
  1. Sreekanth Viswanathan
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sudarshan Jadcherla
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sreekanth Viswanathan.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Viswanathan, S., Jadcherla, S. Transitioning from gavage to full oral feeds in premature infants: When should we discontinue the nasogastric tube?. J Perinatol 39, 1257–1262 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41372-019-0446-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41372-019-0446-2

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links