EARLY ORAL FEEDING VERSUS DELAYED ORAL FEEDING IN PATIENTS UNDERGOING INTESTINAL RESECTION | ||||
| The Egyptian Journal of Surgery | ||||
| Volume 25, Issue 4, October 2006, Page 200-205 PDF (157.85 K) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/ejsur.2006.372982 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
| Tito Metwally* ; Ayman Elnkeib; Ameer Fekry; Saleh Elawady; Mohamed Farid | ||||
| Department of General Surgery, Mansoura University Hospital, Mansoura Faculty of Medicine, Mansoura, Egypt. | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Aim: This study was conducted to evaluate early oral feeding versus delayed feeding after intestinal resection. Methods: In the period from June 2005 to September 2006 this study included 240 patients who underwent intestinal resection either elective or emergency, they were randomized into two groups. Group (A) included 120 patients with early oral feeding and group (B) with delayed oral feeding. Patients were followed up for a period of 3-12 months. Results: Twenty four (20%) patients in group (A) had leakage versus 28 (23.3%) in (B), (p=0.531). Sixteen (13.3%) patients were explored in group (A) versus 18 (15%) in (B), (p= 0.711). In group (A) 15 (12.5%) patients had local complications versus 14 (11.3%) in (B), this was not of statistical significance. Hospital stay was significantly shorter in group A than (B) with mean stay of (2.5 + 1.7) versus (9.93 + 2.60) days respectively. General complications were less frequent in group (A) versus (B) with more patient satisfaction and early return to work, but readmissions were more frequent among group (A) (5 versus 2). Regarding mortality 9 (7.5%) patients died in group (A) versus 8 (6.6%) in (B), (p= 0.333). Conclusion: Early oral feeding after intestinal resection is well tolerated and safe with better outcome. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Enteral nutrition; Intestinal fistula; Ileus | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 63 PDF Download: 30 |
||||
