Skip to main content
PMC home page
Annals of Surgery logoLink to Annals of Surgery
. 1987 Aug;206(2):126–133. doi: 10.1097/00000658-198708000-00002

Use of tubes and radiographs in the management of small bowel obstruction.

R E Brolin, M J Krasna, B A Mast
PMCID: PMC1493109  PMID: 3606237

Abstract

During the past 10 years 311 consecutive patients were admitted with 342 episodes of small bowel obstruction (SBO). There were 193 cases of partial small bowel obstruction (PSBO) and 149 cases of complete small bowel obstruction (CSBO) as determined by interpretation of the abdominal radiographs done on admission. The purpose of this review was to determine the reliability of the admission plain abdominal radiographs and subsequent upper gastrointestinal (UGI) contrast studies in predicting the need for operative intervention. The use of nasogastric tubes (NGT) versus nasointestinal (long) tubes (NIT) was correlated with the following outcome variables; length of hospital stay (LOS), timing of operative intervention, incidence of postoperative complications, and duration of postoperative ileus. Long tubes (NIT) were used in 64 episodes of PSBO and 81 episodes of CSBO, whereas nasogastric tubes (NGT) were used in 116 cases of PSBO and 68 cases of CSBO. Thirty-eight of 193 (19%) patients with PSBO required operation (20 of 116 with NGT and 18 of 64 with NIT), whereas 125 of 149 (84%) patients with CSBO required operation (60 of 68 with NGT and 65 of 81 with NIT). Need for operation was not correlated with whether or not long tubes passed beyond the pylorus; 50 passed versus 33 not passed in operative groups (p = 0.15). Twelve of 83 patients with NIT had operation within 24 hours versus 52 of 80 patients with NGT (p less than 0.001). In six of 64 patients who had surgery within 24 hours, complications developed versus in 39 of 99 patients operated on more than 24 hours after admission (p less than or equal to 0.001). In 29 of 83 patients treated with NIT, postoperative complications developed versus in 16 of 80 patients with NGT (p less than or equal to 0.04). The mean duration of postoperative ileus in patients with NIT was 7 days versus 4.1 days for NGT patients (p less than 0.001). The mean LOS was 12.2 days for NGT patients versus 21 days for patients with NIT (p less than 0.001). Barium UGI contrast studies were performed in 57 patients to establish the presence of obstruction. In 34 of 57 patients the UGI disclosed mechanical obstruction that required operative intervention. In the remaining 23 patients no obstruction was demonstrated, and all 23 patients recovered without operation. In conclusion, there is no inherent superiority of NIT versus NGT in the treatment of SBO.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Full text

PDF
127

Images in this article

129Figs. 1A-C.
on p.129
129Figs. 1A-C.
on p.129
131Figs. 2A and B.
on p.131
131Fig. 3.
on p.131

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. BECKER W. F. Acute adhesive ileus; a study of 412 cases with particular reference to the abuse of tube decompression in treatment. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1952 Oct;95(4):472–476. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Barnett W. O., Petro A. B., Williamson J. W. A current appraisal of problems with gangrenous bowel. Ann Surg. 1976 Jun;183(6):653–659. doi: 10.1097/00000658-197606000-00006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bizer L. S., Liebling R. W., Delany H. M., Gliedman M. L. Small bowel obstruction: the role of nonoperative treatment in simple intestinal obstruction and predictive criteria for strangulation obstruction. Surgery. 1981 Apr;89(4):407–413. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Brolin R. E. Partial small bowel obstruction. Surgery. 1984 Feb;95(2):145–149. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Goldberg H. I., Dodds W. J. Forums in gastrointestinal roentgenology: roentgen evaluation of small-bowel obstruction. Dig Dis Sci. 1979 Mar;24(3):245–252. doi: 10.1007/BF01308439. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Hofstetter S. R. Acute adhesive obstruction of the small intestine. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1981 Feb;152(2):141–144. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Leffall L. D., Syphax B. Clinical aids in strangulation intestinal obstruction. Am J Surg. 1970 Dec;120(6):756–759. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9610(70)80043-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Lo A. M., Evans W. E., Carey L. C. Review of small bowel obstruction at Milwaukee County General Hospital. Am J Surg. 1966 Jun;111(6):884–887. doi: 10.1016/0002-9610(66)90195-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Playforth R. H., Holloway J. B., Griffen W. O., Jr Mechanical small bowel obstruction: a plea for earlier surgical intervention. Ann Surg. 1970 May;171(5):783–788. doi: 10.1097/00000658-197005000-00018. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Quatromoni J. C., Rosoff L., Sr, Halls J. M., Yellin A. E. Early postoperative small bowel obstruction. Ann Surg. 1980 Jan;191(1):72–74. doi: 10.1097/00000658-198001000-00014. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Shatila A. H., Chamberlain B. E., Webb W. R. Current status of diagnosis and management of strangulation obstruction of the small bowel. Am J Surg. 1976 Sep;132(3):299–303. doi: 10.1016/0002-9610(76)90379-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Stewardson R. H., Bombeck C. T., Nyhus L. M. Critical operative management of small bowel obstruction. Ann Surg. 1978 Feb;187(2):189–193. doi: 10.1097/00000658-197802000-00017. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Sykes P. A., Schofield P. F. Early postoperative small bowel obstruction. Br J Surg. 1974 Aug;61(8):594–600. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800610803. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Wolfson P. J., Bauer J. J., Gelernt I. M., Kreel I., Aufses A. H., Jr Use of the long tube in the management of patients with small-intestinal obstruction due to adhesions. Arch Surg. 1985 Sep;120(9):1001–1006. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.1985.01390330013002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Zadeh B. J., Davis J. M., Canizaro P. C. Small bowel obstruction in the elderly. Am Surg. 1985 Aug;51(8):470–473. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Annals of Surgery are provided here courtesy of Lippincott, Williams, and Wilkins

RESOURCES