Pathogenic colonization of oral flora in frail elderly patients fed by nasogastric tube or percutaneous enterogastric tube
Abstract
Background Aspiration of infected oropharyngeal content is the main cause of aspiration pneumonia. This complication, mainly related to gram-negative bacteria, threatens percutaneous enterogastric tube as well as nasogastric tube (NGT) fed patients. The objective of this study was to examine the oral microbiota of tuboenterally fed patients and compare it with that of orally fed counterparts. Methods Patients were recruited for this study from six nursing and skilled nursing facilities with an overall number of 845 beds. Enrolled were 215 patients: Group 1 consisted of 78 patients on NGT feeding, Group 2 consisted of 57 patients on percutaneous enterogastric tube feeding, and Group 3 consisted of 80 patients fed orally who were from the same facilities. Cultures were performed by sampling the oropharynx of each subject in order to identify gram-negative bacteria and Staphylococcus aureus. Results A high prevalence of potentially pathogenic isolations was found in tuboenterally fed patients: 81% in Group 1 and 51% in Group 2, as compared with only 17.5% in Group 3 (p Conclusion This study shows that tuboenteral feeding in elderly patients is associated with pathogenic colonization of the oropharynx. These findings are related to the risk of aspiration pneumonia and are compelling for the reevaluation of current oral cleansing procedures.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Aspiration pneumonia is suggested to be mainly caused by the bacterial content of aspirated saliva and not by the saliva itself, or a minimal oral intake.
“Aspiration pneumonia is suggested to be mainly caused by the bacterial content of aspirated saliva and not by the saliva itself, or a minimal oral intake (170, 171).”
From ESPEN practical guideline: Clinical nutrition and hydration in geriatrics (2022) · cites this paper as [171]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 28 · Cited by 87
- Authors
- Leibovitz, A., Plotnikov, G., Habot, B., Rosenberg, M., & Segal, R.
- Affiliations
- Shmuel Harofeh Hospital (IL)
- ORCID
- Plotnikov, G.
- Venue
- The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2003-01-01
- Volume
- 58
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- M52-M55
- ISSN
- 1079-5006 (ISSN-L)
- 1758-535X
- OpenAlex
- W2170384395
- Cited by
- 87
- References
- 28
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 3.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The Journals of Gerontology Series A (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine › Nosocomial Infections in ICU
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Speech and Hearing › Dysphagia Assessment and Management
- Health Sciences › Dentistry › Periodontics › Oral microbiology and periodontitis research
- Keywords
- oral microbiota, oropharyngeal colonization, aspiration pneumonia, nasogastric tube feeding, tube feeding, frail elderly patients, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Klebsiella, Proteus, Staphylococcus aureus, nursing homes
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cross-Sectional Studies, Enteral Nutrition, Female, Gastrostomy, Gram-Negative Bacteria, Humans, Israel, Length of Stay, Male, Mouth Mucosa, Pneumonia, Aspiration, Probability, Reference Values, Risk Factors, Skilled Nursing Facilities, Colony Count, Microbial, Cohort Studies, Incidence, Prevalence, Frail Elderly, Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review