Comparison of the effect between traditional conservation and nasointestinal tube placement in adhesive small bowel obstruction: A matched case-control study

Abstract

Adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO) causes a major burden in emergency medicine. Owing to in situ decompression, nasointestinal tube (NIT) placement has been increasingly used in clinical practice compared with traditional conservation (TC); however, the indications remain controversial. This study was designed to explore the indications for each treatment in ASBOs and then suggest the optimal strategy.After propensity score matching, 128 pairs were included (the NIT and TC groups). The occurrence of severe adverse events (SAEs), peri-treatment clinical parameters, and radiological features were compared between the successful and failed treatment groups.According to different stages of the entire treatment, the independent risk factors for adverse effects for ASBO were analysed in phase I and phase II. In phase I, normal red blood cells (RBC) levels (p = 0.011) and a balanced sodium ion level (p = 0.016) positively affected the outcomes of TC treatment. In phase II, for the TC group, the successful treatment rate reached 79.5% for patients with ASBOs whose normal RBC levels (p = 0.006) or decreasing white blood cells (WBC) levels (p = 0.014) after treatment. For the NIT group, the treatment success rate was 68.1% for patients whose electrolyte imbalance could be reversed or whose neutrophil count/lymphocyte ratio (NLR) levels was lower than 4.3 (p = 0.018).TC treatment is highly recommended for patients with normal RBC counts and sodium levels pretreatment. After dynamic monitoring of the treatment process, for both the TC and NIT groups, once ASBOs had elevated inflammatory biomarkers or irreversible electrolyte disturbances, surgical interference was preferred.

Keywords

• Adhesive small bowel obstruction
• Nasointestinal tube
• Traditional conservation treatment
• Dynamic monitoring
• Peripheral-blood test