Faculty mentor/PI email address
emazza@virtua.org
Keywords
enteral nutrition, nasogastric tube, IRIS technology, Dobhoff tube
IRB or IACUC Protocol Number
G25020
Date of Presentation
5-6-2026 12:00 AM
Poster Abstract
Background
Postpyloric feeding is essential in critically ill patients. Traditional Dobhoff tube (DHT) placement, often performed blindly, is widely used due to low cost but carries risks of misplacement and reliance on radiographic confirmation. In contrast, Kangaroo™ IRIS (camera-guided) technology enables real-time visualization during placement, potentially improving accuracy and workflow, though at higher cost.
Hypothesis
IRIS-guided placement provides comparable safety and success to DHT, with similar procedural efficacy without increasing complications.
Methods
A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the electronic medical records from multiple Virtua Health hospitals (01/01/13, through 01/31/25), including 200 patients undergoing nasogastric tube placement with DHT or IRIS. Primary outcomes included placement attempts, confirmatory chest X-rays, and pneumothorax. Comparative analysis assessed differences in safety, success, and resource utilization.
Results
IRIS demonstrated high success rates (75-91.7%) with no reported pneumothorax and rapid placement times (approximately, 5-13.5 minutes). Real-time visualization enabled early detection of misplacement. Electromagnetic-guided systems showed similar success (approximately 87.5%) but required imaging confirmation. Institutional data showed equivalent first-attempt success (100%) between IRIS and DHT, with no pneumothorax. IRIS had a small rate of bronchial misplacement (5.6%) and higher cost (approximately $229 versus $79).
Conclusion
IRIS-guided feeding tube placement demonstrates comparable safety and success to traditional Dobhoff placement, with higher upfront costs but potential workflow and visualization advantages. Further clinical trials and cost-effectiveness analyses are needed to assess broader clinical impact.
Disciplines
Dietetics and Clinical Nutrition | Equipment and Supplies | Medicine and Health Sciences
A Retrospective Comparison of Dobhoff Nasogastric Feeding Tubes to IRIS Feeding Tubes
Background
Postpyloric feeding is essential in critically ill patients. Traditional Dobhoff tube (DHT) placement, often performed blindly, is widely used due to low cost but carries risks of misplacement and reliance on radiographic confirmation. In contrast, Kangaroo™ IRIS (camera-guided) technology enables real-time visualization during placement, potentially improving accuracy and workflow, though at higher cost.
Hypothesis
IRIS-guided placement provides comparable safety and success to DHT, with similar procedural efficacy without increasing complications.
Methods
A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the electronic medical records from multiple Virtua Health hospitals (01/01/13, through 01/31/25), including 200 patients undergoing nasogastric tube placement with DHT or IRIS. Primary outcomes included placement attempts, confirmatory chest X-rays, and pneumothorax. Comparative analysis assessed differences in safety, success, and resource utilization.
Results
IRIS demonstrated high success rates (75-91.7%) with no reported pneumothorax and rapid placement times (approximately, 5-13.5 minutes). Real-time visualization enabled early detection of misplacement. Electromagnetic-guided systems showed similar success (approximately 87.5%) but required imaging confirmation. Institutional data showed equivalent first-attempt success (100%) between IRIS and DHT, with no pneumothorax. IRIS had a small rate of bronchial misplacement (5.6%) and higher cost (approximately $229 versus $79).
Conclusion
IRIS-guided feeding tube placement demonstrates comparable safety and success to traditional Dobhoff placement, with higher upfront costs but potential workflow and visualization advantages. Further clinical trials and cost-effectiveness analyses are needed to assess broader clinical impact.