EN 
ES
PT
SV
DE
TR
FR
AR
JA
RU
VI
Description
| Minimum Order Quantity: | 100 |
| Price: | $6.99~10.00 |
| Packaging Details: | Individual package |
| Delivery Time: | 3-7days |
| Payment Terms: | Cash, T/T |
| Supply Ability: | 3,000 per day |
Enteral tube nutrition is indicated for patients who have a functioning GI tract but cannot ingest enough nutrients orally because they are unable or unwilling to take oral feedings. Compared with parenteral nutrition, enteral nutrition has the following advantages:
● Better preservation of the structure and function of the GI tract
● Lower cost
● Probably fewer complications, particularly infections Specific indications for enteral nutrition include the following:
● Prolonged anorexia
● Severe protein-energy undernutrition
● Coma or depressed sensorium
● Liver failure
● Inability to take oral feedings due to head or neck trauma
● Critical illnesses (eg, burns) causing metabolic stress Other indications may include bowel preparation for surgery in seriously ill or undernourished patients, closure of enterocutaneous fistulas, and small-bowel adaptation after massive intestinal resection or in disorders that may cause malabsorption (eg, Crohn disease).
● Types: pediatric vs adult; gastric vs small bowel
● Sizes: smaller sizes (5-8 Fr) for commercial products delivered via pump; larger sizes for viscous, blenderized, fiber-containing formulas, gravity and bolus feedings
● Weighted vs. unweighted: it was once thought that weighted tubes facilitated transpyloric passage; now dictated by personal preference
● Stylet vs. no stylet: stylet facilitates tube placement beyond the pylorus for small, flexible tubes
● Composition: silicone and polyurethane most comfortable
Indications for Use
● Enteral Feeding Tubes are intended for use in those patients who require intermittent or continuous tube feeding via the nasogastric or nasoenteric route. The tubes should be inserted into the patient’s stomach to flush and gastrointestinal decompression.
Specifications
Table 1 PVC and TPU comparison
| Items | TPU | PVC |
| Flexibility | Very flexible | Poor flexible, easy to cause trauma |
| Smoothness | Very smooth | Poor, easy to cause trauma |
| Abrasive resistance | Very good | Poor, easy to cause rough surface |
| Acid-base resistance | Very good | Poor, easy to corrosion in the gastrointestinal tract |
| Oil-resistance | Very good | Poor |
| Aging -resistance | Very good | Poor |
| Hydrolysis-resistance | Very good | Easy Hydrolysis |
| Smell | No smell | Strong smell, easy to cause nausea and vomiting |
| Hardness | It’s hard before insertion, but become soft under body temperature | It’s hard in body temperature, make the patients uncomfortable |
| Force at break | High | Low, easy to break |
| Biocompatibility | Excellent, the first choice for tube, Can be implanted, can stay in the body for long term, such as 6 months, 1year | Poor, easy to stick to the inner wall of the digestive tract due to its properties. It’s painful when take out the tube from body. The material will stay in the patient body.Less than 4 weeks |
| Environment -friendly | Very good | Environment contamination, DEHP is forbidden in many countries |
| Price | Much high | Low |
Summary: ● TPU can replace PVC in all areas, TPU’s performance is 10 times better than PVC. ● TPU tube is very good to the patients as well as environment. ● TPU tube is easy to maintain which reduce the workload of medical staffs. | ||
Table 2 TPU and Silicon comparison
| Items | TPU | Silicon |
| Hardness | It’s hard before insertion, but become soft under body temperature | Very Soft, difficult for insertion |
| Stickiness | Not easy to sticky to hand | Very easy to sticky to hand, hard for handling |
| Flexibility | Better flexible, no kink | Less flexible |
| Smoothness | Very smooth | Very smooth |
| Abrasive resistance | Very good | Poor, can’t sustain abrasion |
| Acid-base resistance | Very good | Very good |
| Oil-resistance | Very good | Very Poor |
| Aging -resistance | Very good | Aging-resistance is poor than TPU |
| Smell | No smell | No smell |
| Force at break | High | Less, In order to have same hardness, the Silicon tube must have a thicker wall, hence the inside diameter is smaller, the flow rate will be low. For big flow rate, must select a big tube which will make the patients not comfortable. |
| Tearing strength | High | Less |
| Biocompatibility | ExcellentPerfect material for catheter, can be implanted, can stay in the body for long term, such as 180 days, 1 year. | Less |
| Price | Low | Much high |
Summary: ● TPU is the best choice for catheter, tubes with its excellent biocompatibility ● TPU can sustain abrasion, has high force at break, tearing strength. Can deliver the same flow rate with smallest outer diameter. In clinic practice, the smaller is the better. ● TPU is hard before insertion and become soft under body temperate which will make the patient very comfortable. ● TPU is much cheaper than Silicon. | ||
Competitive Advantage
● Special medical –grade TPU with excellent biocompatibility.
● Can sustain gastric acid for 30days.
● Unique hydrophilic coating can support to pass through pylorus easily.
● Stream line tip design can reduce the resistance during insertion.
● Different tip design for options.
● Skillful side holes can avoid block.
● Anti-kink stainless stylet.
● X-ray detectable
● Unique Y-connector for multiple functions.
