Table 3 The data on the procedure of enteral feeding tube

No of patients who succeeded post-pyloric EFT placement, n (%)

328 (72.4)

First attempt success, n (%)

197 (43.5)

Success in second and subsequent attempts, n (%)

131 (28.9)

 Number of patients who succeeded in ≤ 3 attempts, n (%)

109 (24.1)

 Number of patients who succeeded in ≥ 4 attempts, n (%)

22 (4.9)

Number of attempts to success with blind placement after second attempt

2 (2–3)

Lowest position of EFT in stomach

 Success in first attempt

L1 (Th12–L2)

 Success in second and subsequent attempt

L2 (L1–L3)

Number of patients with failure to place EFT in the post pylorus, n (%)

112 (24.7)

Number of patients using the assist device, n (%)

13 (2.9)

 Gastro-intestinal fiberscope, n

10

 Fluoroscopy, n

3

 Number of attempts before using assist devices

2 (2–4)

Length (cm)

 Stomach position > L2

12.8 (11.2–14.8)

 Stomach position ≤ L2

7.3 (4.9–9.4)

Correlation, length and stomach position estimated by CT

0.84 (95% CI: 0.81–0.87)

Angle (°)

 Stomach position > L2

6.0 (− 13.9–20.3)

 Stomach position ≤ L2

28.4 (15–40.0)

Correlation, angle and stomach position estimated by CT

0.56 (95% CI 0.49–0.62)