Outcomes of push and pull percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy placements in 854 patients: A single‐center study

Safety and Effectiveness of Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy May Be Improved by Proper Pre- and Post-Positioning Management of Elderly Patients with Multimorbidity

INTRODUCTION

The main risk factors for major complications and early mortality after the positioning of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) reported in the literature are old age, multimorbidity, and the use of inappropriate methods for PEG positioning. A proper PEG positioning technique and adequate post-positioning patient management and surveillance are the main protective factors, but the information on protective factors in the literature is much poorer. The aim of this study was to provide more information on PEG-related complications and mortality in geriatric patients treated with long-term enteral nutrition administered by PEG according to a specific home enteral nutrition (HEN) protocol.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study based on data from 136 elderly patients in whom PEG was positioned from 2017 to 2023 at the geriatric hospital IRCCS INRCA, Ancona (Italy), 88 of whom were treated with HEN. Data on PEG-related complications, duration of HEN, hospitalizations, and mortality were analyzed.

RESULTS

No complications were registered during or immediately after the PEG positioning. The prevalence of a major complication-buried bumper-was in the lower limit of the range reported in the literature (4.32%). The prevalence of minor complications such as peristomal leakage, inadvertent tube removal, and granulation tissue was higher than that reported in the literature (14.71%, 23.53%, 29.41%), while tube blockage and peristomal site infection were less frequent (8.82%, 38.23%). Three hospitalizations for PEG-related complications occurred. Both the all-cause 30-day mortality and within-two-months mortality were lower than those in the literature (1.92% and 3.84%).

CONCLUSIONS

The impact of the risk factors recognized by the literature on complications and mortality could be probably mitigated by improving the PEG placement techniques and pre- and post-PEG placement patient management practices. Data on the prevalence of complications and mortality must be interpreted in correlation to this information.

Safety of the One Step Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (Push-PEG) Button in Pediatric Patients

OBJECTIVES

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG)-systems are essential tools for enteral feeding in a broad variety of pediatric patients. The One Step ("Push-PEG") technique allows the direct introduction of a PEG-Button. The aim of the study was to investigate the safety and parental view of the Push-PEG technique.

METHODS

We conducted a single-center retrospective data and questionnaire (SDC, http://links.lww.com/MPG/D296 ) based study including all pediatric patients receiving a PEG via push or pull technique between 2015 until end of 2020 and compared these 2 groups. The primary outcome was the detection of minor and major complications. Secondary outcomes were growth, thriving, and parental contentment using a Likert-scaled questionnaire.

RESULTS

Eighty-three patients were included in the analysis. There were no significant differences in the basic data regarding age, weight, or diagnosis category. Overall complication rate was 34.9%. The Push-PEG group showed a lower rate of complications (32.7% vs 38.7%) and a lower rate of major complications (4.1% vs 8.8%), although the difference is not significant. Thirty-four families completed the questionnaire (SDC, http://links.lww.com/MPG/D296 ) (response rate 40%). There were no significant differences between the 2 groups regarding answers of the Likert-scaled questions.

CONCLUSION

Push-PEG placement seems to be as safe as placement via traditional pull technique, even in small infants more than 2.8 months and 4 kg. As Push-PEG placement requires less follow-up interventions it may show significant advantages and could be the method of first choice in many cases.

To push or to pull? A clinical audit on the efficacy and safety of the pull and push percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy techniques in oncological patients

BACKGROUND

The peroral "pull" technique and the direct "push" procedure are the two main methods for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) placement. Although pull-PEG is generally recommended as the first-line modality, many oncological patients require a push-PEG approach to prevent tumor seeding or overcome tumor-related obstruction.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of both PEG procedures in cancer patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed all consecutive PEG procedures within a tertiary oncological center. Patients were followed up with the hospital databases and National Cancer Registry to assess the technical success rate for PEG placement, the rate of minor and major adverse events (AEs), and 30-day mortality rates. We compared those outcomes between the two PEG techniques. Finally, risk factors for PEG-related adverse events were analyzed using a multivariable Cox proportional-hazard regression model adjusted for patients' sex, age, performance status (ECOG), Body Mass Index (BMI), diabetes, chemoradiotherapy (CRT) status (pre-/current-/post-treatment), and type of PEG.

RESULTS

We included 1055 PEG procedures (58.7% push-PEG/41.4% pull-PEG) performed in 994 patients between 2014 and 2021 (mean age 62.0 [±10.7] yrs.; 70.2% males; indication: head-and-neck cancer 75.9%/other cancer 24.1%). The overall technical success for PEG placement was 96.5%. Although the "push" technique had a higher rate of all AEs (21.4% vs. 7.1%, Hazard Ratio [HR]  = 2.9; 95% CI = 1.9-4.3, p < 0.001), most of these constituted minor AEs (71.9%), such as tube dislodgement. The methods had no significant difference regarding major AEs and 30-day mortality rates. Previous CRT was associated with an increased risk of major AEs (hazard ratio = 2.7, 95% CI = 1.0-7.2, p = 0.042).

CONCLUSION

The risk of major AEs was comparable between the push- and pull-PEG techniques in cancer patients. Due to frequent tube dislodgement in push-PEG, the pull technique may be more suitable for long-term feeding. Previous CRT increases the risk of major AEs, favoring early ("prophylactic") PEG placement when such treatment is expected.

Does enteral nutrition through a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy, attenuate Helicobacter pylori colonization?: is it worth mentioning?

OBJECTIVE

In patients who experience difficulties in oral feeding, alimentary intake can be supported by creating direct access into the stomach through a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. The present study purposed to compare naïve and exchanged percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tubes in terms of Helicobacter pylori infection and other clinical characteristics.

METHODS

A total of 96 cases who underwent naïve or exchanged percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy procedures with various indications were incorporated into the study. The patients' demographic data, such as age and gender, etiology of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy, anti-HBs status, Helicobacter pylori status, the presence of atrophy and intestinal metaplasia, biochemical parameters, and lipid profiles, had been analyzed. In addition, the anti-HCV and anti-HIV statuses had also been evaluated.

RESULTS

The most common indication for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy placement was dementia in 26 (27.08%) cases (p=0.033). The presence of Helicobacter pylori positivity was significantly lower in the exchange group compared to the naïve group (p=0.022). Total protein, albumin, and lymphocyte levels were significantly higher in the exchange group compared to the naïve group (both p=0.001), and the mean calcium, hemoglobin, and hematocrit levels were statistically significantly higher in the exchange group (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Preliminary outcomes of the present study revealed that enteral nutrition attenuates the incidence of Helicobacter pylori infection. Considering the acute-phase reactant, the significantly lower ferritin values in the exchange group suggest that there is no active inflammatory process in the patients and that immunity is sufficient.

Severe Gastrointestinal Bleeding Following Gastrostomy Tube Replacement: A Case of an Unusual Presentation of Enterocutaneous Fistula

Gastrostomy tubes are widely used and provide an alternative route of enteral feeding when oral intake is not feasible. Previously, a surgical laparotomy was required for its placement, but percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy and fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous radiological gastrostomy (PRG) techniques have widely replaced the surgical approach given their less invasive nature. Although the complications that might follow these procedures are usually minor, more severe complications can rarely occur. We describe a unique case of severe gastrointestinal bleeding in a patient who underwent PRG tube exchange reflecting an acute complication following an asymptomatic misplaced permanent gastrostomy tube.