1
|
Hussain SS, Umar N, Kamran U, Coupland B, Varyani F, Trudgill N. Improving 30-day mortality after radiologically inserted gastrostomy tube from 2007 to 2019: A population-based study of 15,605 patients. Clin Nutr ESPEN 2025; 66:381-389. [PMID: 39921166 DOI: 10.1016/j.clnesp.2025.01.061] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/06/2024] [Revised: 01/28/2025] [Accepted: 01/29/2025] [Indexed: 02/10/2025]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Radiologically inserted gastrostomy (RIG) allows long-term enteral nutrition when percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube insertion is not feasible either due to technical difficulty or a higher risk of complications. The aims of this study were to examine mortality associated with RIG insertion. METHODS Adult patients with RIG insertion from 2007 to 2019 were identified in the Hospital Episode Statistics database. Indications and adverse events were identified using International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th Revision codes. Provider nutrition support data were available from the Getting It Right First Time in Gastroenterology Report 2021. Multivariable logistic regression analysis examined factors associated with 30-day mortality following a RIG. RESULTS 15,605 patients were studied (68.0 % male; age 64(Interquartile range (IQR) 56-73)). There was a steady increase in the number of RIGs inserted from 510 per year in 2007 to 1787 per year in 2019. 59.9 % of RIGs were inserted as an outpatient. 63.3 % of RIGs were inserted in head and neck cancer patients. Of the patients who had a RIG insertion, 4.7 % had pneumonia within 7 days and 6.9 % died within 30 days of RIG insertion. Thirty-day mortality fell from 12.2 % in 2007 to 5.8 % in 2019. Higher 30-day mortality rates were observed in patients with Dementia (16.4 %) and in NHS providers without a nutrition support nurse (11.5 %). Factors associated with 30 day mortality included: increasing age (>81 years odds ratio (OR) 13.67 (95 % confidence interval (CI) 4.99-37.48), p < 0.001); increasing NHS provider volume of RIG insertion >12 per year (OR 0.69 (95 % CI (0.55-0.88), p = 0.003); RIG insertion during an emergency admission (OR 2.53 (95 % CI 2.19-2.93), p < 0.001); increasing comorbidity Charlson score >5 (OR 1.38 (95 % CI 1.10-1.75), p = 0.006); NHS provider without a nutrition support nurse (OR 1.38 (95%CI 1.09-1.75), p = 0.007) and other neurological conditions than stroke as indication for RIG (OR 1.55 (95%CI 1.24-1.95), p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Despite an increase in RIG insertion over the study period, 30-day mortality has fallen by 52 %. Providers without a nutrition support nurse and providers with a lower volume of RIG insertions were associated with higher mortality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Syed Shezal Hussain
- Birmingham Heartlands Hospital, Bordesley Green East, Birmingham, B9 5SS, United Kingdom.
| | - Nosheen Umar
- University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom; Department of Gastroenterology, Sandwell and West Birmingham NHS Trust, West Bromwich, B71 4HJ, United Kingdom.
| | - Umair Kamran
- Department of Gastroenterology, Sandwell and West Birmingham NHS Trust, West Bromwich, B71 4HJ, United Kingdom.
| | - Benjamin Coupland
- Health Informatics, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom.
| | - Fumi Varyani
- Department of Gastroenterology, Sandwell and West Birmingham NHS Trust, West Bromwich, B71 4HJ, United Kingdom.
| | - Nigel Trudgill
- Department of Gastroenterology, Sandwell and West Birmingham NHS Trust, West Bromwich, B71 4HJ, United Kingdom; Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Kohli DR, Cosgrove N, Abidi WM, Machicado JD, Desai M, Forbes N, Marya NB, Thiruvengadam NR, Thosani NC, Alipour O, Ngamruengphong S, Elhanafi SE, Sheth SG, Ruan W, Fang JC, McClave SA, Zvavanjanja RC, Radadiya DK, Kamel AY, Qumseya BJ. American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on gastrostomy feeding tubes: methodology and review of evidence. VIDEOGIE : AN OFFICIAL VIDEO JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY 2025; 10:1-23. [PMID: 39925405 PMCID: PMC11806427 DOI: 10.1016/j.vgie.2024.09.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/11/2025]
Abstract
This article from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) provides a full description of the methodology used to inform the final guidance outlined in the accompanying summary and recommendations article for strategies to manage endoscopically placed gastrostomy tubes. This article was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework and specifically addresses the utility of PEG versus interventional radiology-guided gastrostomy (IR-G), the need for withholding antiplatelet and anticoagulant medications, appropriate timing to initiate tube feedings, and appropriate selection of the gastrostomy technique in patients with malignant dysphagia. In patients needing enteral access, the ASGE suggests PEG as the preferred technique for initial gastrostomy over IR-G. The ASGE recommends that tube feeding can be safely started within 4 hours of the gastrostomy without the need for an intentional delay. The ASGE suggests that a PEG can be performed without the need to withhold antiplatelet medications. In patients on anticoagulants who need to undergo PEG placement, the ASGE suggests that the periprocedural management of anticoagulants should be based on a multidisciplinary discussion with the patient regarding the risk of bleeding versus cardiovascular adverse events. In patients with malignant dysphagia, either transoral "Pull" PEG or transcutaneous "Direct" PEG can be performed for initial enteral access.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Divyanshoo Rai Kohli
- Pancreas and Liver Clinic, Providence Sacred Medical Center, Elson Floyd School of Medicine, Washington State University, Spokane, Washington, USA
| | - Natalie Cosgrove
- Center for Interventional Endoscopy AdventHealth, Orlando, Florida, USA
| | - Wasif M Abidi
- Section of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Jorge D Machicado
- Division of Gastroenterology, Michigan Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
| | - Madhav Desai
- Center for Interventional Gastroenterology at UTHealth, McGovern Medical School, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Nauzer Forbes
- Department of Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Neil B Marya
- Division of Gastroenterology, UMass Chan Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Nikhil R Thiruvengadam
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, California, USA
| | - Nirav C Thosani
- Center for Interventional Gastroenterology at UTHealth, McGovern Medical School, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Omeed Alipour
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Saowanee Ngamruengphong
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Sherif E Elhanafi
- Division of Gastroenterology, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, El Paso, Texas, USA
| | - Sunil G Sheth
- Division of Gastroenterology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Wenly Ruan
- Division of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Baylor College of Medicine, Texas Children's Hospital, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - John C Fang
- Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Stephen A McClave
- Department of Medicine, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky, USA
| | - Rodrick C Zvavanjanja
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology at UTHealth, McGovern Medical School, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Dhruvil K Radadiya
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Motility, University of Kansas, Kansas City, Kansas USA
| | - Amir Y Kamel
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA
- Department of Pharmacy, UF Health Shands Hospital, University of Florida College of Pharmacy, Gainesville, Florida, USA
| | - Bashar J Qumseya
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Kohli DR, Abidi WM, Cosgrove N, Machicado JD, Desai M, Forbes N, Marya NB, Thiruvengadam NR, Thosani NC, Alipour O, Ngamruengphong S, Elhanafi SE, Sheth SG, Ruan W, Fang JC, McClave SA, Zvavanjanja RC, Kamel AY, Qumseya BJ. American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on gastrostomy feeding tubes: summary and recommendations. Gastrointest Endosc 2025; 101:25-35. [PMID: 39520459 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2024.08.044] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/21/2024] [Accepted: 08/23/2024] [Indexed: 11/16/2024]
Abstract
This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) provides an evidence-based approach for strategies to manage endoscopically placed gastrostomy tubes. This document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. The guideline addresses the utility of PEG versus interventional radiology-guided gastrostomy (IR-G), need for withholding antiplatelet and anticoagulant medications before PEG tube placement, appropriate timing to initiate tube feeding after PEG, and selection of the appropriate technique of gastrostomy in patients with malignant dysphagia. In patients needing enteral access, the ASGE suggests PEG as the preferred technique for initial gastrotomy over IR-G. The ASGE recommends that tube feeding can be safely started within 4 hours of gastrostomy. The ASGE suggests that PEG can be performed without withholding antiplatelet medications. The ASGE suggests that the periprocedural management of anticoagulants should be based on a multidisciplinary discussion regarding the risk of bleeding versus cardiovascular events. In patients with malignant dysphagia, either transoral "pull" PEG or direct PEG can be performed for initial enteral access.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Divyanshoo Rai Kohli
- Pancreas and Liver Clinic, Providence Sacred Medical Center, Elson Floyd School of Medicine, Washington State University, Spokane, Washington, USA
| | - Wasif M Abidi
- Section of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Natalie Cosgrove
- Center for Interventional Endoscopy AdventHealth, Orlando, Florida, USA
| | - Jorge D Machicado
- Division of Gastroenterology, Michigan Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
| | - Madhav Desai
- Center for Interventional Gastroenterology at UTHealth, McGovern Medical School, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Nauzer Forbes
- Department of Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Neil B Marya
- Division of Gastroenterology, UMass Chan Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Nikhil R Thiruvengadam
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, California, USA
| | - Nirav C Thosani
- Center for Interventional Gastroenterology at UTHealth, McGovern Medical School, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Omeed Alipour
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Saowanee Ngamruengphong
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Sherif E Elhanafi
- Division of Gastroenterology, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, El Paso, Texas, USA
| | - Sunil G Sheth
- Division of Gastroenterology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Wenly Ruan
- Division of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Baylor College of Medicine, Texas Children's Hospital, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - John C Fang
- Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Stephen A McClave
- Department of Medicine, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, Kentucky, USA
| | - Rodrick C Zvavanjanja
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology at UTHealth, McGovern Medical School, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Amir Y Kamel
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA; Department of Pharmacy, UF Health Shands Hospital, University of Florida College of Pharmacy, Gainesville, Florida, USA
| | - Bashar J Qumseya
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Brönnimann MP, Tarca M, Segger L, Kulagowska J, Fleckenstein FN, Gebauer B, Fehrenbach U, Collettini F, Heverhagen JT, Auer TA. Comparative Analysis of CT Fluoroscopy Modes and Gastropexy Techniques in CT-Guided Percutaneous Radiologic Gastrostomy. Tomography 2024; 10:1754-1766. [PMID: 39590938 PMCID: PMC11598829 DOI: 10.3390/tomography10110129] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/04/2024] [Revised: 10/24/2024] [Accepted: 11/04/2024] [Indexed: 11/28/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES This study was conducted to compare two modes of computed tomography fluoroscopy (CTF) and two gastropexy techniques used in CT-guided percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (CT-PRG) aiming to identify the optimal techniques for image guidance and gastropexy and, thus, to overcome the current lack of consensus on the preferred modalities. METHODS We retrospectively identified 186 successful CT-PRG procedures conducted evenly across two university hospitals from January 2019 to December 2023. Patients were divided into two groups (intermittent multislice CT biopsy mode-guided technique (MS-CT BM) and retention anchor suture (T-fastener) versus real-time (RT-)CTF and gastropexy device) for descriptive analysis of demographics, indication for PRG, radiation exposure (DLP), procedural time, number of CT scans, gastropexy time, and complications. Differences were assessed for statistical significance using Fisher's exact test and the Mann-Whitney U-test. RESULTS Our final study population comprised 100 patients (50 from each center; 62.52 ± 12.36 years, 73 men). There was a significant difference in radiation exposure between MS-CT BM (group 1) and RT-CTF (group 2), with an average dose-length product (DLP) of 56.28 mGycm×m ± 67.89 and 30.91 ± 27.53 mGycm×cm, respectively (p < 0.001). PRG with RT-CTF guidance was significantly faster than PRG with MS-CT BM, with an average difference of 10.28 min (p < 0.001). No significant difference in duration was found between the two gastropexy methods compared (retention anchor suture, 11.50 ± 5.239 s vs. gastropexy device, 11.17 ± 6.015 s; p = 0.463). Complication rates did not differ significantly either (p = 0.458). CONCLUSIONS Our findings indicate comparable efficacy and safety of the two gastropexy methods and underscore that the choice of CTF mode for image guidance has only a small role in reducing radiation exposure in patients undergoing CT-PRG. Instead, it is essential to avoid control scans.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael P. Brönnimann
- Department of Diagnostic, Interventional and Pediatric Radiology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Freiburgstrasse 10, 3010 Bern, Switzerland; (J.K.); (J.T.H.)
- Department of Radiology, Charité—Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353 Berlin, Germany; (L.S.); (F.N.F.); (B.G.); (U.F.); (F.C.); (T.A.A.)
| | - Mauro Tarca
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Bern, Murten Street, 3008 Bern, Switzerland;
| | - Laura Segger
- Department of Radiology, Charité—Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353 Berlin, Germany; (L.S.); (F.N.F.); (B.G.); (U.F.); (F.C.); (T.A.A.)
| | - Jagoda Kulagowska
- Department of Diagnostic, Interventional and Pediatric Radiology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Freiburgstrasse 10, 3010 Bern, Switzerland; (J.K.); (J.T.H.)
| | - Florian N. Fleckenstein
- Department of Radiology, Charité—Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353 Berlin, Germany; (L.S.); (F.N.F.); (B.G.); (U.F.); (F.C.); (T.A.A.)
- Clinician Scientist Program, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité—Universitätsmedizin Berlin, 10178 Berlin, Germany
| | - Bernhard Gebauer
- Department of Radiology, Charité—Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353 Berlin, Germany; (L.S.); (F.N.F.); (B.G.); (U.F.); (F.C.); (T.A.A.)
| | - Uli Fehrenbach
- Department of Radiology, Charité—Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353 Berlin, Germany; (L.S.); (F.N.F.); (B.G.); (U.F.); (F.C.); (T.A.A.)
| | - Federico Collettini
- Department of Radiology, Charité—Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353 Berlin, Germany; (L.S.); (F.N.F.); (B.G.); (U.F.); (F.C.); (T.A.A.)
- Clinician Scientist Program, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité—Universitätsmedizin Berlin, 10178 Berlin, Germany
| | - Johannes T. Heverhagen
- Department of Diagnostic, Interventional and Pediatric Radiology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Freiburgstrasse 10, 3010 Bern, Switzerland; (J.K.); (J.T.H.)
| | - Timo A. Auer
- Department of Radiology, Charité—Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353 Berlin, Germany; (L.S.); (F.N.F.); (B.G.); (U.F.); (F.C.); (T.A.A.)
- Clinician Scientist Program, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité—Universitätsmedizin Berlin, 10178 Berlin, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Neitzel E, Stearns J, Guido J, Porter K, Whetten J, Lammers L, vanSonnenberg E. Iatrogenic vascular complications of non-vascular percutaneous abdominal procedures. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2024; 49:4074-4091. [PMID: 38849536 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-024-04381-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/05/2024] [Revised: 05/06/2024] [Accepted: 05/11/2024] [Indexed: 06/09/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE The purpose of this paper is to compile and present all of the reported vascular complications that resulted from common non-vascular abdominal procedures in the literature. Non-vascular procedures include, though are not limited to, percutaneous abscess/fluid collection drainage (PAD), percutaneous nephrostomy (PN), paracentesis, percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography (PTC)/percutaneous biliary drainage (PBD), percutaneous biliary stone removal, and percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PG)/percutaneous radiologic gastrojejunostomy (PG-J). By gathering this information, radiologists performing these procedures can be aware of the associated vascular injuries, as well as take steps to minimize risks. METHODS A literature review was conducted using the PubMed database to catalog relevant articles, published in the year 2000 onward, in which an iatrogenic vascular complication occurred from the following non-vascular abdominal procedures: PAD, PN, paracentesis, PTC/PBD, percutaneous biliary stone removal, and PG/PG-J. Biopsy and tumor ablation were deferred from this article. RESULTS 214 studies met criteria for analysis. 28 patients died as a result of vascular complications from the analyzed non-vascular abdominal procedures. Vascular complications from paracentesis were responsible for 19 patient deaths, followed by four deaths from PTC/PBD, three from biliary stone removal, and two from PG. CONCLUSION Despite non-vascular percutaneous abdominal procedures being minimally invasive, vascular complications still can arise and be quite serious, even resulting in death. Through the presentation of vascular complications associated with these procedures, interventionalists can improve patient care by understanding the steps that can be taken to minimize these risks and to reduce complication rates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Easton Neitzel
- University of Arizona College of Medicine-Phoenix, 475 N 5th St, HSEB C523, Phoenix, AZ, 85004, USA.
| | - Jack Stearns
- University of Arizona College of Medicine-Phoenix, 475 N 5th St, HSEB C523, Phoenix, AZ, 85004, USA
| | - Jessica Guido
- University of Arizona College of Medicine-Phoenix, 475 N 5th St, HSEB C523, Phoenix, AZ, 85004, USA
| | - Kaiden Porter
- University of Arizona College of Medicine-Phoenix, 475 N 5th St, HSEB C523, Phoenix, AZ, 85004, USA
| | - Jed Whetten
- University of Arizona College of Medicine-Phoenix, 475 N 5th St, HSEB C523, Phoenix, AZ, 85004, USA
| | - Luke Lammers
- University of Arizona College of Medicine-Phoenix, 475 N 5th St, HSEB C523, Phoenix, AZ, 85004, USA
| | - Eric vanSonnenberg
- University of Arizona College of Medicine-Phoenix, 475 N 5th St, HSEB C523, Phoenix, AZ, 85004, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Brönnimann MP, Kulagowska J, Gebauer B, Auer TA, Collettini F, Schnapauff D, Magyar CTJ, Komarek A, Krokidis M, Heverhagen JT. Fluoroscopic-Guided vs. Multislice Computed Tomography (CT) Biopsy Mode-Guided Percutaneous Radiologic Gastrostomy (PRG)-Comparison of Interventional Parameters and Billing. Diagnostics (Basel) 2024; 14:1662. [PMID: 39125538 PMCID: PMC11312216 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics14151662] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/11/2024] [Revised: 07/22/2024] [Accepted: 07/30/2024] [Indexed: 08/12/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study investigated and compared the efficacy, safety, radiation exposure, and financial compensation of two modalities for percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PRG): multislice computed tomography biopsy mode (MS-CT BM)-guided and fluoroscopy-guided (FPRG). The aim was to provide insights into optimizing radiologically assisted gastrostomy procedures. METHODS We conducted a retrospective analysis of PRG procedures performed at a single center from January 2018 to January 2024. The procedures were divided into two groups based on the imaging modality used. We compared patient demographics, intervention parameters, complication rates, and procedural times. Financial compensation was evaluated based on the tariff structure for outpatient medical services in Switzerland (TARMED). Statistical differences were determined using Fisher's exact test and the Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS The study cohort included 133 patients: 55 with MS-CT BM-PRG and 78 with FPRG. The cohort comprised 35 women and 98 men, with a mean age of 64.59 years (±11.91). Significant differences were observed between the modalities in effective dose (MS-CT BM-PRG: 10.95 mSv ± 11.43 vs. FPRG: 0.169 mSv ± 0.21, p < 0.001) and procedural times (MS-CT BM-PRG: 41.15 min ± 16.14 vs. FPRG: 28.71 min ± 16.03, p < 0.001). Major complications were significantly more frequent with FPRG (10% vs. 0% in MS-CT BM-PRG, p = 0.039, φ = 0.214). A higher single-digit number of MS-CT BM-guided PRG was required initially to reduce procedure duration by 10 min. Financial comparison revealed that only 4% of MS-CT BM-guided PRGs achieved reimbursement equivalent to the most frequent comparable examination, according to TARMED. CONCLUSIONS Based on our experience from a retrospective, single-center study, the execution of a PRG using MS-CT BM, as opposed to FPRG, is currently justified in challenging cases despite a lower incidence of major complications. However, further well-designed prospective multicenter studies are needed to determine the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of these two modalities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael P. Brönnimann
- Department of Diagnostic, Interventional and Paediatric Radiology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010 Bern, Switzerland; (J.K.); (A.K.); (M.K.); (J.T.H.)
- Department of Radiology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, 13353 Berlin, Germany; (B.G.); (T.A.A.); (F.C.); (D.S.)
| | - Jagoda Kulagowska
- Department of Diagnostic, Interventional and Paediatric Radiology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010 Bern, Switzerland; (J.K.); (A.K.); (M.K.); (J.T.H.)
| | - Bernhard Gebauer
- Department of Radiology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, 13353 Berlin, Germany; (B.G.); (T.A.A.); (F.C.); (D.S.)
| | - Timo A. Auer
- Department of Radiology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, 13353 Berlin, Germany; (B.G.); (T.A.A.); (F.C.); (D.S.)
- Clinician Scientist Program, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, 10178 Berlin, Germany
| | - Federico Collettini
- Department of Radiology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, 13353 Berlin, Germany; (B.G.); (T.A.A.); (F.C.); (D.S.)
- Clinician Scientist Program, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, 10178 Berlin, Germany
| | - Dirk Schnapauff
- Department of Radiology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, 13353 Berlin, Germany; (B.G.); (T.A.A.); (F.C.); (D.S.)
| | - Christian T. J. Magyar
- Department of Visceral Surgery and Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010 Bern, Switzerland;
| | - Alois Komarek
- Department of Diagnostic, Interventional and Paediatric Radiology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010 Bern, Switzerland; (J.K.); (A.K.); (M.K.); (J.T.H.)
| | - Miltiadis Krokidis
- Department of Diagnostic, Interventional and Paediatric Radiology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010 Bern, Switzerland; (J.K.); (A.K.); (M.K.); (J.T.H.)
| | - Johannes T. Heverhagen
- Department of Diagnostic, Interventional and Paediatric Radiology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010 Bern, Switzerland; (J.K.); (A.K.); (M.K.); (J.T.H.)
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Piñar-Gutiérrez A, González-Gracia L, Vázquez Gutiérrez R, García-Rey S, Jiménez-Sánchez A, González-Navarro I, Tatay-Domínguez D, Garrancho-Domínguez P, Remón-Ruiz PJ, Martínez-Ortega AJ, Serrano-Aguayo P, Giménez-Andreu MD, García-Fernández FJ, Bozada-García JM, Nacarino-Mejías V, López-Iglesias Á, Pereira-Cunill JL, García-Luna PP. Percutaneous Gastrostomies: Associated Complications in PUSH vs. PULL Techniques over 12 Years in a Referral Centre. J Clin Med 2024; 13:1836. [PMID: 38610601 PMCID: PMC11012573 DOI: 10.3390/jcm13071836] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2024] [Revised: 03/18/2024] [Accepted: 03/21/2024] [Indexed: 04/14/2024] Open
Abstract
Objectives: To compare complications associated with percutaneous gastrostomies performed using PUSH and PULL techniques, whether endoscopic (PEG) or radiological (PRG), in a tertiary-level hospital. Methods: This was a prospective observational study. Adult patients who underwent percutaneous PULL or PUSH gastrostomy using PEG or PRG techniques at the Virgen del Rocio University Hospital and subsequently followed up in the Nutrition Unit between 2009-2020 were included. X2 tests or Fisher's test were used for the comparison of proportions when necessary. Univariate analysis was conducted to study risk factors for PRG-associated complications. Results: n = 423 (PULL = 181; PUSH = 242). The PULL technique was associated with a higher percentage of total complications (37.6% vs. 23.8%; p = 0.005), exudate (18.2% vs. 11.2%; p = 0.039), and irritation (3.3% vs. 0%; p = 0.006). In the total sample, there were 5 (1.1%) cases of peritonitis, 3 (0.7%) gastrocolic fistulas, and 1 (0.2%) death due to complications associated with gastrostomy. Gender, age, and different indications were not risk factors for a higher number of complications. The most common indications were neurological diseases (35.9%), head and neck cancer (29%), and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (17.2%). Conclusions: The PULL technique was associated with more total complications than the PUSH technique, but both were shown to be safe techniques, as the majority of complications were minor.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ana Piñar-Gutiérrez
- UGC Endocrinología y Nutrición, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocio, 41013 Sevilla, Spain (L.G.-G.); (R.V.G.); (S.G.-R.); (I.G.-N.); (D.T.-D.); (P.G.-D.); (P.J.R.-R.); (A.J.M.-O.); (P.S.-A.); (M.D.G.-A.); (P.P.G.-L.)
| | - Lucía González-Gracia
- UGC Endocrinología y Nutrición, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocio, 41013 Sevilla, Spain (L.G.-G.); (R.V.G.); (S.G.-R.); (I.G.-N.); (D.T.-D.); (P.G.-D.); (P.J.R.-R.); (A.J.M.-O.); (P.S.-A.); (M.D.G.-A.); (P.P.G.-L.)
| | - Rocío Vázquez Gutiérrez
- UGC Endocrinología y Nutrición, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocio, 41013 Sevilla, Spain (L.G.-G.); (R.V.G.); (S.G.-R.); (I.G.-N.); (D.T.-D.); (P.G.-D.); (P.J.R.-R.); (A.J.M.-O.); (P.S.-A.); (M.D.G.-A.); (P.P.G.-L.)
| | - Silvia García-Rey
- UGC Endocrinología y Nutrición, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocio, 41013 Sevilla, Spain (L.G.-G.); (R.V.G.); (S.G.-R.); (I.G.-N.); (D.T.-D.); (P.G.-D.); (P.J.R.-R.); (A.J.M.-O.); (P.S.-A.); (M.D.G.-A.); (P.P.G.-L.)
| | - Andrés Jiménez-Sánchez
- UGC Endocrinología y Nutrición, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocio, 41013 Sevilla, Spain (L.G.-G.); (R.V.G.); (S.G.-R.); (I.G.-N.); (D.T.-D.); (P.G.-D.); (P.J.R.-R.); (A.J.M.-O.); (P.S.-A.); (M.D.G.-A.); (P.P.G.-L.)
| | - Irene González-Navarro
- UGC Endocrinología y Nutrición, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocio, 41013 Sevilla, Spain (L.G.-G.); (R.V.G.); (S.G.-R.); (I.G.-N.); (D.T.-D.); (P.G.-D.); (P.J.R.-R.); (A.J.M.-O.); (P.S.-A.); (M.D.G.-A.); (P.P.G.-L.)
| | - Dolores Tatay-Domínguez
- UGC Endocrinología y Nutrición, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocio, 41013 Sevilla, Spain (L.G.-G.); (R.V.G.); (S.G.-R.); (I.G.-N.); (D.T.-D.); (P.G.-D.); (P.J.R.-R.); (A.J.M.-O.); (P.S.-A.); (M.D.G.-A.); (P.P.G.-L.)
| | - Pilar Garrancho-Domínguez
- UGC Endocrinología y Nutrición, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocio, 41013 Sevilla, Spain (L.G.-G.); (R.V.G.); (S.G.-R.); (I.G.-N.); (D.T.-D.); (P.G.-D.); (P.J.R.-R.); (A.J.M.-O.); (P.S.-A.); (M.D.G.-A.); (P.P.G.-L.)
| | - Pablo J. Remón-Ruiz
- UGC Endocrinología y Nutrición, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocio, 41013 Sevilla, Spain (L.G.-G.); (R.V.G.); (S.G.-R.); (I.G.-N.); (D.T.-D.); (P.G.-D.); (P.J.R.-R.); (A.J.M.-O.); (P.S.-A.); (M.D.G.-A.); (P.P.G.-L.)
| | - Antonio J. Martínez-Ortega
- UGC Endocrinología y Nutrición, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocio, 41013 Sevilla, Spain (L.G.-G.); (R.V.G.); (S.G.-R.); (I.G.-N.); (D.T.-D.); (P.G.-D.); (P.J.R.-R.); (A.J.M.-O.); (P.S.-A.); (M.D.G.-A.); (P.P.G.-L.)
| | - Pilar Serrano-Aguayo
- UGC Endocrinología y Nutrición, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocio, 41013 Sevilla, Spain (L.G.-G.); (R.V.G.); (S.G.-R.); (I.G.-N.); (D.T.-D.); (P.G.-D.); (P.J.R.-R.); (A.J.M.-O.); (P.S.-A.); (M.D.G.-A.); (P.P.G.-L.)
| | - María Dolores Giménez-Andreu
- UGC Endocrinología y Nutrición, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocio, 41013 Sevilla, Spain (L.G.-G.); (R.V.G.); (S.G.-R.); (I.G.-N.); (D.T.-D.); (P.G.-D.); (P.J.R.-R.); (A.J.M.-O.); (P.S.-A.); (M.D.G.-A.); (P.P.G.-L.)
| | | | | | | | - Álvaro López-Iglesias
- Unidad de Radiodiagnóstico, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocio, 41013 Sevilla, Spain
| | - José Luis Pereira-Cunill
- UGC Endocrinología y Nutrición, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocio, 41013 Sevilla, Spain (L.G.-G.); (R.V.G.); (S.G.-R.); (I.G.-N.); (D.T.-D.); (P.G.-D.); (P.J.R.-R.); (A.J.M.-O.); (P.S.-A.); (M.D.G.-A.); (P.P.G.-L.)
| | - Pedro Pablo García-Luna
- UGC Endocrinología y Nutrición, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocio, 41013 Sevilla, Spain (L.G.-G.); (R.V.G.); (S.G.-R.); (I.G.-N.); (D.T.-D.); (P.G.-D.); (P.J.R.-R.); (A.J.M.-O.); (P.S.-A.); (M.D.G.-A.); (P.P.G.-L.)
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Al-Balas H, Metwalli Z, Burney I, Sada D. Primary placement of low-profile or 'button' versus traditional balloon-retention radiologically inserted gastrostomy catheters in adults: a retrospective review. BMJ Open Gastroenterol 2023; 10:bmjgast-2023-001118. [PMID: 36931664 PMCID: PMC10030477 DOI: 10.1136/bmjgast-2023-001118] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/21/2023] [Accepted: 03/09/2023] [Indexed: 03/19/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE De novo percutaneous placement of radiologically inserted low-profile or 'button-type' gastrostomy catheters (LPG) is infrequently reported in adults. This study compares the safety and clinical outcomes of primary percutaneous placement of LPG catheters and traditional balloon-retention gastrostomy catheters (TG) using image guidance at a single institution. DESIGN This was a retrospective, single-institution review comparing initial LPG and TG radiologically inserted catheter placements in a 36-month time period. The age, gender, indication, catheter type and method of anaesthesia of 139 consecutive initial gastrostomy placement procedures were recorded. Total catheter days without intervention, major and minor complications, reasons for reintervention, and procedure fluoroscopy times were compared. RESULTS During the 36-month study period, 61 LPG and 78 TG catheters were placed. Mean total catheter days prior to intervention was 137 days in the LPG group and 128 days in the TG group (p=0.70). Minor complications including cellulitis, pericatheter leakage and early catheter occlusion occurred in 4.9% (3/61) in the LPG group and 9% (7/78) in the TG group (p=0.5). Major complications including early catheter dislodgement and bleeding requiring transfusion (in one patient) occurred in 4.9% (3/61) in the LPG group and 7.7% (6/78) in the TG group (p=0.4). Procedure fluoroscopy time was lower in the LPG group (2.56 min) compared with the TG group (4.21 min) (p<0.005). CONCLUSION Primary placement of low-profile or 'button-type' gastrostomy catheters is technically feasible with a low complication rate similar to that of traditional radiologically inserted gastrostomy catheters.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hassan Al-Balas
- Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear medicine, Jordan University of Science and Technology, Irbid, Jordan
| | - Zeyad Metwalli
- Radiology, M. D. Anderson cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | | | - David Sada
- Department of Radiology, Michael E DeBakey VA Medical Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Piñar-Gutiérrez A, Serrano-Aguayo P, García-Rey S, Vázquez-Gutiérrez R, González-Navarro I, Tatay-Domínguez D, Garrancho-Domínguez P, Remón-Ruiz PJ, Martínez-Ortega AJ, Nacarino-Mejías V, Iglesias-López Á, Pereira-Cunill JL, García-Luna PP. Percutaneous Radiology Gastrostomy (PRG)-Associated Complications at a Tertiary Hospital over the Last 25 Years. Nutrients 2022; 14:nu14224838. [PMID: 36432521 PMCID: PMC9694556 DOI: 10.3390/nu14224838] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/04/2022] [Revised: 11/05/2022] [Accepted: 11/14/2022] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES We aimed to describe and compare the complications associated with different percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PRG) techniques. METHODS A retrospective and prospective observational study was conducted. Patients who underwent a PRG between 1995-2020 were included. TECHNIQUES A pigtail catheter was used until 2003, a balloon catheter without pexy was used between 2003-2009 and a balloon catheter with gastropexy was used between 2015-2021. For the comparison of proportions, X2 tests or Fisher's test were used when necessary. Univariate analysis was performed to study the risk factors for PRG-associated complications. RESULTS n = 330 (pigtail = 114, balloon-type without pexy = 28, balloon-type with pexy = 188). The most frequent indication was head and neck cancer. The number of patients with complications was 44 (38.5%), 11 (39.2%) and 54 (28,7%), respectively. There were seven (25%) cases of peritonitis in the balloon-type without-pexy group and 1 (0.5%) in the balloon-type with-pexy group, the latter being the only patient who died in the total number of patients (0.3%). Two (1%) patients of the balloon-type with-pexy group presented with gastrocolic fistula. The rest of the complications were minor. CONCLUSIONS The most frequent complications associated with the administration of enteral nutrition through PRG were minor and the implementation of the balloon-type technique with pexy has led to a decrease in them.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ana Piñar-Gutiérrez
- UGC Endocrinología y Nutrición, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, 41013 Seville, Spain
| | - Pilar Serrano-Aguayo
- UGC Endocrinología y Nutrición, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, 41013 Seville, Spain
| | - Silvia García-Rey
- UGC Endocrinología y Nutrición, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, 41013 Seville, Spain
| | - Rocío Vázquez-Gutiérrez
- UGC Endocrinología y Nutrición, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, 41013 Seville, Spain
| | - Irene González-Navarro
- UGC Endocrinología y Nutrición, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, 41013 Seville, Spain
| | - Dolores Tatay-Domínguez
- UGC Endocrinología y Nutrición, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, 41013 Seville, Spain
| | | | - Pablo J. Remón-Ruiz
- UGC Endocrinología y Nutrición, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, 41013 Seville, Spain
| | | | - Verónica Nacarino-Mejías
- Servicio de Radiología, Unidad de Radiología Intervencionista, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, 41013 Seville, Spain
| | - Álvaro Iglesias-López
- Servicio de Radiología, Unidad de Radiología Intervencionista, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, 41013 Seville, Spain
| | - José Luis Pereira-Cunill
- UGC Endocrinología y Nutrición, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, 41013 Seville, Spain
- Correspondence:
| | - Pedro Pablo García-Luna
- UGC Endocrinología y Nutrición, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, 41013 Seville, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Da Cunha T, Villavicencio J, Goldenberg SA. Severe Gastrointestinal Bleeding Following Gastrostomy Tube Replacement: A Case of an Unusual Presentation of Enterocutaneous Fistula. Cureus 2022; 14:e24673. [PMID: 35663723 PMCID: PMC9156346 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.24673] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 05/02/2022] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Steven A Goldenberg
- Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Connecticut Health, Farmington, USA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Karthikumar B, Keshava SN, Moses V, Chiramel GK, Ahmed M, Mammen S. Percutaneous gastrostomy placement by intervention radiology: Techniques and outcome. Indian J Radiol Imaging 2021; 28:225-231. [PMID: 30050247 PMCID: PMC6038225 DOI: 10.4103/ijri.ijri_393_17] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/28/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Interventional radiology (IR) has played an important role in the technical evolution of gastrostomy, from the first surgical, endoscopical to percutaneous interventional procedures. Aim This study is done to assess the technical feasibility and outcome of IR-guided percutaneous gastrostomy for patients requiring nutritional support for neuromuscular disorders or head and neck malignancies, as well as to describe simplified and newer technique for pull-type gastrostomy. Materials and Methods This is a retrospective study including 29 patients who underwent IR-guided percutaneous gastrostomy over a period of 8 years in a tertiary-level institution. Either pull or push-type gastrostomy was performed in these patients as decided by the interventional radiologist. The procedures were assessed by analyzing the indications, technical aspects, and complications. Statistical Analysis Descriptive summary statistics and frequencies were used to assess the techniques and related complications. Results The sample consists of 27 patients (93%) with pull technique and 2 patients (7%) with push technique. The technical success rate was 100%. Most of the complications were minor 24% (7/29), including superficial skin infections around the tube site, self-resolving pneumoperitoneum, tube-related complications such as block, leakage, deformation, and dislodgement. Three patients (10.3%) had major complications. One patient (3.4%) developed massive pneumoperitoneum and mild peritonitis due to technical failure in the first attempt and needed re-puncture for successful placement, and other two patients (6.9%) developed peristromal focal abscess. One patient died on the third postoperative day due to type II respiratory failure. Conclusion IR-guided percutaneous gastrostomy is a safe and effective procedure in selected patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Vinu Moses
- Department of Radiology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India
| | - George K Chiramel
- Department of Radiology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India
| | - Munawwar Ahmed
- Department of Radiology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India
| | - Suraj Mammen
- Department of Radiology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Kim R, Park HS, Do YS, Park KB, Shin SW, Cho SK, Hyun DH, Choo SW. Percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy with single gastropexy: outcomes in 636 patients. Eur Radiol 2021; 31:6531-6538. [PMID: 33655409 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-021-07762-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/21/2020] [Revised: 01/09/2021] [Accepted: 02/05/2021] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES This study aimed to assess the technical success and overall complication rate of percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PRG) with single gastropexy using a separate tract from that used for tube placement. METHODS From January 2014 to December 2018, 636 patients (469 men, 167 women; mean age 66.8 years; age range, 22-98 years) underwent PRG using single gastropexy at a tertiary center. Preprocedural computed tomography (CT) was recommended if there were no data on the location of the stomach on previous CT. After a single anchor was applied, the PRG tube was inserted through a separate tract from that used for tube placement. The technical success rate and major and minor complications were retrospectively reviewed. The number of patients and percentages were used as descriptive statistics for evaluating the complication rate. RESULTS The technical success rate of PRG with single gastropexy was 99.2% (631/636). There were 32 complications among the 631 procedures. There were 19 (3.0%) major complications, including peritonitis (n = 7), migration (n = 5), infection (n=4), malposition (n = 2), and bleeding (n = 1). There were 13 (2.1%) minor complications, including local infection (n = 11), malfunction (n = 1), and pneumoperitoneum (n = 1). The overall complication rate within 30 days of PRG placement was 4.1% (26/631). CONCLUSIONS PRG with single gastropexy using a separate tract from that used for tube placement is technically feasible with a low complication rate. KEY POINTS • Percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy with single gastropexy using a separate tract from that used for tube placement is technically feasible. • Complications including peritonitis and bleeding were comparatively low with the conventional technique.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ran Kim
- Department of Radiology, Ewha Womans University Mokdong Hospital, College of Medicine, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Korea
| | - Hong Suk Park
- Department of Radiology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Irwon-ro, Gangnam Gu, Seoul, 06351, Korea.
| | - Young Soo Do
- Department of Radiology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Irwon-ro, Gangnam Gu, Seoul, 06351, Korea
| | - Kwang Bo Park
- Department of Radiology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Irwon-ro, Gangnam Gu, Seoul, 06351, Korea
| | - Sung Wook Shin
- Department of Radiology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Irwon-ro, Gangnam Gu, Seoul, 06351, Korea
| | - Sung Ki Cho
- Department of Radiology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Irwon-ro, Gangnam Gu, Seoul, 06351, Korea
| | - Dong Ho Hyun
- Department of Radiology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Irwon-ro, Gangnam Gu, Seoul, 06351, Korea
| | - Sung Wook Choo
- Department of Radiology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Irwon-ro, Gangnam Gu, Seoul, 06351, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Siu J, Fuller K, Nadler A, Pugash R, Cohen L, Deutsch K, Enepekides D, Karam I, Husain Z, Chan K, Singh S, Poon I, Higgins K, Xu B, Eskander A. Metastasis to gastrostomy sites from upper aerodigestive tract malignancies: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 91:1005-1014.e17. [PMID: 31926149 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2019.12.045] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/17/2019] [Accepted: 12/26/2019] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Metastasis to the gastrostomy site in patients with upper aerodigestive tract (UADT) malignancies is a rare but devastating adverse event that has been poorly described. Our aim was to determine the overall incidence and clinicopathologic characteristics observed with development of gastrostomy site metastasis in patients with UADT cancers. METHODS This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of 6138 studies retrieved from Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Register after being queried for studies including gastrostomy site metastasis in patients with UADT malignancies. RESULTS The final analysis included 121 studies. Pooled analysis showed an overall event rate gastrostomy site metastasis of .5% (95% confidence interval [CI], .4%-.7%). Subgroup analysis showed an event rate of .56% (95% CI, .40%-.79%) with the pull technique and .29% (95% CI, .15%-.55%) with the push technique. Clinicopathologic characteristics observed with gastrostomy site metastasis were late-stage disease (T3/T4) (57.8%), positive lymph node status (51.2%), and no evidence of systemic disease (M0) (62.8%) at initial presentation. The average time from gastrostomy placement to diagnosis of metastasis was 7.78 ± 4.9 months, average tumor size on detection was 4.65 cm (standard deviation, 2.02), and average length of survival was 7.26 months (standard deviation, 6.23). CONCLUSIONS Gastrostomy site metastasis is a rare but serious adverse event that occurs at an overall rate of .5%, particularly in patients with advanced-stage disease, and is observed with a very poor prognosis. These findings emphasize a need for clinical practice guidelines to include a regular assessment of the PEG site and highlight the importance of detection and management of gastrostomy site metastasis by the multidisciplinary care oncology team.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer Siu
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Cancer Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Kaitlin Fuller
- Gerstein Science Information Centre, University of Toronto Libraries, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Ashlie Nadler
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Robyn Pugash
- Vascular/Interventional Radiology, Department of Medical Imaging, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Lawrence Cohen
- Division of Gastroenterology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Konrado Deutsch
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Cancer Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Danny Enepekides
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Cancer Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Head & Neck Surgical Oncology, University of Toronto, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Irene Karam
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Zain Husain
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Kelvin Chan
- Division of Medical Oncology, University of Toronto, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Toronto, Canada
| | - Simron Singh
- Division of Medical Oncology, University of Toronto, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Ian Poon
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Kevin Higgins
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Cancer Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Head & Neck Surgical Oncology, University of Toronto, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Bin Xu
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Antoine Eskander
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Cancer Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Head & Neck Surgical Oncology, University of Toronto, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Surgical Oncology, Michael Garron Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Institute for Health Policy Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Institute for Clinical Evaluative Science, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Partovi S, Li X, Moon E, Thompson D. Image guided percutaneous gastrostomy catheter placement: How we do it safely and efficiently. World J Gastroenterol 2020; 26:383-392. [PMID: 32063687 PMCID: PMC7002903 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v26.i4.383] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/14/2019] [Revised: 01/07/2020] [Accepted: 01/11/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Gastrostomy tube is an effective and safe long-term feeding access that is well-tolerated by patients. The typical placement routes include surgical, endoscopic and interventional radiologic placement. In particular, percutaneous interventional radiologic gastrostomy (PIRG) has increasingly become the preferred method of choice in many practices. Although many PIRG techniques have been developed since the 1980s, there is still a paucity of evidence supporting the choice of a most-optimal PIRG technique. Hence, there is a large variation in institutional approach to PIRG. We are a large, quaternary academic institution with an extensive experience in PIRG. Therefore, we aim to present the “push” PIRG technique utilized in our institution, to review the current literature, to discuss the optimal choice of PIRG technique and to generate further interests in comparison studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sasan Partovi
- Section of Interventional Radiology, Imaging Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH 44195, United States
| | - Xin Li
- Section of Interventional Radiology, Imaging Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH 44195, United States
| | - Eunice Moon
- Section of Interventional Radiology, Imaging Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH 44195, United States
| | - Dustin Thompson
- Section of Interventional Radiology, Imaging Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH 44195, United States
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Ma S, Lamparello NA, Paik H, Nadolski G, Stavropoulos W, Tischfield D, Gade T, Shlansky-Goldberg RD. Single-Step Method for Pull-Type Gastrostomy Tube Placement. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2019; 31:473-477. [PMID: 31542269 DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2019.05.022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2019] [Revised: 05/20/2019] [Accepted: 05/21/2019] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Single-step pull-type gastrostomy tube (PGT) placement is a method involving gastric puncture with a curved 18-gauge trocar needle allowing retrograde cannulation of the gastroesophageal junction without use of a sheath or snare. This retrospective review of 102 patients who underwent single-step PGT placement demonstrated 91% success in advancing the wire up the esophagus using only the curved trocar. Successful placement of a gastrostomy tube was 100%. Two major and 2 minor complications occurred within 30 days, all unrelated to the single-step technique. Mean fluoroscopy time for all patients was 5.1 min (range, 1.5-19.2 min). Single-step PGT placement is an effective, safe, fast, and equipment-sparing method for gastrostomy placement.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shawn Ma
- Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 1 Silverstein, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104
| | - Nicole A Lamparello
- Interventional Radiology, Weill Cornell Imaging at New York-Presbyterian, New York, New York
| | - Helen Paik
- Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 1 Silverstein, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104
| | - Gregory Nadolski
- Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 1 Silverstein, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104
| | - William Stavropoulos
- Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 1 Silverstein, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104
| | - David Tischfield
- Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 1 Silverstein, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104
| | - Terence Gade
- Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 1 Silverstein, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104
| | - Richard D Shlansky-Goldberg
- Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 1 Silverstein, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104.
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Retrospective comparison of outcomes and associated complications between large bore radiologically inserted gastrostomy tube types. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2019; 44:318-326. [PMID: 30073401 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-018-1717-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Multiple approaches to radiologically inserted gastrostomy (RIG) exist. The goal of this study was to compare 30-day outcomes and associated complications between large bore balloon-retained (BR), loop-retained (LR), and pull-type (PT) RIG devices. METHODS Data on 1477 patients who underwent RIG between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2016 were collected retrospectively using a dedicated interventional radiology database and electronic medical record. Statistical analysis was performed to compare complication rates between BR, LR, and PT devices. RESULTS Ninety-eight percent (1477/1507) of the procedures were successfully performed. A total of 752 BR, 323 LR, and 402 PT gastrostomy tubes were placed. The overall complication rate for BR catheters was 5.7% (25 major [3.3%] and 18 minor [2.4%]). The overall complication rate for PT catheters was 3.7% (8 major [2.0%] and 7 minor [1.7%]). The overall complication rate for LR catheters was 1.6% (4 major [1.4%] and 1 minor [0.8%]). Compared to BR catheters, LR catheters had significantly fewer total complications (P = 0.01) but not minor complications (P = 0.052). There were no significant differences in the number of complications between LR and PT catheters or between BR and PT catheters. CONCLUSIONS Use of BR, LR, and PT devices for RIG is safe with a low incidence of complications. Compared to BR catheters, primary insertion of a LR gastrostomy was associated with significantly fewer overall complications within the first 30 days. Therefore, for initial tube placement, large bore LR catheters may be preferred over BR devices.
Collapse
|
17
|
Zener R, Istl AC, Wanis KN, Hocking D, Kachura J, Alshehri S, Mujoomdar A, Latosinsky S, Wiseman D. Thirty-day complication rate of percutaneous gastrojejunostomy and gastrostomy tube insertion using a single-puncture, dual-anchor technique. Clin Imaging 2018; 50:104-108. [DOI: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2018.01.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2017] [Revised: 12/07/2017] [Accepted: 01/02/2018] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
|
18
|
Currie BM, Getrajdman GI, Covey AM, Alago W, Erinjeri JP, Maybody M, Boas FE. Push versus pull gastrostomy in cancer patients: A single center retrospective analysis of complications and technical success rates. Diagn Interv Imaging 2018; 99:547-553. [PMID: 29716845 DOI: 10.1016/j.diii.2018.04.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/12/2018] [Revised: 04/12/2018] [Accepted: 04/12/2018] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To compare the technical success and complication rates of push versus pull gastrostomy tubes in cancer patients, and to examine their dependence on operator experience. MATERIALS AND METHODS A retrospective review was performed of 304 cancer patients (170 men, 134 women; mean age 60.3±12.6 [SD], range: 19-102 years) referred for primary gastrostomy tube placement, 88 (29%) of whom had a previously unsuccessful attempt at percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) placement. Analyzed variables included method of insertion (push versus pull), indication for gastrostomy, technical success, operator experience, and procedure-related complications within 30 days of placement. RESULTS Gastrostomy tubes were placed for feeding in 189 patients and palliative decompression in 115 patients. Technical success was 91%: 78% after endoscopy had previously been unsuccessful and 97% when excluding failures associated with prior endoscopy. In the first 30 days, there were 29 minor complications (17.2%) associated with push gastrostomies, and only 8 minor complications (7.5%) with pull gastrostomies (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in major complications (push gastrostomy 5.3%, pull gastrostomy 5.6%). For decompressive gastrostomy tubes, the pull technique resulted in lower rates of both minor and major complications. There was no difference in complications or technical success rates for more versus less experienced operators. CONCLUSION Pull gastrostomy tube placement had a lower rate of complications than push gastrostomy tube placement, especially when the indication was decompression. The technical success rate was high, even after a failed attempt at endoscopic placement. Both the rates of success and complications were independent of operator experience.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- B M Currie
- Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275, York avenue, New York, NY 10065, United States; Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 3400, Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104, United States
| | - G I Getrajdman
- Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275, York avenue, New York, NY 10065, United States
| | - A M Covey
- Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275, York avenue, New York, NY 10065, United States
| | - W Alago
- Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275, York avenue, New York, NY 10065, United States
| | - J P Erinjeri
- Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275, York avenue, New York, NY 10065, United States
| | - M Maybody
- Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275, York avenue, New York, NY 10065, United States
| | - F E Boas
- Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275, York avenue, New York, NY 10065, United States.
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Han K, Kim MD, Kwon JH, Kim YS, Kim GM, Lee J, Choi W, Won JY, Lee DY. Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Radiologic Pigtail-Retained Gastrostomy and Radiologic Mushroom-Retained Gastrostomy. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2017; 28:1702-1707. [PMID: 28802552 DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2017.06.031] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/12/2017] [Revised: 06/21/2017] [Accepted: 06/23/2017] [Indexed: 01/20/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To prospectively compare 2 different types of percutaneous fluoroscopic gastrostomy procedures (pigtail-retained gastrostomy [PG] vs mushroom-retained gastrostomy [MG]). MATERIALS AND METHODS Between March 2014 and February 2016, 100 patients were randomly assigned to receive 14-F PG or 20-F MG. Block randomization (block size 4) was performed, and sample size was calculated to assess the difference in minor complications. One patient withdrew from the study after allocation. Baseline characteristics were not significantly different between groups (P > .05). Technical success, defined as successful placement of gastrostomy tube, and procedural complications were evaluated. Procedural complications were divided into major and minor complications according to the Society of Interventional Radiology criteria. RESULTS Technical success rate was 100%. In the PG group, the major complication rate was 2% (1 of 50); 1 patient had a misplaced PG in the peritoneal cavity between the gastric and abdominal walls and developed peritonitis that had to be surgically treated. The minor complication rate was 34% (17 of 50) in the PG group. In the MG group, the major complication rate was 0%, and the minor complication rate was 12.2% (6 of 49). The most common minor complication was tube occlusion. Minor complication rate was significantly higher in the PG group (P = .016). Mean fluoroscopy time was significantly longer in the MG group (P = .013). CONCLUSIONS Both PG and MG demonstrated high technical success rates in all indications. MG had lower complication rates than PG at the cost of an increase in fluoroscopy times.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kichang Han
- Department of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50 Yonsei-ro Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 120-752, Korea
| | - Man-Deuk Kim
- Department of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50 Yonsei-ro Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 120-752, Korea.
| | - Joon Ho Kwon
- Department of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50 Yonsei-ro Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 120-752, Korea
| | - Yong Seek Kim
- Department of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50 Yonsei-ro Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 120-752, Korea
| | - Gyoung Min Kim
- Department of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50 Yonsei-ro Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 120-752, Korea
| | - Junhyung Lee
- Department of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50 Yonsei-ro Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 120-752, Korea
| | - Woosun Choi
- Department of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50 Yonsei-ro Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 120-752, Korea
| | - Jong Yun Won
- Department of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50 Yonsei-ro Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 120-752, Korea
| | - Do Yun Lee
- Department of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50 Yonsei-ro Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 120-752, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Haber ZM, Charles HW, Gross JS, Pflager D, Deipolyi AR. Percutaneous radiologically guided gastrostomy tube placement: comparison of antegrade transoral and retrograde transabdominal approaches. Diagn Interv Radiol 2017; 23:55-60. [PMID: 27911264 DOI: 10.5152/dir.2016.15626] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE We aimed to compare the antegrade transoral and the retrograde transabdominal approaches for fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous gastrostomy tube (G-tube) placement. METHODS Following institutional review board approval, all G-tubes at two academic hospitals (January 2014 to May 2015) were reviewed retrospectively. Retrograde approach was used at Hospital 1 and both antegrade and retrograde approaches were used at Hospital 2. Chart review determined type of anesthesia used during placement, dose of radiation used, fluoroscopy time, procedure time, medical history, and complications. RESULTS A total of 149 patients (64 women, 85 men; mean age, 64.4±1.3 years) underwent G-tube placement, including 93 (62%) placed via the retrograde transabdominal approach and 56 (38%) placed via the antegrade transoral approach. Retrograde placement entailed fewer anesthesiology consultations (P < 0.001), less overall procedure time (P = 0.023), and less fluoroscopy time (P < 0.001). A comparison of approaches for placement within the same hospital demonstrated that the retrograde approach led to significantly reduced radiation dose (P = 0.022). There were no differences in minor complication rates (13%-19%; P = 0.430), or major complication rates (6%-7%; P = 0.871) between the two techniques. CONCLUSION G-tube placement using the retrograde transabdominal approach is associated with less fluoroscopy time, procedure time, radiation exposure, and need for anesthesiology consultation with similar safety profile compared with the antegrade transoral approach. Additionally, it is hypothesized that decreased procedure time and anesthesiology consultation using the transoral approach are likely associated with reduced cost.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zachary M Haber
- Division of Vascular and Interventional Radiology Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
21
|
Busch JD, Herrmann J, Adam G, Habermann CR. Radiologically inserted gastrostomy: differences of maintenance of balloon- vs. loop-retained devices. Scand J Gastroenterol 2016; 51:1423-1428. [PMID: 27687634 DOI: 10.1080/00365521.2016.1216590] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE To compare outcome and associated complications of ballon- vs. loop-retained devices for radiologically inserted gastrostomy (RIG). METHODS From 2007 to 2011 233 patients (age 63.7 ± 10.6 years) were referred for a RIG because of pharyngeal stricture Intervention was performed with four different devices: balloon-retained - Freka® GastroTube, Fresenius Kabi (n = 121); MIC® Gastrostomy Feeding Tube, Kimberly-Clark (n = 34); Russell® Gastrostomy Tray, Cook Medical Inc. (n = 17); and loop-retained - Tilma® Gastrostomy Set, Cook Medical Inc. (n = 50). Follow-up was performed with regard to RIG-related complications, cause of removal and fatalities. Revision-free survival times after RIG were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier analysis and group differences by log-rank tests. For analysis of demographic and methodical variables multivariate Cox regression models were used. RESULTS With a primary technical success rate of 95.3% (222/233) a total of 92 instances of revisions were necessary in 66 patients (66/233, 28.3%) during follow-up (mean 182.8 ± 86.6 days). The most common complication was tube dislodgement (14.3%). There were no significant differences between the distinct devices (p = 0.098), but analyzing the data in subgroups of balloon-compared to loop-retained gastrostomy tubes we observed a significantly higher probability of minor complications for the latter (p = 0.023). CONCLUSION As it is significantly less prone to minor complications we recommend the use of balloon-retained gastrostomy tubes to improve the practicability and maintenance of RIG.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J D Busch
- a Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Nuclear Medicine , University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf , Hamburg , Germany.,b Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Nuclear Medicine , Section of Pediatric Radiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf , Hamburg , Germany
| | - J Herrmann
- a Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Nuclear Medicine , University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf , Hamburg , Germany.,b Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Nuclear Medicine , Section of Pediatric Radiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf , Hamburg , Germany
| | - G Adam
- a Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Nuclear Medicine , University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf , Hamburg , Germany
| | - C R Habermann
- c Catholic Marienkrankenhaus GmbH , Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology , Hamburg , Germany
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Sofue K, Takeuchi Y, Tsurusaki M, Shibamoto K, Sakamoto N, Kitajima K, Sone M, Sugimura K, Arai Y. Value of Percutaneous Radiologic Gastrostomy for Patients with Advanced Esophageal Cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2016; 23:3623-3631. [PMID: 27188297 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-016-5276-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/19/2016] [Indexed: 01/28/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Nutritional management is important throughout the treatment period for esophageal cancer patients. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PRG) and to investigate whether PRG can be applied for patients with advanced esophageal cancer. METHODS In this study, 89 patients (74 men and 15 women) with advanced esophageal cancer underwent PRG using computed tomography and fluoroscopic guidance. These patients were unsuitable candidates for endoscopic intervention because of esophageal stricture. Primary placement of a mushroom-retained gastrostomy catheter was intended. The end points were technical success and complications after PRG as well as clinical outcomes and survival of the patients. These end points also were compared between the pre-chemoradiotherapy (pre-CRT) and post-CRT groups using the Chi square test, Fisher's exact test, and the Wilcoxon rank sum test. The survival rate was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. RESULTS All the patients had a successful PRG. The mushroom-tip gastrostomy catheter was primarily inserted in 77 patients (86.5 %) and finally achieved for all the patients. Complications occurred for 14 patients (15.7 %) including Dindo-Clavien classification grade 3 (1 catheter dislodgement), grade 2 (2 gastric hemorrhages), and grade 1 (7 skin infections and 4 oozing hemorrhages) complications. During the follow-up period (median, 6 months), 60 patients (67.4 %) died, giving a 12-month survival rate of 37.7 %. Gastrostomy removal was more common in the pre-CRT group (P = 0.011). The pre-CRT group had higher survival rates than the post-CRT group (P = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS Because PRG provided high technical success with limited complications, it can be used for patients with advanced esophageal cancer whose treatment plan involves multimodal therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Keitaro Sofue
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan. .,Department of Radiology, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Hyogo, Japan.
| | - Yoshito Takeuchi
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Masakatsu Tsurusaki
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.,Department of Radiology, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Hyogo, Japan
| | - Kentaro Shibamoto
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Noriaki Sakamoto
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.,Department of Radiology, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Hyogo, Japan
| | - Kazuhiro Kitajima
- Department of Radiology, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Hyogo, Japan
| | - Miyuki Sone
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Kazuro Sugimura
- Department of Radiology, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Hyogo, Japan
| | - Yasuaki Arai
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Milovanovic L, Kennedy SA, Chrea B, Midia M. Safety and Short-Term Complication Rates Using Single-Puncture T-Fastener Gastropexy. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2016; 27:898-904. [PMID: 27134109 DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2016.02.033] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/26/2015] [Revised: 02/24/2016] [Accepted: 02/28/2016] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To report a single operator's experience using a modified single-puncture gastrostomy technique deploying up to three nonabsorbable gastropexy anchors. MATERIALS AND METHODS A retrospective review of 69 consecutive patients undergoing gastrostomy, gastrojejunostomy, or jejunostomy tube insertion between March 2012 and January 2014 was performed. Technical success and 30-day local, major, and minor complication rates were assessed according to the Society of Interventional Radiology (SIR) Standards of Practice for Gastrointestinal Access. Procedure time was also recorded. RESULTS Primary technical success of the procedure was 98.6% (68/69). In one patient, the procedure was aborted because the stomach could not be safely accessed. Major complications occurred in one of 69 (1.4%) patients, minor complications occurred in 10 of 69 (13%) patients, and local complications occurred in three of 69 (4.3%) patients. Local complications consisted of redness and mild tenderness at the enteric access site. Mean procedure time was 5 minutes (range, 3.1-36 min). CONCLUSIONS Single-puncture, multianchor gastrostomy is a feasible technique for radiologically guided enteric access tube insertion with technical success and complication rates similar to conventional gastrostomy techniques. This technique could be considered when expeditious performance of a procedure is required.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lazar Milovanovic
- Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, 1200 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario L7P4V9, Canada
| | - Sean A Kennedy
- Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, 1200 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario L7P4V9, Canada
| | - Bopha Chrea
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
| | - Mehran Midia
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging, McMaster University, 1200 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario L7P4V9, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Allen JA, Chen R, Ajroud-Driss S, Sufit RL, Heller S, Siddique T, Wolfe L. Gastrostomy tube placement by endoscopy versus radiologic methods in patients with ALS: A retrospective study of complications and outcome. Amyotroph Lateral Scler Frontotemporal Degener 2013; 14:308-14. [DOI: 10.3109/21678421.2012.751613] [Citation(s) in RCA: 42] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022]
|