Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in head and neck cancer patients: indications, techniques, complications and results

Utility of prophylactic percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube in head and neck cancer patients undergoing concurrent chemoradiation: A prospective observational cohort

PURPOSE

The necessity of prophylactic percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PPEG) before concurrent chemoradiation (CCRT) in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients remains uncertain. We evaluated the utilization rate of PPEG tube. Weight changes and tube dependence were also assessed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective cohort study evaluated the utilization rate of PPEG tube in patients with newly diagnosed HNC undergoing CCRT. Baseline characteristics, nutrition status, and weight loss data were collected and compared between use and non-use groups.

RESULTS

110 patients (94.8%) used PPEG tube (70 fully-used and 40 partially-used groups). Non-users had a tendency to lose weight more than partially and fully-used groups; 9.13%, 3.42%, and 1.95%, respectively (p = 0.085). Fully-used group had significantly longer time of tube dependence than partially-used group, 7.0 months versus 4.9 months (p = 0.012). The type of PPEG tube use (full use or partial use) and presence of dysphagia were significantly related to tube dependence. The time ratio of tube dependence for partially-used patients versus fully-used patients was 0.82 (95% CI: 0.68-0.99) (p = 0.039). The time ratio for patients with symptoms of dysphagia was 1.29 (95% CI: 1.02-1.63) (p = 0.032). At the end of CCRT, 96.6% of patients agreed that PPEG tube was necessary.

CONCLUSION

We recommend PPEG for patients undergoing CCRT. Partial use of PPEG with continuous oral intake as tolerated is strongly encouraged to maintain weight, and to reduce risk of tube dependence. Future study to evaluate effective swallowing exercise is warranted.

Benefits of prophylactic percutaneous gastrostomy in patients with nasopharyngeal cancer receiving concurrent chemoradiotherapy: A multicenter analysis

PURPOSE

Prophylactic percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PPEG) is widely used for patients with head and neck cancer undergoing concurrent chemoradiation (CCRT). Nevertheless, the necessity of its use in patients with nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) is uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate the benefits of PPEG on prevention of weight loss and treatment tolerance in patients with NPC receiving CCRT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective multicenter chart review of 904 patients, 378 in the PPEG group and 526 in the non-PPEG group, was conducted. Baseline characteristics, weight loss, and treatment tolerance were analyzed and compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the mean baseline body mass index (BMI) between the groups. At the end of CCRT, no difference in weight loss was found between the 2 groups (non-PPEG group, 6.6%; PPEG group, 5.9%). Nonetheless, the subgroup analysis demonstrated that a baseline BMI < 18.5 kg/m² (underweight) and non-intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) technique were independent factors associated with prevention of weight loss by PPEG. More patients in the PPEG group were able to complete planned cycles of chemotherapy (73.3% vs. 49.0%, P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

Although the benefits of PPEG on prevention of weight loss were not observed for the entire cohort, we found a potentially protective effect of PPEG in some subgroups of patients. Additionally, PPEG significantly enhanced chemotherapy tolerance. Therefore, PPEG tube insertion should be strongly considered for patients with NPC receiving CCRT, particularly for underweight patients and those undergoing a non-IMRT technique.

Transnasal Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (T-PEG): An Alternative Approach to Conventional PEG Placement

Transnasal percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (T-PEG) is a novel endoscopic intervention for enteral nutrition. Peroral endoscopic gastrostomy is widely performed feeding procedure. However, it cannot be done in 4 to 7% of cases with head & neck malignancies. T-PEG is a safe and viable alternative procedure in those patients. T-PEG can be performed in patients with head and neck malignancies, malignant oropharyngeal obstruction, and trismus where oral endoscopy is not feasible.

Seeding of Gastrostomy Tube Site in Patient With Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Tongue: A Case Report

Enteral nutrition (EN) is a widely used therapeutic tool to provide nutrition support for patients with various clinical conditions, including different types of cancer. Head and neck cancers, often complicated by dysphagia, are among leading indications for enteral feeding. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy (PEJ) tubes are typically used to deliver EN. This article presents a case report of a young male with squamous cell carcinoma of the tongue. Unfortunately, he developed metastasis of his cancer at the right lateral side of the PEG placement site, requiring surgical resection of seeded growth at the PEG site. This rare complication can be challenging, as it requires a high index of suspicion to diagnose and can potentially limit nutrition support options. A number of theories have been proposed to explain seeding during PEG/PEJ placement, including direct repositioning of malignant cells during instrumentation. A specific placement technique has not been shown to be superior, as seeding was reported with all placement techniques. However, given the lack of statistically powerful studies to describe this entity, there are still gaps we need to explore to better understand seeding of feeding tubes and best practices around diagnosis and early treatment. EN continues to be an important part of caring for patients with cancer during active or palliative treatments. Understanding potential risks in the setting of cancer metastasis is beneficial to the patients and multidisciplinary teams involved. Early recognition of possible seeding of feeding tube sites is necessary to ensure subsequent timely surgical intervention.

Comparison between Percutaneous Gastrostomy and Self-Expandable Metal Stent Insertion for the Treatment of Malignant Esophageal Obstruction, after Propensity Score Matching

Background: The outcomes of the two procedures; self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) insertion and percutaneous gastrostomy (PG) feeding procedures, used in patients with malignant esophageal obstruction, are still controversial. We aimed to compare the outcomes between the two procedures, following propensity score (PS) matching. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 568 esophageal cancer patients who underwent SEMS insertion (stent group) or PG (gastrostomy group) at the Samsung Medical Center between January 1996 and December 2018. Procedures for reasons other than malignant obstruction were excluded. We analyzed the datasets after PS matching. Primary outcomes were the post-procedural nutritional status, and need for additional intervention (AI). The secondary outcome was overall survival (OS). Results: In a matched cohort, the gastrostomy group showed less decrease in albumin level after the procedure (−0.15 ± 0.57 vs. stent group; 0.41 ± 0.59, p = 0.021). The gastrostomy group required less need for, and number of, AIs (2.1% vs. stent group; 23.4%, p < 0.001 and 0.04 ± 0.25 vs. stent group; 0.31 ± 0.61, p < 0.001). After matching, there was no significant difference between the two groups in OS. However, PG was associated with OS based on multivariable analysis of the matched cohort (vs. stent group, hazard ratio 0.69, 95% confidence interval 0.5–0.95). Conclusions: PG tends to provide better post-procedure nutritional status than SEMS insertion in patients with malignant esophageal obstruction.

Feasibility, safety and outcome of endoscopic gastrostomy in patients with esophageal cancer

Introduction

Background and aims: esophageal cancer (EC) is an important health problem worldwide with high morbidity and mortality. EC patients are likely to develop malnutrition. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and safety of endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) feeding in EC cancer, and to identify risk factors associated with poor prognosis. Methods: a retrospective observational study was performed using records from EC patients referred for PEG. Age, gender, cancer histologic subtype, indication for gastrostomy, and mortality data were recorded. NRS 2002, body mass index (BMI), hemoglobin, serum albumin, transferrin and total cholesterol were collected at the day of PEG. An association between anthropometric, clinical and laboratorial data with patient survival was assessed. Results: data were obtained for forty-one EC patients (36 men and 5 women) aged 39-88 years (mean, 62 years). Gastrostomy was possible in all patients referred to PEG (27 patients selected for curative treatment and 14 patients for palliative nutrition). No major complications occurred. Mean survival after PEG was 18.1 months, and mortality rate at 3 months was 31.7 %. Most patients (34; 82.9 %) died under PEG feeding. Mean BMI was 21.3 kg/m2 and 14 patients (34.1 %) patients had low BMI. Serum albumin, transferrin and total cholesterol were low in 10 (24.4 %), 20 (48.8 %) and 18 (43.9 %) patients, respectively. Higher BMI (R = 0.30), serum albumin (R = 0.41) and transferrin (R = 0.47) tended to be positively correlated with survival (p < 0.005). Conclusions: PEG is a feasible and safe technique for enteral feeding in EC patients. Higher BMI, serum albumin and transferrin levels at admission predict a better outcome. Enteral feeding through PEG should be considered early in EC patients due to their higher risk of malnutrition, which is associated with shorter survival.

Metastasis to gastrostomy sites from upper aerodigestive tract malignancies: a systematic review and meta-analysis

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.

Tumor implantation following percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy insertion for head and neck and oesophageal cancer: Review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Because of publication bias, there is uncertainty about the true incidence of tumor seeding or implantation in patients with head and neck or oesophageal cancer undergoing percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) insertion.

METHODS

In order to obtain a more reliable estimate of risk, a systematic review was undertaken. Randomized or non-randomized studies and case reports were identified by electronic searching. A risk of bias assessment was carried out for each study.

RESULTS

Ninety-eight cases from 74 published case reports and 1 unpublished case were identified. Synchronous distant metastases were present in 37%. Analysis of case series (6192 patients) considered to carry a moderate risk of bias suggests an incidence of seeding after PEG insertion of 0.32%. Studies carrying a lower risk of bias indicate a risk of seeding closer to 1 in 2000.

CONCLUSION

The true risk of seeding after PEG insertion is probably less than 1 in 1000.

Prolonged Versus Short-Duration Use of Nasogastric Tubes in Patients with Head and Neck Cancer During Radiotherapy Alone or Combined Chemoradiotherapy

To compare safety and effectiveness of prolonged (>28 days) versus short duration (≤28 days) use of nasogastric tube for enteral nutrition and weight loss prevention during curative radiotherapy with or without concurrent chemotherapy or cetuximab for head and neck cancer patients. We performed a retrospective study and database review of all patients at our center, treated with radiotherapy for head and neck cancer receiving enteral nutrition by nasogastric tube. Type of treatment, weight and body mass index changes, and related complications (gastroesophageal reflux, pneumonia, ulcer, feeding tube obstruction, or dislocation) were documented. Comparison between patients with prolonged (>28 days, group A) and short duration (≤28 days, group B) of EN through nasogastric tube was performed. Data expressed as mean ± SD or median (min; max) values as appropriate, and analyzed by ANOVA repeated measures and Kaplan-Meier estimates. We identified 114 patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Among them, 10% were treated with radiotherapy alone, while 90% received concurrent chemotherapy or cetuximab. Ninety-four patients (82%, group A) had a nasogastric tube in place for a period >28 days and 20 (18%, group B) for ≤28 days during treatment. Patients were mainly men (86 patients, 75%), with a median age of 61 years (range 49-73) and advanced stage IV disease in most cases (87 patients, 76%) without differences between both groups (p = 0.53, 0.47, and 0.30, respectively). Treatment discontinuation did not occur within both groups. Fifty-six patients (49%) developed complications, without a significant difference between both groups (P = 0.23). Body weight and BMI changes did not differ during EN (-0.8 ± 4.5 and -0.3 ± 1.6), the oncological treatment (-5.3 ± 4.0 and -1.8 ± 1.4), or 6 months after the end of treatment (-0.6 ± 4.4 and -0.2 ± 1.5). Our findings suggest that prolonged enteral nutrition by nasogastric tube is safe and effective in preventing weight loss during curative radiotherapy or radio-chemotherapy for head and neck cancer.

Prospective experience of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tubes placed by otorhinolaryngologist-head and neck surgeons: safe and efficacious

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is often the treatment of choice in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients needing long-term nutritional support. Prospective studies on PEG tube placement in an otorhinolaryngologist service are lacking. At our hospital, otolaryngologist-head and neck (ORL-HN) surgeons-have performed PEG insertions for HNC patients since 2008. We prospectively analyzed 127 consecutive HNC patients who received their PEG tubes at the Department of Otorhinolaryngology-head and neck surgery, and evaluated the outcome of PEG tube insertions performed by ORL-HN surgeons. To compare time delays before and after, PEG placement service was transferred from gastrointestinal surgeons to ORL-HN surgeons, and we retrospectively analyzed a separate group of 110 HNC patients who had earlier received PEG tubes at the Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery. ORL-HN surgeons' success rate in PEG insertion was 97.6%, leading to a final prospective study group of 124 patients. Major complications occurred in four (3.2%): two buried bumper syndromes, one subcutaneous hemorrhage leading to an abscess in the abdominal wall, and one metastasis at the PEG site. The most common minor complication was peristomal granulomatous tissue affecting 23 (18.5%) patients. After the change in practice, median time delay before PEG insertion decreased from 13 to 10 days (P < 0.005). The proportion of early PEG placements within 0-3 days increased from 3.6 to 14.6% (P < 0.005). PEG tube insertion seems to be a safe procedure in the hands of an ORL-HN surgeon. Independence from gastrointestinal surgeons' services reduced the time delay and improved the availability of urgent PEG insertions.

Insertion of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy by head and neck surgeons: systematic review

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy to maintain nutrition in patients with cancer of the head and neck is increasingly being done by head and neck surgeons. We have reviewed published papers to assess the success rate of insertion and the incidence of complications.

The Decline of Tracheotomy among Otolaryngologists

Objective

To determine the trend of number of tracheotomies performed by otolaryngologists.

Study Design

Case series with chart review.

Setting

Tertiary referral center in central Pennsylvania.

Subjects

All patients undergoing tracheotomy between 2000 and 2013.

Methods

Data were gathered from billing records and operative reports to determine the service performing the tracheotomy. In addition, the surgical technique and indication for surgery were recorded. Negative binomial regressions were conducted to examine the number of tracheotomies performed by each specialty as a function of year.

Results

In 2000, 44% of tracheotomies were being performed by the otolaryngology service, compared with only 25% in 2013. This is a decline of 22% over time. Since 2000, general surgery steadily increased the number of tracheotomies performed in comparison to the steady decrease performed by otolaryngology. Since 2008, general surgeons have significantly increased the number of percutaneous tracheotomies they perform (76% per year). Over the same period, the number of tracheotomies performed by the cardiothoracic surgery service has steadily increased by 26% per year. Most of the tracheotomies performed by cardiothoracic surgery are percutaneous tracheotomies.

Conclusion

This study illustrates that otolaryngologists at our institution are performing fewer tracheotomies over time. If this trend continues, the experience of our trainees may become diluted through reduction in surgical volume. While multi-institutional studies are warranted, this review provides a summary of data collected at a tertiary care institution, which may reflect national trends.

Head and neck cancer patients' perceptions of quality of life and how it is affected by the disease and enteral tube feeding during treatment

AIM

To explore individual quality of life in patients with head and neck cancer from diagnosis up to 3 months after termination of radiotherapy.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1) Which areas in life are important to quality of life, and which are influenced by the disease and by having oral or enteral nutrition; and 2) Which areas in life are influenced by having a nasogastric feeding tube (NGT) or a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube?

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Data were collected in 36 patients. Semi-structured interviews were conducted using an extended version of the Schedule for the Evaluation of Individual Quality of Life (SEIQoL) and analysed with content analysis.

RESULTS

Negative and positive experiences of quality of life in general were about relation to family, own health, and leisure activities. Negative impacts on physical, psychological, existential and social problems, but also positive experiences are described by the patients related to the disease. More than half expressed eating-related problems. Enteral nutrition entailed negative and positive experiences, and no greater variations were described by the patients with NGT or PEG tube. Overall, there were interindividual variations.

CONCLUSIONS

The patients' perception of general or disease-related quality of life was not affected by whether they had enteral nutrition or not. From the patients' perspective neither of the two feeding tubes (NGT or PEG) was clearly in favour. We suggest that more studies are needed on how the choice of enteral feeding tube can be evidence-based, and incorporating the patients' perspective.

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement by otorhinolaryngologist-head and neck surgeons

CONCLUSION

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube placement by an otorhinolaryngologist-head and neck surgeon is a feasible procedure with logistical advantages for the patient. Patient selection, co-morbidities, and the prognosis of the underlying disease are factors determining the outcome. Patient evaluation by a multidisciplinary team, with a gastroenterologist surgeon as a technical adviser, is proposed.

OBJECTIVE

PEG tube placement offers an alternative to enteral nutrition. We aimed to analyze complication rates after PEG tube placement in order to evaluate the changed management policy.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of complication rates in two patient cohorts with consecutive PEG tube placement at the Departments of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery (group I, n = 120) and Surgery (group II, n = 172) at Helsinki University Central Hospital, Helsinki, Finland. Data were collected on the patients' age, sex, preoperative condition, tumor site and stage, preoperative laboratory parameters, coexisting medical diagnoses, indication and date for PEG tube placement, complications, time of PEG use, follow-up time, and clinical status at the last follow-up.

RESULTS

The only baseline differences between the cohorts were a higher ASA classification and fewer prophylactic PEG tubes in group II. The rate of major complications was 7.5% in group I and 13.9% in group II; in group I the rate of minor complications was 25%, compared with 15% in group II; and the procedure-related mortality rate was 0.8% in group I and 0.5% in group II. The differences were not significant (p = 0.105-0.795).

Transnasal PEG tube placement in patients with head and neck cancer

BACKGROUND

Head and neck cancer (H&NCa) patients have an increased risk of malnutrition and dysphagia because of their malignancy and the adverse events of therapy. Most of these patients require gastrostomies. Four percent to 7% of H&NCa patients are unable to undergo per oral percutaneous gastrostomies. Transnasal endoscopy is an option for gastrostomy placement in selected patients.

OBJECTIVE

Clinical, epidemiologic characteristics and outcomes of transnasal PEG (t-PEG) placement.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis.

SETTING

Tertiary care hospital, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center.

PATIENTS

All patients who underwent t-PEG placement.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Epidemiology, adverse events, and outcomes of t-PEG placement.

RESULTS

Sixteen patients underwent t-PEG placement from January 2010 to May 2013. All patients had H&NCa and 56.3% had metastasis. Indications for the transnasal approach were airway compromise, malignant oropharyngeal obstruction, and trismus, among others. All procedures were successful using a 20F gastrostomy tube, push technique, anesthesiologist-guided propofol sedation, and/or nasotracheal intubation. Of all patients, 68.8% were white and 68.8% were men. Mean age was 54 years, and mean body mass index was 20.87. Two patients had a total of 2 adverse events: poor wound healing and wound site infection. Of all patients, 18.75% had leukopenia, 6.25% neutropenia, and 50% lymphopenia. Mean white blood cell count, absolute neutrophil count, and absolute lymphocyte count were 8.6 × 10(9)/L, 6.57 × 10(9)/L, and .93 × 10(9)/L, respectively. Eleven patients were alive, 2 were lost to follow-up, and 3 had died at the time of review.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective analysis, small cohort, patient selection bias.

CONCLUSION

t-PEG placement is a viable and safe option for H&NCa patients when the standard endoscopic approach is not feasible.

Metastatic carcinoma to percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube sites. A report of five cases

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the clinicopathologic features of metastatic carcinomas at percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube sites.

METHODS

We reviewed the metastatic malignancies at PEG tube sites (2002-2011).

RESULTS

Five patients were identified, each with primary head and neck keratinizing squamous cell carcinoma. The metastases had a mean size of 6.08 cm (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.75-8.41). The time from PEG tube placement to metastasis diagnosis was 9.8 months (95% CI, 6.59-13.01). The survival times from PEG tube placement and from metastasis diagnosis were 23.5 (95% CI, 7.65-39.35) and 13.7 (95% CI, 0-31.08) months, respectively. Compared with a meta-analysis of the largest case series, our male patients were significantly older (mean, 73 years; 95% CI, 62.2-83.9 vs mean 59 years, 95% CI, 56.0-62.0) but had similar survival times.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite their older ages, our male patients had similar survival times to those reported previously. Larger series are needed to confirm our findings and explore the causes.

Factors affecting duration of gastrostomy tube retention in survivors following treatment for head and neck cancer

Background:

Many patients treated for head and neck cancer require nutritional support, which is often delivered using a gastrostomy tube. It is difficult to predict which patients will retain their gastrostomy tube in the long term. This study aimed to identify the factors which affect the duration of gastrostomy tube retention.

Method:

In this retrospective study, 151 consecutive patients from one centre were audited. All patients had a mucosal tumour of the head and neck, and underwent gastrostomy tube insertion between 2003 and 2007.

Results:

There were near-complete data sets for 132 patients. The gastrostomy tube was retained in survivors (n = 66) for a mean of 21.3 months and in non-survivors (n = 66) for 11.9 months. Univariate analysis showed that co-morbidity was the only factor which significantly increased duration of gastrostomy tube retention in survivors (p = 0.041).

Conclusion:

Co-morbidity alone was associated with a significant increase in gastrostomy tube retention. It is suggested that co-morbidity be included as a variable in future relevant research. Co-morbidity should also be considered when counselling patients about their long-term function following cancer treatment. Gastrostomy tube retention is likely to be affected by many factors, with few single variables having importance independently.

Repeat PEG placement is safe for head and neck cancer patients

PURPOSE

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) provides durable nutritional access for head and neck (HNC) patients as they undergo treatment. Continuing treatment of HNC may necessitate repeat PEG placement. We report our outcomes with repeat PEG compared to first-time PEG in HNC patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective chart review identified morbidity, mortality, and possible risk factors for complications.

RESULTS

Repeat PEG tubes constituted 17% of PEG procedures. Morbidity was rare and similar complication rates were found between the initial PEG and repeat PEG groups (2% vs. 11%, p=0.131). There were no mortalities.

CONCLUSIONS

Repeat PEG plays an important role in the care of HNC patients and can be considered a safe means to establish durable enteric feeding access for patients with recurrent cancer or treatment complications.

Prophylactic percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in head and neck cancer patients: results of tertiary institute

To evaluate the use and complications of a prophylactic percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) in head and cancer patients in our institute. A retrospective study of 194 consecutive patients with a newly diagnosed upper aero digestive tract malignancy who underwent mainly prophylactic PEG tube placement. The procedure is relatively safe: 15 (7.7%) of the complications were considered serious; no deaths occurred. Of the patients 23 (12.5%) did not use the PEG tube at all, but it was not possible to single out a group of patients in which this could be predicted. The majority of the patients were considered to benefit from the prophylactic PEG insertion.

Single endoscopist-performed percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement

AIM: To investigate whether single endoscopist-performed percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is safe and to compare the complications of PEG with those reported in the literature.

METHODS: Patients who underwent PEG placement between June 2001 and August 2011 at the Baskent University Alanya Teaching and Research Center were evaluated retrospectively. Patients whose PEG was placed for the first time by a single endoscopist were enrolled in the study. PEG was performed using the pull method. All of the patients were evaluated for their indications for PEG, major and minor complications resulting from PEG, nutritional status, C-reactive protein (CRP) levels and the use of antibiotic treatment or antibiotic prophylaxis prior to PEG. Comorbidities, rates, time and reasons for mortality were also evaluated. The reasons for PEG removal and PEG duration were also investigated.

RESULTS: Sixty-two patients underwent the PEG procedure for the first time during this study. Eight patients who underwent PEG placement by 2 endoscopists were not enrolled in the study. A total of 54 patients were investigated. The patients’ mean age was 69.9 years. The most common indication for PEG was cerebral infarct, which occurred in approximately two-thirds of the patients. The mean albumin level was 3.04 ± 0.7 g/dL, and 76.2% of the patients’ albumin levels were below the normal values. The mean CRP level was high in 90.6% of patients prior to the procedure. Approximately two-thirds of the patients received antibiotics for either prophylaxis or treatment for infections prior to the PEG procedure. Mortality was not related to the procedure in any of the patients. Buried bumper syndrome was the only major complication, and it occurred in the third year. In such case, the PEG was removed and a new PEG tube was placed via surgery. Eight patients (15.1%) experienced minor complications, 6 (11.1%) of which were wound infections. All wound infections except one recovered with antibiotic treatment. Two patients had bleeding from the PEG site, one was resolved with primary suturing and the other with fresh frozen plasma transfusion.

CONCLUSION: The incidence of major and minor complications is in keeping with literature. This finding may be noteworthy, especially in developing countries.

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy for nutritional palliation of upper esophageal cancer unsuitable for esophageal stenting

CONTEXT

Esophageal cancer is often diagnosed at an advanced stage and has a poor prognosis. Most patients with advanced esophageal cancer have significant dysphagia that contributes to weight loss and malnutrition. Esophageal stenting is a widespread palliation approach, but unsuitable for cancers near the upper esophageal sphincter, were stents are poorly tolerated. Generally, guidelines do not support endoscopic gastrostomy in this clinical setting, but it may be the best option for nutritional support.

OBJECTIVE

Retrospective evaluation of patients with dysphagia caused advanced esophageal cancer, no expectation of resuming oral intake and with percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy for comfort palliative nutrition.

METHOD

We selected adult patients with unresecable esophageal cancer histological confirmed, in whom stenting was impossible due to proximal location, and chemotherapy or radiotherapy were palliative, using gastrostomy for enteral nutrition. Clinical and nutritional data were evaluated, including success of gastrostomy, procedure complications and survival after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy, and evolution of body mass index, albumin, transferrin and cholesterol.

RESULTS

Seventeen males with stage III or IV squamous cell carcinoma fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Mean age was 60.9 years. Most of the patients had toxic habits. All underwent palliative chemotherapy or radiotherapy. Gastrostomy was successfully performed in all, but nine required prior dilatation. Most had the gastrostomy within 2 months after diagnosis. There was a buried bumper syndrome treated with tube replacement and four minor complications. There were no cases of implantation metastases or procedure related mortality. Two patients were lost and 12 died. Mean survival of deceased patients was 5.9 months. Three patients are alive 6, 14 and 17 months after the gastrostomy procedure, still increasing the mean survival. Mean body mass index and laboratory parameters were roughly stable 1 and 3 months after the gastrostomy procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with advanced upper esophageal cancer where only palliative treatment is possible, nutritional support is easily achieved with percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy, allowing patients to be at homes, surviving a significant period of time. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy feeding should be considered as standard definitive nutritional palliation in patients with upper esophageal cancer, unsuitable for esophageal stenting.

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy complication rates and compliance with the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines for the management of antithrombotic therapy

BACKGROUND

The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) has published recommendations in regards to anticoagulant (AC) and antiplatelet (AP) therapy management during endoscopic procedures. So far, no study has assessed either ASGE recommendation compliance during percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) placement or procedure-associated complication rates as related to the observance of these recommendations. The aims of this study were to compare the incidence and type of complications during PEG placement in patients receiving or not receiving AC and/or AP therapy and to determine the compliance with ASGE's AC and AP management guidelines.

METHODS

Medical files of patients who underwent PEG placement from January 2004 to December 2008 were reviewed. Clinical and procedure-related data were recorded. Patients were separated into 1 of 2 groups: patients under AP and/or AC therapy prior to PEG placement (n = 51) and a control group of patients (n = 40) not receiving any AP and/or AC treatment at least 6 months prior to the procedure.

RESULTS

A total of 91 patients (51 cases) were included. Groups were comparable in demographics and clinical characteristics. No differences in the frequency and type of complications were found between groups. ASGE's recommendations were not followed in any of these patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall PEG placement complication rate was 13.7%. AP therapy may be safely discontinued closer to the time of endoscopic procedure than the time currently recommended by the ASGE guidelines.