Complications of percutaneous endoscopic and radiologic gastrostomy tube insertion: a KASID (Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Diseases) study

Iatrogenic vascular complications of non-vascular percutaneous abdominal procedures

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.

Percutaneous Gastrostomies: Associated Complications in PUSH vs. PULL Techniques over 12 Years in a Referral Centre

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.

Interdisciplinary Approach to Expedited Outpatient Gastrostomy Tube Placement in Head and Neck Cancer Patients: A Single Center Retrospective Study

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE

Treatment for head and neck cancer (HNC) can lead to decreased oral intake which often requires gastrostomy tube (g-tube) placement to provide nutritional support. A multidisciplinary team (MDT) consisting of interventional radiology (IR), HNC oncology and surgery, nutrition, and speech language pathology departments implemented an expedited outpatient g-tube placement pathway to reduce hospital stays and associated costs, initiate feeds sooner, and improve communication between care teams. This single center study investigates differences in complications, time to procedure and costs savings with implementing this pathway.

METHODS

142 patients with HNC who underwent elective image guided g-tube placement by IR from 2015 to 2022 were identified retrospectively. 52 patients underwent the traditional pathway, and 90 patients underwent the expedited pathway. Patient demographics, procedure characteristics, periprocedural costs and 90-day complication rates were collected and compared statistically.

RESULTS

The 90-day complication rate was comparable between groups (traditional=32.7%; expedited=22.2%; p-value=0.17). The expedited pathway decreased the time from consult to procedure by 11.1 days (95% CI 7.6 - 14.6; p < 0.001) and decreased charge per procedure by $2940 (95% CI $989-$4891; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

A MDT for the treatment of patients with HNC successfully provided enteral nutrition support faster, with fewer associated costs, and in a more patient centered approach than previously done at this institution.

Factors Associated With Short-Term Complications After Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Tube Insertion: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube placement is generally safe but is associated with a range of complications. Minor complications include infections, granuloma formation, leakage, and blockages, while major complications encompass aspiration pneumonia, hemorrhage, and more serious conditions such as necrotizing fasciitis and colonic fistula.

AIM

This study aimed to assess the rate of short-term complications within one month of endoscopic PEG insertion, focusing on their correlation with patient characteristics.

METHODOLOGY

This retrospective cohort study analyzed data from patients who underwent PEG insertion between January 2020 and December 2022. It evaluated the incidence of complications in relation to variables such as the indication for the procedure, the patient's immune status, albumin and CRP levels, and the setting of the procedure (inpatient vs. outpatient).

RESULTS

The study included 121 patients, with a mean age of 69.73 years, comprising 71 males (58.7%) and 50 females (41.3%). Neurological indications accounted for 64.5% of the cases. Notably, 67.8% of the patients were immunocompromised. Within 30 days of PEG insertion, 16.5% experienced complications, including GI bleeding (4.1%), infection at the PEG site (11.6%), and peritonitis (0.8%). Complications were significantly higher in immunocompromised patients and those with non-neurological indications. Higher serum albumin and lower CRP levels were associated with fewer complications, though the association was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

The study highlights that gastrostomy site infection is the most common short-term complication following PEG insertion. Immune status and the reason for PEG insertion emerged as key factors influencing the likelihood of complications.

Risk factors and natural history of bedside percutaneous endoscopic versus fluoroscopy-guided gastrostomy tubes in intensive care unit patients

INTRODUCTION

There is a paucity of literature comparing patients receiving bedside placed percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) versus fluoroscopic-guided percutaneous gastrostomy tubes (G-tube) in an intensive care unit (ICU) setting. This study aims to investigate and compare the natural history and complications associated with PEG versus fluoroscopic G-tube placement in ICU patients.

METHODS

All adult patients admitted in the ICU requiring feeding tube placement at our center from 1/1/2017 to 1/1/2022 with at least 12-month follow up were identified through retrospective chart review. Adjusting for patient comorbidities, hospital factors, and indications for enteral access, a 1-to-2 propensity score matched Cox proportional-hazards model was fitted to evaluate the treatment effect of bedside PEG tube placement versus G-tube placement on patient 1-year complication, readmission, and death rates. Major complications were defined as those requiring operative or procedural intervention.

RESULTS

This study included 740 patients, with 178 bedside PEG and 562 fluoroscopic G-tube placements. The overall rate of complication was 22.3% (13% PEG, 25.2% G-tube, P = 0.003). The major complication rate was 11.2% (8.5% PEG, 12.1% G-tube, P = 0.09). Most common complications were tube dysfunction (16.7% PEG; 39.4% G-tube; P = 0.04) and dislodgement (58.3% PEG; 40.8% G-tube). After propensity score matching, G-tube recipients had significantly increased risk for all-cause (HR 2.7, 95% CI 1.56-4.87, P < 0.001) and major complications (HR 2.11, 95% CI 1.05-4.23, P = 0.035). There were no significant differences in 1-year rates of readmission (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.58-1.38, P = 0.62) or death (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.70-1.44, P = 0.7).

CONCLUSIONS

The overall rate of complications for ICU patients requiring feeding tube in our cohort was 22.3%. ICU patients receiving fluoroscopic-guided percutaneous gastrostomy tube placement had significantly elevated risk of 1-year all-cause and major complications compared to those undergoing bedside PEG.

Gastrostomies: experience and complications with three modalities in a tertiary centre over a 26-year period

Objectives

To describe the complications associated with the different gastrostomy techniques [endoscopic (PEG), radiologic (PRG), and surgical (SG)] performed in the last 26 years in a terciary hospital.

Methods

Retrospective observational study. Patients who underwent gastrostomy at the Virgen del Rocío University Hospital between 1995 and 2021 were included. For PEG, the PULL technique was performed until 2018 and subsequently the PUSH technique predominantly. For PRG, a pigtail catheter was used until 2003, a balloon catheter between 2003 and 2009, and a balloon catheter with gastropexy between 2015 and 2021. For SG, the conventional technique (CSG) was performed until 2009 and since then the laparoscopic assisted percutaneous gastrostomy (PLAG) technique. Descriptive analysis was performed obtaining the median and quartiles of the quantitative variables [P50 (P25-P75)] and the frequency for the qualitative variables [n (%)].The comparison of complications between patients who underwent different techniques was performed with Fisher's test.

Results

n = 1,070 (PEG = 608, PRG = 344, SG = 118). The three most frequent indications were head and neck tumors, neurological diseases and gastroesophageal tumors. The percentage of patients who had any complication was 48.9% (PEG-PULL), 23.7% (PEG-PUSH), 38.5% (pigtail PRG), 39.2% (balloon PRG), 29.7% (balloon with gastropexy PRG), 87.3% (CSG), and 41.26% (PLAG). 2 (0.18%) patients died from gastrostomy-related complications. 18(1.68%) presented with peritonitis and 5 (0.4%) presented with gastrocolic fistula. The rest of the complications were minor.

Conclusion

Gastrostomy in any of its modalities is currently a safe procedure with a low rate of complications, most of which are minor.

Endoscopic vs radiologic gastrostomy for enteral feeding: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and percutaneous radiological gastrostomy (PRG) are minimally invasive techniques commonly used for prolonged enteral nutrition. Despite safe, both techniques may lead to complications, such as bleeding, infection, pain, peritonitis, and tube-related complications. The literature is unclear on which technique is the safest.

AIM

To establish which approach has the lowest complication rate.

METHODS

A database search was performed from inception through November 2022, and comparative studies of PEG and PRG were selected following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. All included studies compared the two techniques directly and provided absolute values of the number of complications. Studies with pediatric populations were excluded. The primary outcome of this study was infection and bleeding. Pneumonia, peritonitis, pain, and mechanical complications were secondary outcomes. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB2) and we used The Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies (ROBINS-I) to analyze the retrospective studies. We also performed GRADE analysis to assess the quality of evidence. Data on risk differences and 95% confidence intervals were obtained using the Mantel-Haenszel test.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies were included, including two randomized controlled trials and fifteen retrospective cohort studies. The total population was 465218 individuals, with 273493 having undergone PEG and 191725 PRG. The only outcome that showed a significant difference was tube related complications in retrospective studies favoring PEG (95%CI: 0.03 to 0.08; P < 0.00001), although this outcome did not show significant difference in randomized studies (95%CI: -0.07 to 0.04; P = 0.13). There was no difference in the analyses of the following outcomes: infection in retrospective (95%CI: -0.01 to 0.00; P < 0.00001) or randomized (95%CI: -0.06 to 0.04; P = 0.44) studies; bleeding in retrospective (95%CI: -0.00 to 0.00; P < 0.00001) or randomized (95%CI: -0.06 to 0.02; P = 0.43) studies; pneumonia in retrospective (95%CI: -0.04 to 0.00; P = 0.28) or randomized (95%CI: -0.09 to 0.11; P = 0.39) studies; pain in retrospective (95%CI: -0.05 to 0.02; P < 0.00001) studies; peritonitis in retrospective (95%CI: -0.02 to 0.01; P < 0.0001) studies.

CONCLUSION

PEG has lower levels of tube-related complications (such as dislocation, leak, obstruction, or breakdown) when compared to PRG.

A randomized trial comparing percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and radiologically inserted percutaneous gastrostomy (RIG)

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

At present, percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is the procedure of choice in establishing a permanent feeding tube in patients with chronic severe dysphagia. This is the first prospective randomized study in adults comparing PEG with radiologically inserted gastrostomy (RIG).

METHODS

Randomization of 106 patients, eligible for both techniques, to PEG (pull method) or RIG. The groups were comparable in terms of age, body mass index, and underlying diseases. Adverse events were reported 10 and 30 days after the operative procedure, and mortality was up until 6 months. The validated European Quality of life 5 Dimensions 3 level version (EQ-5D) questionnaire was used for health status measurements.

RESULTS

The procedures were successfully completed in all patients. The median operative time was 10 min for PEG and 20 min for RIG (p < 0.001). The overall rate of adverse events was lower for PEG (22%) than for RIG (51%, p = 0.002), mostly due to less local self-limiting stoma reactions and tube problems. The 30-day mortality was lower after PEG (2% versus 14%, p = 0.020). Patient-scored health status remained low for the entire cohort, with an EQ-5D utility index of 0.164. Self-rated health was low but improved in the RIG group (52.5 from 41.1, out of 100).

CONCLUSION

PEG can be recommended as the primary procedure in patients in need of a feeding gastrostomy, mainly due to a lower frequency of tube complications. However, as the two techniques complement each other, RIG is also a valid alternative method.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number ISRCTN17642761. https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN17642761.

Complications of Percutaneous Radiologic Gastrostomy Among Patients in a Tertiary Care Hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PRG) is the method of choice for patients incapable of ingesting nutrition orally. The complications related to PRG are classified into major and minor complications. This article presents the prevalence of major and minor complications of PRG among adult patients admitted to King Abdulaziz Medical City (KAMC) in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia between 2017 and 2018.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cross-sectional study, which included adult patients who underwent a new PRG intubation between 2017 and 2018 in KAMC in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The variables reviewed were the demographics, comorbidities, indications of tube insertion, major and minor complications, and mortality rates.

RESULTS

A total of 105 patients who underwent PRG were covered in this study with a mean age of 69.2 + 20.4 years. The most common indications were neurogenic pharyngeal dysphagia (31%) and dementia (29%). Most of the complications reported were minor (40%) and major complications were found in 2%. The percentage of patients with both minor and major complications was 37%. The patients who had no complications made up 21%. Major skin complication was reported in 19 patients (18%), while leakage was the most occurring minor complication found in 49 patients (47%). The 30-day mortality was observed in five patients (5%) and one-year mortality was observed in 21 patients (20%), and none of them were related to the PRG tube.

CONCLUSION

This study found that the PRG procedure had low rates of complications in KAMC. The majority were minor complications, and the mortality rate was low with none being related to the tube itself. So PRG may be considered to be a relatively safe procedure.

Outcomes and Complications of Radiological Gastrostomy vs. Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy for Enteral Feeding: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and percutaneous radiological gastrostomy (PRG) are commonly utilized to establish access to enteral nutrition. However, data comparing the outcomes of PEG vs. PRG are conflicting. Therefore, we aimed to conduct an updated systemic review and meta-analysis comparing PRG and PEG outcomes.

Methods

Medline, Embase, and Cochrane library databases were searched until February 24, 2023. Primary outcomes included 30-day mortality, tube leakage, tube dislodgement, perforation, and peritonitis. Secondary outcomes included bleeding, infectious complications, and aspiration pneumonia. All analyses were conducted using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Software.

Results

The initial search revealed 872 studies. Of these, 43 of these studies met our inclusion criteria and were included in the final meta-analysis. Of 471,208 total patients, 194,399 received PRG and 276,809 received PEG. PRG was associated with higher odds of 30-day mortality when compared to PEG (odds ratio (OR): 1.205, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.015 - 1.430, I² = 55%). In addition, tube leakage and tube dislodgement were higher in the PRG group than in PEG (OR: 2.231, 95% CI: 1.184 - 4.2 and OR: 2.602, 95% CI: 1.911 - 3.541, respectively). Perforation, peritonitis, bleeding, and infectious complications were higher with PRG than PEG.

Conclusion

PEG is associated with lower 30-day mortality, tube leakage, and tube dislodgement rates than PRG.

Role of Endoscopy in Management of Upper Gastrointestinal Cancers

Upper gastrointestinal (GI) malignancy is a leading cause of cancer-related morbidity and mortality. Upper endoscopy has an established role in diagnosing and staging upper GI cancers, screening for pre-malignant lesions, and providing palliation in cases of advanced malignancy. New advances in endoscopic techniques and technology have improved diagnostic accuracy and increased the therapeutic potential of upper endoscopy. We aim to describe the different types of endoscopic technology used in cancer diagnosis, summarize the current guidelines for endoscopic diagnosis and treatment of malignant and pre-malignant lesions, and explore new potential roles for endoscopy in cancer therapy.

Use of an intragastric trocar to perform a novel stapling procedure for reflux disease

Background and study aims  A percutaneous intragastric trocar (PIT) enables intraluminal use of laparoscopic tools and helps overcome traditional limitations of endoscopy. The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of using a PIT to perform an anti-reflux stapling procedure. Materials and methods  Trocars were placed in four animals and an articulating stapler was used to perform fundoplication under endoscopic guidance. Animals were monitored for 14 days post-procedure. Functional lumen imaging of the esophagogastric junction (EGJ) was performed at baseline, immediately post-intervention, and at 14 days. Results  The procedure was successful in all animals who survived to day 14 without distress or significant adverse events. Baseline EGJ distensibility was 5.0 ± 1.2 mm ² /mmHg, 2.7 ± 0.7 mm ² /mmHg post-procedurally, and 3.0 ± 0.8mm ² /mmHg on day 14. Average change in distensibility pre- and post-procedure was -2.3 ± 1.8 mm ² /mmHg (95 % confidence interval [CI] -0.5 to 5.1, P  = 0.08) while change in pre- and day 14 distensibility was -2.0 ± 1.4 mm ² /mmHg (95 % CI -0.1 to 4.2, P  = 0.06). Conclusions  An intragastric trocar allows for use of large-diameter laparoscopic instruments to safely and effectively perform endoluminal fundoplication with anti-reflux properties that persist for at least 14 days.

Percutaneous Radiology Gastrostomy (PRG)-Associated Complications at a Tertiary Hospital over the Last 25 Years

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.

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy and jejunostomy: Indications and techniques

Nutritional support is essential in patients who have a limited capability to maintain their body weight. Therefore, oral feeding is the main approach for such patients. When physiological nutrition is not possible, positioning of a nasogastric, nasojejunal tube, or other percutaneous devices may be feasible alternatives. Creating a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is a suitable option to be evaluated for patients that need nutritional support for more than 4 wk. Many diseases require nutritional support by PEG, with neurological, oncological, and catabolic diseases being the most common. PEG can be performed endoscopically by various techniques, radiologically or surgically, with different outcomes and related adverse events (AEs). Moreover, some patients that need a PEG placement are fragile and are unable to express their will or sign a written informed consent. These conditions highlight many ethical problems that become difficult to manage as treatment progresses. The aim of this manuscript is to review all current endoscopic techniques for percutaneous access, their indications, postprocedural follow-up, and AEs.

Gastrostomy tubes: Fundamentals, periprocedural considerations, and best practices

Gastrostomy tube placement is a procedure that achieves enteral access for nutrition, decompression, and medication administration. Preprocedural evaluation and selection of patients is necessary to provide optimal benefit and reduce the risk of adverse events (AEs). Appropriate indications, contraindications, ethical considerations, and comorbidities of patients referred for gastrostomy placement should be weighed and balanced. Additionally, endoscopist should consider either a transoral or transabdominal approach is appropriate, and radiologic or surgical gastrostomy tube placement is needed. However, medical history, physical examination, and imaging prior to the procedure should be considered to tailor the appropriate approach and reduce the risk of AEs.

OUP accepted manuscript

Percutaneous gastrostomy (PEG) tube placement is often the preferred approach to addressing nutritional deficits in patients requiring long-term feeding access. Numerous major and minor complications may occur with PEG tube insertion; buried bumper syndrome is a rare, long-term outcome of PEG tube placement, comprising <2.4% of complications. We present the case of a 60-year-old female with laryngeal cancer whom developed acute buried bumper syndrome after PEG tube insertion which was managed successfully with surgical intervention.

Comparative Safety of Endoscopic vs Radiological Gastrostomy Tube Placement: Outcomes From a Large, Nationwide Veterans Affairs Database

INTRODUCTION

A gastrostomy is generally performed in patients who are unable to maintain volitional intake of food. We compared outcomes of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and interventional radiologist-guided gastrostomy (IRG) using an integrated nationwide database.

METHODS

Using the VA Informatics and Computing Infrastructure database, patients who underwent PEG or IRG from 2011 through 2021 were selected using Current Procedural Terminology and International Classification of Diseases codes. The primary outcome was the comparative incidence of adverse events between PEG and IRG. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality. Comorbidities were identified using International Classification of Diseases codes, and adjusted odds ratio (OR) for adverse events were calculated using multivariate logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 23,566 (70.7 ± 10.2 years) patients underwent PEG and 9,715 (69.6 ± 9.7 years) underwent IRG. Selected frequent indications for PEG vs IRG were as follows: stroke, 6.8% vs 5.3%, P < 0.01; aspiration pneumonia, 10.9% vs 6.8%, P < 0.001; feeding difficulties, 9.8% vs 6.3%, P < 0.01; and upper aerodigestive tract malignancies 58.8% vs 79.8%, P < 0.01. Across all subtypes of malignancies of the head and neck and foregut, the proportion of patients undergoing IRG was greater than those undergoing PEG (P < 0.001). The all-cause 30-day mortality and overall incidence of adverse events were significantly lower for PEG compared with those for IRG (PEG vs IRG): all-cause 30-day mortality, 9.35% vs 10.3% (OR 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74-0.87; P < 0.01); perforation of the colon, 0.12% vs 0.24% (OR 0.50; 95% CI 0.29-0.86; P = 0.04); peritonitis, 1.9% vs 2.7% (OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.58-0.79; P < 0.01); and hemorrhage 1.6% vs 1% (OR 1.47; 95% CI 1.18-1.83; P < 0.01).

DISCUSSION

In a large nationwide database of more than 33,000 gastrostomy procedures, PEG was associated with a lower incidence of adverse outcomes and the 30-day mortality than IRG.

Laparoscopic-Percutaneous Combined Gastrostomy: Initial Experience and Description of a Technique

Background: Gastrostomy is a widely used procedure that aims to obtain access to the stomach. Its purpose may be feeding or gastric decompression. Currently, the most common techniques are endoscopic and radiologic. Sometimes, these accesses are not available due to technical or patient-specific factors. In these cases, laparoscopic and percutaneous approaches combined could be an option. The aim of this study was to describe a laparoscopic-percutaneous combined gastrostomy procedure, feasibility, and complications. Materials and Methods: Retrospective descriptive observational study. All patients underwent laparoscopic-percutaneous combined gastrostomy required for feeding or decompressive gastrostomy. We analyzed variables: demographics, surgical indication, operation time, hospitalization stay, success, and morbidity/mortality associated to the procedure. Results: A total of n = 17 patients were recruited (58.8% women and 41.2% men), with mean age of 53. Regarding the indications of laparoscopic-percutaneous combined gastrostomy, 47% were due to upper gastrointestinal/head and neck tumor, 29.4% stomach location in a retrocostal position, 17.7% colonic interposition, and 5.9% acute gastric dilation of remnant after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. The mean time of the procedure was 25 minutes, and mean hospitalization stay was 1.2 days. The success of the procedure was 100%. No complications and mortality associated with the procedure were reported. Conclusion: Laparoscopic-percutaneous combined gastrostomy is fast, feasible, safe, and cost effective. It is an option in patients where it is not possible to perform standard minimally invasive approaches.

Enteral tube feeding for people with severe dementia

BACKGROUND

The balance of benefits and harms associated with enteral tube feeding for people with severe dementia is not clear. An increasing number of guidelines highlight the lack of evidenced benefit and potential risks of enteral tube feeding. In some areas of the world, the use of enteral tube feeding is decreasing, and in other areas it is increasing.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of enteral tube feeding for people with severe dementia who develop problems with eating and swallowing or who have reduced food and fluid intake.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched ALOIS, the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's register, MEDLINE, Embase, four other databases and two trials registers on 14 April 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), or controlled non-randomised studies. Our population of interest was adults of any age with a diagnosis of primary degenerative dementia of any cause, with severe cognitive and functional impairment, and poor nutritional intake. Eligible studies evaluated the effectiveness and complications of enteral tube feeding via a nasogastric or gastrostomy tube, or via jejunal post-pyloric feeding, in comparison with standard care or enhanced standard care, such as an intervention to promote oral intake. Our primary outcomes were survival time, quality of life, and pressure ulcers.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors screened citations and two review authors assessed full texts of potentially eligible studies against inclusion criteria. One review author extracted data, which were then checked independently by a second review author. We used the 'Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies of Interventions' (ROBINS-I) tool to assess the risk of bias in the included studies. Risk of confounding was assessed against a pre-agreed list of key potential confounding variables. Our primary outcomes were survival time, quality of life, and pressure ulcers. Results were not suitable for meta-analysis, so we presented them narratively. We presented results separately for studies of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) feeding, nasogastric tube feeding and studies using mixed or unspecified enteral tube feeding methods. We used GRADE methods to assess the overall certainty of the evidence related to each outcome for each study.

MAIN RESULTS

We found no eligible RCTs. We included fourteen controlled, non-randomised studies. All the included studies compared outcomes between groups of people who had been assigned to enteral tube feeding or oral feeding by prior decision of a healthcare professional. Some studies controlled for a range of confounding factors, but there were high or very high risks of bias due to confounding in all studies, and high or critical risks of selection bias in some studies. Four studies with 36,816 participants assessed the effect of PEG feeding on survival time. None found any evidence of effects on survival time (low-certainty evidence). Three of four studies using mixed or unspecified enteral tube feeding methods in 310 participants (227 enteral tube feeding, 83 no enteral tube feeding) found them to be associated with longer survival time. The fourth study (1386 participants: 135 enteral tube feeding, 1251 no enteral tube feeding) found no evidence of an effect. The certainty of this body of evidence is very low. One study of PEG feeding (4421 participants: 1585 PEG, 2836 no enteral tube feeding) found PEG feeding increased the risk of pressure ulcers (moderate-certainty evidence). Two of three studies reported an increase in the number of pressure ulcers in those receiving mixed or unspecified enteral tube feeding (234 participants: 88 enteral tube feeding, 146 no enteral tube feeding). The third study found no effect (very-low certainty evidence).  Two studies of nasogastric tube feeding did not report data on survival time or pressure ulcers. None of the included studies assessed quality of life. Only one study, using mixed methods of enteral tube feeding, reported on pain and comfort, finding no difference between groups. In the same study, a higher proportion of carers reported very heavy burden in the enteral tube feeding group compared to no enteral tube feeding. Two studies assessed the effect of nasogastric tube feeding on mortality (236 participants: 144 nasogastric group, 92 no enteral tube feeding). One study of 67 participants (14 nasogastric, 53 no enteral tube feeding) found nasogastric feeding was associated with increased mortality risk. The second study found no difference in mortality between groups. The certainty of this evidence is very low. Results on mortality for those using PEG or mixed methods of enteral tube feeding were mixed and the certainty of evidence was very low. There was some evidence from two studies for enteral tube feeding improving nutritional parameters, but this was very low-certainty evidence. Five studies reported a variety of harm-related outcomes with inconsistent results. The balance of evidence suggested increased risk of pneumonia with enteral tube feeding. None of the included studies assessed behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence that tube feeding improves survival; improves quality of life; reduces pain; reduces mortality; decreases behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia; leads to better nourishment; improves family or carer outcomes such as depression, anxiety, carer burden, or satisfaction with care; and no indication of harm. We found some evidence that there is a clinically significant risk of pressure ulcers from enteral tube feeding. Future research should focus on better reporting and matching of control and intervention groups, and clearly defined interventions, measuring all the outcomes referred to here.

Comparing the Safety and Cost of Image-Guided Percutaneous Gastrostomy Tube Placement in the Outpatient Versus Overnight Observation Setting in a Single-Center Retrospective Study

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

Historically, patients undergoing image-guided percutaneous gastrostomy tube placement have been admitted overnight with feeds commencing 12-24 hours postprocedure. With new expedited feeding protocols starting 3-4 hours postprocedure, same-day discharge is now possible. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and cost of image-guided percutaneous gastrostomy tube placement as an outpatient procedure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this retrospective study, 131 patients (age 63.9 ± 11.6; 34% female) underwent gastrostomy tube placement as an outpatient procedure with expedited feeding protocol versus 40 patients (age 61.3 ± 12.6; 38% female) who were hospitalized overnight with feeds starting at 12-24 hours, primarily based on operator preference. The two groups were compared regarding complications within 90 days of procedure. Using a subgroup of 33 consecutive patients, procedural costs (total combined insurer and patient payments for professional and hospital services) for outpatients vs. hospitalized patients were compared.

RESULTS

Complication rates were similar (p = 0.64) for gastrostomy tubes placed on outpatients (0.17 complications/procedure: 4 bleeding, 2 aspiration pneumonia, 1 abdominal abscess, 4 significant pain, 6 cellulitis, 1 surgical consult, 4 malpositioned/fractured tubes) and hospitalized patients (0.20 complications/procedure: 1 aspiration pneumonia, 1 significant pain, 3 cellulitis, 1 surgical consult, 2 fractured tubes). Total combined insurer and patient payments were similar ($2193/outpatient vs $2701/hospitalized patient; p= 0.52).

CONCLUSION

Outpatient image-guided percutaneous gastrostomy tube placement with an expedited feeding protocol is a safe and cost-comparable alternative to historic overnight hospitalization. Further prospective investigation with a larger sample is warranted.

Safety of endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement compared with radiologic or surgical gastrostomy: nationwide inpatient assessment

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

A gastrostomy tube is often required for inpatients requiring long-term nutritional access. We compared the safety and outcomes of 3 techniques for performing a gastrostomy: percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG), fluoroscopy-guided gastrostomy by an interventional radiologist (IR-gastrostomy), and open gastrostomy performed by a surgeon (surgical gastrostomy).

METHODS

Using the Nationwide Readmissions Database, we identified hospitalized patients who underwent a gastrostomy from 2016 to 2017. They were identified using the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Procedure Coding System. The selected patients were divided into 3 cohorts: PEG (0DH64UZ), IR-gastrostomy (0DH63UZ), and open surgical gastrostomy (0DH60UZ). Adjusted odds ratios for adverse events associated with each technique were calculated using multivariable logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 184,068 patients meeting the selection criteria, the route of gastrostomy tube placement was as follows: PEG, 16,384 (53.7 ± 29.0 years); IR-gastrostomy, 154,007 (67.2 ± 17.5 years); and surgical gastrostomy, 13,677 (57.9 ± 24.3 years). Compared with PEG, the odds for colon perforation using IR-gastrostomy and surgical gastrostomy, respectively, were 1.90 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.26-2.86; P = .002) and 6.65 (95% CI, 4.38-10.12; P < .001), for infection of the gastrostomy 1.28 (95% CI, 1.07-1.53; P = .006) and 1.61 (95% CI, 1.29-2.01; P < .001), for hemorrhage requiring blood transfusion 1.84 (95% CI, 1.26-2.68; P = .002) and 1.09 (95% CI, .64-1.86; P = .746), for nonelective 30-day readmission 1.07 (95% CI, 1.03-1.12; P = .0023) and 1.13 (95% CI, 1.06-1.2; P = .0002), and for inpatient mortality 1.09 (95% CI, 1.02-1.17; P = .0114) and 1.55 (95% CI, 1.42-1.69; P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Placement of a gastrostomy tube (PEG) endoscopically is associated with a significantly lower risk of inpatient adverse events, mortality, and readmission rates compared with IR-gastrostomy and open surgical gastrostomy.

Laparoscopic vs open insertion of feeding gastrostomy tube in adults with head and neck cancers: A case-matched comparative study

BACKGROUND

Patients with head and neck cancers may require feeding tube gastrostomy (FTG) during their treatment. Surgical gastrostomy is indicated in patients who fail or unsuitable for endoscopic or radiologic FTG insertion.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of a novel laparoscopic technique to the insertion of feeding tube gastrostomy (FTG) in patients with head and neck cancer vs conventional open surgery.

METHODS

Patients were randomly matched on a 1:1 basis according to whether the procedure was therapeutic or prophylactic and whether a concomitant less major surgical procedure was required.

RESULTS

The groups (17 patients in each group) were comparable for age, sex distribution, ASA score, body mass index, serum albumin levels and the frequencies of previous upper abdominal surgery, hypoalbuminaemia and prior chemoradiotherapy and/or cancer surgery. There were no conversions to open surgery. No significant differences were detected between the groups with regard to the operating time (median, 40 vs 60 minutes, P = .053) and 30-day clinically significant morbidity (17.6% vs 23.5%, P = .180) or mortality (11.8% in each group). However, laparoscopy was associated with significantly shorter hospital stay (0 vs 2.8 days, P < .001) and greater proportion of day-case procedures (64.7% vs 0%, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic insertion of FTG is safe, can be performed as a day-case procedure, and is associated with shorter hospital stay compared with open surgery; it should be preferred over open surgery where local expertise exists.

Unplanned hospitalizations in patients with locoregionally advanced head and neck cancer treated with (chemo)radiotherapy with and without prophylactic percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy

BACKGROUND

Current studies about percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube placement report equivalent patient outcomes with prophylactic PEG tubes (pPEGs) versus common nutritional support. Unreported was if omitting a pPEG is associated with an increased risk of complications leading to a treatment-related unplanned hospitalization (TRUH).

METHODS

TRUHs were retrospectively analyzed in patients with advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (n = 310) undergoing (chemo)radiotherapy with (pPEG) or without PEG (nPEG).

RESULTS

In 88 patients (28%), TRUH was reported. One of the leading causes of TRUH in nPEG patients was inadequate oral intake (n = 16, 13%), and in pPEG patients, complications after PEG tube insertion (n = 12, 10%). Risk factors for TRUH were poor performance status, tobacco use, and surgical procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Omitting pPEG tube placement without increasing the risk of an unplanned hospitalization due to dysphagia, dehydration or malnutrition, is an option in patients being carefully monitored. Patients aged > 60 years with hypopharyngeal carcinoma, tobacco consumption, and poor performance status appear at risk of PEG tube-related complications leading to an unplanned hospitalization.

Guidelines for gastrostomy tube placement and enteral nutrition in patients with severe, refractory hypoglycemia after gastric bypass

BACKGROUND

Postbariatric hypoglycemia (PBH) affects up to 38% of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) patients. Severe cases are refractory to diet and medications. Surgical treatments including bypass reversal and pancreatectomy are highly morbid and hypoglycemia often recurs. We have developed a highly effective method of treatment by which enteral nutrition administered through a gastrostomy (G) tube placed in the remnant stomach replaces oral diet: if done correctly this reverses hyperinsulinemia and hypoglycemia, yielding substantial health and quality of life benefits for severely affected patients.

OBJECTIVES

To provide clinical guidelines for placement of a G-tube to treat postRYGB hypoglycemia, including candidate selection, preoperative evaluation, surgical considerations, and post-RYGB management.

SETTING

Stanford University Hospital and Clinics.

METHODS

Based on our relatively large experience with placing and managing G-tubes for PBH treatment, an interdisciplinary task force developed guidelines for practitioners.

RESULTS

A team approach (endocrinologist, dietitian, surgeon, psychologist) is recommended. Appropriate candidates have a history of RYGB, severe hypoglycemia refractory to medical-nutrition therapy, and significantly affected quality of life. Preoperative requirements include education and expectation setting, determination of initial enteral feeding program, and establishing service with a home enteral provider. Close postoperative follow-up is needed to ensure success and may require adjustments in formula and mode/rate of delivery to optimize tolerance and meet nutritional goals. G-tube nutrition must fully replace oral nutrition to prevent hypoglycemia.

CONCLUSIONS

G-tube placement in the remnant stomach represents a relatively well-tolerated and effective treatment for severe, refractory hypoglycemia after RYGB.

Use of a Laparoscopic Witzel Gastrostomy Without Gastropexy in Bariatric and General Surgery

Background

Gastrostomy placement is the preferred means of long-term enteral feeding for patients who cannot eat by mouth. During laparoscopic gastrostomy, it is standard to perform gastropexy, apposing visceral and parietal peritoneum. In some settings, due to altered anatomy from prior surgery, direct apposition of the stomach to the abdominal wall is not possible. This study reports a series of cases where laparoscopic gastrostomy was performed via a Witzel approach without gastropexy.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was performed of all patients at a tertiary academic medical center who underwent Witzel gastrostomy without gastropexy over a 3-year period. In each case, an 18-French tube was placed into the fundus of the stomach and secured with a purse-string suture. A 5-cm serosalized Witzel tunnel was created around the tube using running silk suture. No gastropexy was performed.

Results

Six patients underwent 7 Witzel gastrostomy procedures. In three cases, patients had undergone prior major upper abdominal surgery where adhesive disease prevented gastropexy. In the other four cases, the patients had undergone prior gastric bypass with antecolic antegastric position of the roux limb. No patient suffered leak of gastric contents into the peritoneum, and there were no postoperative complications or mortality related to the gastrostomy.

Conclusion

In cases where enteral access is necessary, and where the stomach cannot reach the anterior abdominal wall for gastropexy due to prior surgeries, a Witzel gastrostomy without gastropexy is a safe option which resulted in no morbidity or mortality in our series.

Outcomes following percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy versus fluoroscopic procedures in the Medicare population

Background

In the United States, few high-quality manuscripts have directly compared the complication profiles of percutaneous endoscopic versus fluoroscopic gastrostomy. Thus, it is our goal to compare these 2 common procedures to better understand their efficacy and complication profiles.

Materials and Methods

A retrospective analysis of patient records from Medicare parts A/B from 2007 to 2012 was used to identify percutaneous fluoroscopic gastrostomy and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy procedures. Patient demographics were stratified by age, sex, comorbidities, and complications.

Results

A total of 258,641 patients were found to have either percutaneous fluoroscopic gastrostomy (26,477, 10.2%) or percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (232,164, 89.8%). Percutaneous fluoroscopic gastrostomy experienced greater rates for all complications queried. Multivariate analysis revealed that the percutaneous fluoroscopic gastrostomy cohort had statistically significant increased odds for short-term complications, such as ileus (odds ratio 1.4, 95% confidence interval 1.22–1.54), mechanical (odds ratio 2.4, 95% confidence interval 2.28–2.58), wound infection (odds ratio 1.4, 95% confidence interval 1.24–1.52), persistent fistula after tube removal (odds ratio 1.9, 95% confidence interval 1.78–2.12), and other complications (odds ratio 2.2, 95% confidence interval 2.03–2.37), and long-term complications, including abdominal wall pain (odds ratio 1.4, 95% confidence interval 1.33–1.44), wound infection (odds ratio 1.1, 95% confidence interval 1.01–1.15), and persistent fistula after tube removal (odds ratio 1.8, 95% confidence interval 1.72–1.87).

Conclusion

Gastrostomy tubes are more frequently being placed via percutaneous endoscopic and fluoroscopic methods. This study suggests that those undergoing fluoroscopic placement have higher odds of developing short- and long-term postoperative complications.

•

Fluoroscopic g-tubes have higher odds of developing short- and long-term complications.

•

Fluoroscopy has higher odds for abdominal wall pain and mechanical complications.

•

Hyperlipidemia, smoking, and hypertension are risk factors for abdominal wall pain.

MDCT evaluation of complications of percutaneous gastrostomy tube placement

Percutaneous gastrostomy tube placement is a commonly performed procedure to provide enteral alimentation to patients unable to tolerate oral feeds. Percutaneous gastrostomy is a relatively safe procedure, and serious complications like gastrointestinal bleeding, perforated viscus, and adjacent organ injury are rare. The most common complications after gastrostomy tube placement occur early and are usually minor. The purpose of this review article is to describe the techniques of percutaneous gastrostomy tube insertion and imaging protocol for gastrostomy tube evaluation, and describe the early, late, and anytime complications. The article will also illustrate very rare late complications of gastrostomy tube placement like gastro-hepatic fistula, gastro-colic fistula, buried bumper syndrome, and gastrostomy site hernia.

Prediction of risk of adverse events related to percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: a retrospective study

Background:

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is a popular method for long-term enteral feeding. Our aim was to determine potential risk factors for adverse events related to PEG, as well as consequent prolonged hospitalization.

Methods:

Data were retrospectively collected from the admission records of a tertiary center between July 2015 and June 2018. Possible predictors of the 3 following outcomes were evaluated: minor PEG-related adverse events, major PEG-related adverse events, and length of hospital stay. Data were tested for correlation using the Spearman coefficient and for association using Kruskal-Wallis tests for significance.

Results:

A total of 362 admissions involving 146 patients were included in the study. Of the admissions, 221 (61.0%) had only minor adverse events, 100 (27.6%) had only major adverse events, and 41 (11.3%) had both. Eighty (22.1%) had PEG-site infection and 128 (35%) had aspiration pneumonia. Serum albumin levels at presentation were negatively correlated with the length of hospitalization (P<0.001), which also differed between patients presenting with major and minor adverse events (P<0.001 and P=0.026). The Charlson comorbidity index was positively correlated with the duration of hospitalization (P<0.001). Higher index scores were found more among patients presenting with aspiration pneumonia (P=0.004) and lower scores were found among patients presenting with PEG site infection and inadvertent PEG removal compared with those presenting with a major complication (P<0.001).

Conclusion:

The patient’s general medical condition and nutritional status are the greatest risk predictors for developing adverse events related to their PEG feeding, as well as a consequent extended hospital stay.

[Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy]

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) was developed in 1980. Since that time this method has become preferable for long-term enteral nutrition. PEG is an effective and relatively safe procedure for enteral nutrition of patients with impaired enteral feeding. However, complications and mortality are also observed. Indications, contraindications and potential complications of PEG are reviewed in the article.