Direct Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Versus Radiological Gastrostomy in Patients Unable to Undergo Transoral Endoscopic Pull Gastrostomy

Safety and efficacy of stoma site selection in CT-guided percutaneous gastrostomy: a retrospective analysis

PURPOSE

To compare the safety and efficacy of CPG in the rectus abdominis and intercostal regions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study included 226 patients who underwent CPG at a single center, with the stoma placed in the rectus abdominis or intercostal region. Surgical outcomes and complications, such as pain and infection within 6 months postoperatively, were recorded.

RESULTS

The surgical success rate was 100%, and the all-cause mortality rate within 1 month was 0%. An intercostal stoma was placed in 56 patients; a rectus abdominis stoma was placed in 170 patients. The duration of surgery was longer for intercostal stoma placement (37.66 ± 14.63 min) than for rectus abdominis stoma placement (30.26 ± 12.40 min) (P = 0.000). At 1 month postsurgery, the rate of stoma infection was greater in the intercostal group (32.1%) than in the rectus abdominis group (20.6%), but the difference was not significant (P = 0.077). No significant difference was observed in the infection rate between the two groups at 3 or 6 months postsurgery (P > 0.05). Intercostal stoma patients reported higher pain scores during the perioperative period and at 1 month postsurgery (P = 0.000), but pain scores were similar between the two groups at 3 and 6 months postsurgery. The perioperative complication rates for intercostal and rectus abdominis surgery were 1.8% and 5.3%, respectively (P = 0.464), with no significant difference in the incidence of tube dislodgement (P = 0.514). Patient weight improved significantly at 3 and 6 months postoperatively compared to preoperatively (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Rectus abdominis and intercostal stomas have similar safety and efficacy. However, intercostal stomas may result in greater short-term patient discomfort.

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.