Technical success rate and safety of radiologically inserted gastrostomy versus percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in motor neuron disease patients undergoing: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy versus percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy for enteral feeding: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous radiological gastrostomy (PRG) and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) are minimally invasive gastrostomy techniques for individuals requiring prolonged enteral feeding. Recent meta-analyses concerning their efficacy and safety mainly included retrospective studies and yielded conflicting results. This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aimed to compare efficacy, safety, and procedure time between PRG and PEG for enteral feeding.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for eligible RCTs comparing PRG and PEG for enteral feeding through February 23, 2024. The primary outcome was technical success. The secondary outcomes were (1) adverse events (AEs), (2) mortality, and (3) procedure time. We used the random-effects model to calculate pooled risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) with corresponding 95% CIs for dichotomous and continuous outcomes, respectively.

RESULTS

Five RCTs with 544 patients (268 PRG and 276 PEG) were included. There was similar technical success (RR = 1.02; 95% CI = 0.98-1.05; I² = 35%; moderate certainty of evidence because of inconsistency), overall mortality (RR = 1.25; 95% CI = 0.63-2.47; I² = 47%; very low certainty of evidence because of inconsistency, indirectness, and imprecision), and overall AEs risk (RR = 1.06; 95% CI = 0.63-1.76; I² = 81%; low certainty of evidence because of inconsistency and imprecision) between the two groups. However, compared with PEG, the procedure time was longer in the PRG group (MD = 19.35 min; 95% CI = 0.95-37.75 min; I² = 98%; very low certainty of evidence because of inconsistency and imprecision).

CONCLUSION

PRG and PEG demonstrate similar efficacy and safety; however, the endoscopic technique may boast a shorter procedure time.

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.

Enteral tube feeding for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis/motor neuron disease

BACKGROUND

Maintaining adequate nutrition is critical for people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), also known as motor neuron disease (MND). Enteral tube feeding is offered to people experiencing difficulty swallowing (dysphagia) to prevent weight loss and aspiration pneumonia. Among the types of enteral tube feeding, percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is the typical procedure offered to people with ALS and will be mainly discussed here.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effectiveness of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy or other enteral tube feeding in people with ALS, compared to oral feeds without enteral tube feeding on: 1. survival; 2. nutritional status; 3. quality of life. To examine the incidence of minor and major complications of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and other enteral tube feeding procedures in people with ALS.

SEARCH METHODS

On 3 January 2020 and 6 February 2021, we searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE. Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP. We screened the results to identify randomized controlled studies on enteral tube feeding in ALS. We reviewed all references from the search in published articles to identify any additional references.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, and cross-over trials evaluating the effectiveness and complications of PEG or other enteral tube feeding placement in ALS.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We found no RCTs or quasi-RCTs comparing the effectiveness of enteral tube feeding versus oral feeds without enteral tube feeding.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There are no RCTs or quasi-RCTs to indicate whether enteral tube feeding is effective compared to continuation of oral feeding for any of the outcome measures. Such RCTs are very unlikely to be performed for ethical reasons. RCTs evaluating the effect of different enteral tube insertion techniques and timings of tube placement on survival and quality of life of people with ALS dysphagia are feasible and warranted.

An 8-year, single-centre experience of primary image-guided insertion of 'button' gastrostomy catheters: Technical and clinical results

INTRODUCTION

'Button' gastrostomy insertion is traditionally a two-step procedure with an initial longer gastrostomy tube inserted followed by placement of the shorter 'button' gastrostomy in 6 weeks when the track is mature. The aim of this study is to assess whether the placement of a Button gastrostomy de novo is a safe and effective method of radiologically inserted gastrostomy (RIG) insertion.

METHODS

Using our Picture Archive and Communication System (PACS) and electronic patient charts we identified all patients who underwent primary 'button' gastrostomy over an 8-year period with at least a 1-year follow-up period. We evaluated technical success rate, indications for insertion, major and minor complications, 30-day mortality and the number of exchanges performed.

RESULTS

Overall, 482 patients underwent a primary button RIG insertion during this period with an overall success rate of 97.1%. Indications for RIG insertion included neurological and neurosurgical disorders 236 (48.9%), head and neck malignancy 182 (37.8%), oesophageal malignancy 27 (5.6%) and other indications in 37 (7.7%). The mean age was 59.55 years (range 18-88 years) with 290 men (60.2%) and 192 women (39.8%). Major complications were recorded in 0.8% and minor complications in 1.7%. A 30-day mortality of 1% was identified (five patients), mortality was directly related to the RIG insertion in one patient (0.2%). A total of 65 exchanges/replacements took place over this period of time, with 33 (50.1%) due to 'inadvertent removal'.

CONCLUSION

Primary button RIG insertion is a procedure that has a high success rate and low morbidity and mortality. We believe it is a safe and effective alternative to deliver enteral nutrition.

Nutritional Management of Patients with Head and Neck Cancer-A Comprehensive Review

While surgical therapy for head and neck cancer (HNC) is showing improvement with the advancement of reconstruction techniques, the focus in these patients should also be shifting to supportive pre and aftercare. Due to the highly sensitive and anatomically complex region, these patients tend to exhibit malnutrition, which has a substantial impact on their recovery and quality of life. The complications and symptoms of both the disease and the therapy usually make these patients unable to orally intake food, hence, a strategy should be prepared for their nutritional management. Even though there are several possible nutritional modalities that can be administrated, these patients commonly have a functional gastrointestinal tract, and enteral nutrition is indicated over the parenteral option. However, after extensive research of the available literature, it seems that there is a limited number of studies that focus on this important issue. Furthermore, there are no recommendations or guidelines regarding the nutritional management of HNC patients, pre- or post-operatively. Henceforth, this narrative review summarizes the nutritional challenges and management modalities in this particular group of patients. Nonetheless, this issue should be addressed in future studies and an algorithm should be established for better nutritional care of these patients.

Percutaneous Radiologic Gastrostomy in Patients After Partial Gastrectomy: A Retrospective Study to Assess the Technical Feasibility of Postsurgical Remnant Stomach Access

PURPOSE

To evaluate the technical feasibility of percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy in patients after partial gastrectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study included 15 consecutive gastrectomized patients with attempted percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy at our institution between April 2014 and March 2021. When the stomach was sufficiently insufflated to distend below the left anterior subcostal margin, percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy with gastropexy was conventionally performed by the Seldinger technique. When the stomach was still highly positioned and/or overlaid by the other organs, some adjunctive maneuvers, such as hydro-displacement, intragastric balloon support, or cephalad oblique puncture or left intercostal puncture, were employed as modified gastrostomy. Ultrasonography or x-ray or computed tomography fluoroscopy was used for imaging guidance during the gastric puncture. Adequate tube placement was defined as technical success. Technical details, clinical outcomes, and complications were reviewed.

RESULTS

One patient underwent percutaneous radiologic jejunostomy instead of gastrostomy because safe gastric access could not be ensured. Seven patients underwent conventional gastrostomy; the other seven underwent modified gastrostomy with no gastropexy. The technical success rate was 100% (7/7) in the conventional group and 85.7% (6/7) in the modified group. The stomach was punctured under x-ray or computed tomography fluoroscopy for conventional gastrostomy. In contrast, the combination of various modalities was used for modified gastrostomy except for one failed case with unintentional transhepatic access. During a median follow-up of 108 days, no major complications occurred.

CONCLUSION

The adequate combination of multimodal imaging guidance and technical modifications could secure radiological creation of gastrostomy for the postsurgical stomach.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 4, Case Series.

Percutaneous gastrostomy in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a review

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) causes dysphagia and consequent poor nutrition. Sometimes enteral feeding is offered. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is currently the technique of choice for enteral nutrition of these patients. This systematic review addresses the role of PEG and other enteral feeding techniques in maintaining ALS patients' survival and quality of life and in identifying prognostic factors for survival, in order to optimize their usefulness. We also evaluated the mortality of enteral feeding in the first 30 days after each procedure and its complications. Studies were retrieved from Pubmed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases, using the relevant keywords, and by hand search. The inclusion criteria were prospective and retrospective designs of studies of people with clinically diagnosed ALS in whom gastrostomy or nasogastric enteral feeding were used in management, published in English. Studies with sample sizes <40, or which focused on a specific gastrostomy technique utilizing less than 30 subjects were excluded in order to avoid small sample bias. We conclude that PEG is safe and probably prolongs survival in non-malnourished ALS patients. However, older age at onset, marked loss of weight or reduced body mass index from symptomatic onset, and marked respiratory dysfunction negatively influence the outcome after PEG insertion. The currently available evidence does not meaningfully address the impact of PEG on quality of life in ALS. The literature about other enteral feeding techniques is insufficient for reliable conclusions. The optimum time for PEG insertion and preferences for specific gastrostomy techniques also require more investigation.

Per-oral image guided gastrojejunostomy insertion for levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel in Parkinson's disease is safe and may be advantageous

BACKGROUND

Procedural aspects and complications of gastrojejunostomy insertion are important considerations in the use of levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel therapy (LCIG) and may limit uptake. We describe our experience of using per-oral image guided gastrojejunostomy (PIG-J) which avoids the need for endoscopy and routine sedation in percutaneous endoscopic gastrojejunostomy (PEG-J) and allows more secure tube placement than radiologically inserted gastrojejunostomy techniques.

METHODS

We describe a case series of 32 patients undergoing PIG-J insertion for LCIG therapy in a single centre. Under local anaesthetic, a fluoroscopy-guided gastric puncture allows access for the guidewire which is then used to pull through the gastrostomy tube allowing for secure fixation, followed by placement of the gastrojejunal extension.

RESULTS

Between December 2015 to April 2020, 32/34 patients referred for PIG-J underwent this procedure successfully, 2 cases unsuccessful due to technical considerations. One patient developed delirium following successful implantation. Ten patients (31%) required a replacement tube due to blockage or displacement within the first 12 months of placement, including 2 patients who needed more than one replacement. Minor complications occurred in 10 other patients (31%), including infection (9 patients); a small haematoma not requiring intervention who later developed an infection (1 patient); and peri-stomal acid leakage (1 patient).

CONCLUSION

In summary, PIG-J insertion is safe with a similar complication rate to traditional PEG-J, well tolerated and effective for use in LCIG administration. This may widen access to LCIG for PD patients who may not be suitable or unable to tolerate PEG-J.

Radiologically Inserted Gastrostomy (RIG) at a Tertiary Center: Periprocedural Safety including Rationalization of Antibiotic Prophylaxis

Introduction Long-term percutaneous enteral nutrition forms an important part of treatment for patients with an inability to meet nutrient requirements orally. Radiologically inserted gastrostomy (RIG) is an alternative to the traditionally performed percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy technique. However, there is marked heterogeneity in the way that RIG is performed. In addition, the role for antibiotic prophylaxis during RIG insertion is not clearly established. This study aimed to assess the safety of RIG insertion using our technique including the role of antibiotics in RIG insertion.

Method Retrospective study over 5 years at a tertiary teaching hospital. Periprocedural or early complications within the first 2 weeks of the procedure were collected and correlated with the use of prophylactic antibiotics.

Results A total of 116 patients met the inclusion criteria. 18-French tube was used in 96.6%. Note that 58.6% of procedures were done with intravenous sedation. Prophylactic 1 g cefazolin was used in 70 patients with 1 case of infection. Procedures were performed without antibiotics in 46 patients with 3 infections, p = 0.20.

There were two major complications (1.7%) consisting of right gastric artery injury requiring embolization and gastric wall injury requiring laparotomy. There were 12 minor complications (10.3%) including 4 cases of infection, 3 of severe pain, 1 of minor bleeding, 2 of early dislodgement, and 2 of leak/bypass of gastric contents around the tube.

Conclusion The technique used for RIG insertion at our institution results in a low complication rate. In addition, this study shows no significant difference in early peristomal infection rate with the use of antibiotic prophylaxis.