Percutaneous gastrostomy and gastrojejunostomy

Primary placement of low-profile or 'button' versus traditional balloon-retention radiologically inserted gastrostomy catheters in adults: a retrospective review

OBJECTIVE

De novo percutaneous placement of radiologically inserted low-profile or 'button-type' gastrostomy catheters (LPG) is infrequently reported in adults. This study compares the safety and clinical outcomes of primary percutaneous placement of LPG catheters and traditional balloon-retention gastrostomy catheters (TG) using image guidance at a single institution.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective, single-institution review comparing initial LPG and TG radiologically inserted catheter placements in a 36-month time period. The age, gender, indication, catheter type and method of anaesthesia of 139 consecutive initial gastrostomy placement procedures were recorded. Total catheter days without intervention, major and minor complications, reasons for reintervention, and procedure fluoroscopy times were compared.

RESULTS

During the 36-month study period, 61 LPG and 78 TG catheters were placed. Mean total catheter days prior to intervention was 137 days in the LPG group and 128 days in the TG group (p=0.70). Minor complications including cellulitis, pericatheter leakage and early catheter occlusion occurred in 4.9% (3/61) in the LPG group and 9% (7/78) in the TG group (p=0.5). Major complications including early catheter dislodgement and bleeding requiring transfusion (in one patient) occurred in 4.9% (3/61) in the LPG group and 7.7% (6/78) in the TG group (p=0.4). Procedure fluoroscopy time was lower in the LPG group (2.56 min) compared with the TG group (4.21 min) (p<0.005).

CONCLUSION

Primary placement of low-profile or 'button-type' gastrostomy catheters is technically feasible with a low complication rate similar to that of traditional radiologically inserted gastrostomy catheters.

Current trends and perspectives in interventional radiology for gastrointestinal cancers

Gastrointestinal (GI) cancers often require a multidisciplinary approach involving surgeons, endoscopists, oncologists, and interventional radiologists to diagnose and treat primitive cancers, metastases, and related complications. In this context, interventional radiology (IR) represents a useful minimally-invasive tool allowing to reach lesions that are not easily approachable with other techniques. In the last years, through the development of new devices, IR has become increasingly relevant in the context of a more comprehensive management of the oncologic patient. Arterial embolization, ablative techniques, and gene therapy represent useful and innovative IR tools in GI cancer treatment. Moreover, IR can be useful for the management of GI cancer-related complications, such as bleeding, abscesses, GI obstructions, and neurological pain. The aim of this study is to show the principal IR techniques for the diagnosis and treatment of GI cancers and related complications, as well as to describe the future perspectives of IR in this oncologic field.

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.

Complications of percutaneous gastrostomy and gastrojejunostomy tubes in children

Percutaneous feeding tubes are generally considered a safe option for enteral feeding and are widely used in children who require long-term nutritional support. However, complications are not infrequent and can range from bothersome to life-threatening. Radiologists should be familiar with the imaging appearances of potential complications for optimal patient care. In this review, we discuss radiologic appearances of common complications and less frequent but serious complications related to percutaneous feeding tubes. Additionally, as fluoroscopic feeding tube evaluation is often requested as the initial imaging study, we also discuss the fluoroscopic appearances of some uncommon complications.

Utility of pre-procedural CT and abdominal radiography before percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy placement

PURPOSE

To evaluate the utility of pre-procedural CT and abdominal radiography before percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy tube placement.

METHODS

A retrospective review of gastrostomy tube placements was conducted at a tertiary care radiology department. During the studied period, all percutaneous radiologic G-tube placements (PRG) at the institution required a pre-procedural abdominal CT. Whether the CT was interpreted to have an adequate window for PRG was recorded. The same patients with pre-procedural abdominal radiographs were also identified and retrospectively reviewed for the presence of satisfactory anatomy for PRG. Outcomes of tube placements were reviewed.

RESULTS

126 PRG requests were identified, all with abdominal CTs. 110 also had an abdominal radiograph. An adequate window for PRG was present in 83% of patients by CT and 73% by radiography. Of patients in whom it was attempted, 94% underwent successful PRG with a 7.4% minor complication rate. Of those refused for PRG based on CT, 9% had successful percutaneous endoscopic G-tube placement, resulting in a sensitivity of 98%. 97% of patients with satisfactory anatomy by radiograph underwent successful PRG. Of those with no window, 66% had a window by CT, and 94% in whom it was attempted had successful PRG placement. This resulted in a sensitivity of 77% for radiography. Concordance between CT and radiography was 73%.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-procedural CT interpretation is highly predictive of successful and uncomplicated PRG. Abdominal radiography also predicts successful PRG, but with a lower accuracy, limiting its utility as a pre-procedural exam.

Image guided percutaneous gastrostomy catheter placement: How we do it safely and efficiently

Gastrostomy tube is an effective and safe long-term feeding access that is well-tolerated by patients. The typical placement routes include surgical, endoscopic and interventional radiologic placement. In particular, percutaneous interventional radiologic gastrostomy (PIRG) has increasingly become the preferred method of choice in many practices. Although many PIRG techniques have been developed since the 1980s, there is still a paucity of evidence supporting the choice of a most-optimal PIRG technique. Hence, there is a large variation in institutional approach to PIRG. We are a large, quaternary academic institution with an extensive experience in PIRG. Therefore, we aim to present the “push” PIRG technique utilized in our institution, to review the current literature, to discuss the optimal choice of PIRG technique and to generate further interests in comparison studies.

Percutaneous transgastrostomic interventional radiology-operated endoscopy facilitates foreign body removal using rigid endobronchial forceps

Retained foreign bodies within the stomach and proximal small bowel may be problematic in patients with prior cerebrovascular injury or head, neck and esophageal malignancy, given the increased vulnerability of this patient population to complications from aspiration and increased difficulty of esophagogastroduodenoscopy in cases of tumoral obstruction. This article presents an alternative method for foreign body retrieval through an existing gastrostomy tract, which offers the benefits of fast procedure times, reduction in radiation dose and fluoroscopy time, and allows for safer retrieval of foreign bodies by using direct visualization. This technique may be performed entirely by interventional radiologists.

Bowel Obstruction: Decompressive Gastrostomies and Cecostomies

Over the past 30 years, image-guided placement of gastrostomies and cecostomies for gastrointestinal decompression has developed into a safe and effective treatment for symptomatic bowel obstruction. Gastrostomies and cecostomies relieve patient symptoms, can prevent serious complications such as colonic perforation, and may bridge patients to more definitive treatment for the underlying cause of obstruction. This article will review the history of decompressive gastrostomies and cecostomies as well as the indications, contraindications, technique, complications, and outcomes of these procedures.

A New Method for Laparoscopic Stamm Gastrostomy

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Many methods of laparoscopic gastrostomy have been described, but in the majority of these, purse-string sutures and fixation of the stomach to the abdominal wall are not performed simultaneously. In this study, we aim to present a new laparoscopic gastrostomy tube (GT) placement method developed in accordance with the classical Stamm method.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Intracorporeal purse-string suture is placed at the anterior wall of the stomach where the GT is intended to be placed. While purse-string sutures are being placed, in each bite, the needle is passed through from a loop thread prepared by extracorporeal and the two threads are suspended outside. The stomach is punctured with the hook cautery, the GT is inserted, and both threads are knotted outside the abdomen.

RESULTS

We prospectively placed GT by using our method in 16 patients with an average age of 5 years and most of them with neurological developmental delay. Fundoplication was performed in most of the cases in the same session. No complications were encountered.

CONCLUSIONS

Our method is a feasible approach for GT placement by the purse-string suturing and the fixation of the stomach to the abdominal wall without extending the port incision.

Intratumoral treatment with radioactive beta-emitting microparticles: a systematic review

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to review the role of radioactive microparticles (1-100 μm) for the treatment of solid tumors and provide a comprehensive overview of the feasibility, safety, and efficacy.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library (January 2017) by combining synonyms for the determinants "tumor," "injection," and "radionuclide." Data on injection technique, toxicity, tumor response, and survival were collected.

RESULTS

The search yielded 7271 studies, and 37 were included for analysis. Twelve studies were performed in human patients and 25 animal studies. The studies were heterogeneous in patient population, tumors, follow-up time, and treatment characteristics. The direct intratumoral injection of radioactive microparticles resulted in a response rate of 71% in a variety of tumors and uncomplicated procedures with high cumulative doses of >19,000 Gy were reported.

CONCLUSION

The large variety of particles, techniques, and treated tumors in the studies provided an important insight into issues concerning efficacy, safety, particle and isotope choice, and other concepts for future research. Animal studies showed efficacy and a dose response. Most studies in humans concluded that intratumoral treatment with radioactive beta-emitting microparticles is relatively safe and effective. Conflicting evidence about safety and efficacy might be explained by the considerable variation in the treatment characteristics. Larger particles had a better retention which resulted in higher anti-tumor effect. Leakage seems to follow the path of least resistance depending on anatomical structures. Subsequently, a grid-like injection procedure with small volume depots is advised over a single large infusion. Controlled image-guided treatment is necessary because inadequate local delivery and inhomogeneous dose distribution result in reduced treatment efficacy and in potential complications.

Complementary roles of interventional radiology and therapeutic endoscopy in gastroenterology

Acute upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding, enteral feeding, cecostomy tubes and luminal strictures are some of the common reasons for gastroenterology service. While surgery was initially considered the main treatment modality, the advent of both therapeutic endoscopy and interventional radiology have resulted in the paradigm shift in the management of these conditions. In this paper, we discuss the patient’s work up, indications, and complementary roles of endoscopic and angiographic management in the settings of gastrointestinal bleeding, enteral feeding, cecostomy tube placement and luminal strictures. These conditions often require multidisciplinary approaches involving a team of interventional radiologists, gastroenterologists and surgeons. Further, the authors also aim to describe how the fields of interventional radiology and gastrointestinal endoscopy are overlapping and complementary in the management of these complex conditions.

Fluoroscopy-guided jejunal extension tube placement through existing gastrostomy tubes: analysis of 391 procedures

PURPOSE

We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of fluoroscopically placed jejunal extension tubes (J-arm) in patients with existing gastrostomy tubes.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of 391 J-arm placements performed in 174 patients. Indications for jejunal nutrition were aspiration risk (35%), pancreatitis (17%), gastroparesis (13%), gastric outlet obstruction (12%), and other (23%). Technical success, complications, malfunctions, and patency were assessed. Percutaneous gastrostomy (PEG) tube location, J-arm course, and fluoroscopy time were correlated with success/failure. Failure was defined as inability to exit the stomach. Procedure-related complications were defined as adverse events related to tube placement occurring within seven days. Tube malfunctions and aspiration events were recorded and assessed.

RESULTS

Technical success was achieved in 91.9% (95% CI, 86.7%-95.2%) of new tubes versus 94.2% (95% CI, 86.7%-95.2%) of replacements (P = 0.373). Periprocedural complications occurred in three patients (0.8%). Malfunctions occurred in 197 patients (50%). Median tube patency was 103 days (95% CI, 71-134 days). No association was found between successful J-arm placement and gastric PEG tube position (P = 0.677), indication for jejunal nutrition (P = 0.349), J-arm trajectory in the stomach and incidence of malfunction (P = 0.365), risk of tube migration and PEG tube position (P = 0.173), or J-arm length (P = 0.987). A fluoroscopy time of 21.3 min was identified as a threshold for failure. Malfunctions occurred more often in tubes replaced after 90 days than in tubes replaced before 90 days (P < 0.001). A total of 42 aspiration events occurred (OR 6.4, P < 0.001, compared with nonmalfunctioning tubes).

CONCLUSION

Fluoroscopy-guided J-arm placement is safe for patients requiring jejunal nutrition. Tubes indwelling for longer than 90 days have higher rates of malfunction and aspiration.

ASPEN Safe Practices for Enteral Nutrition Therapy [Formula: see text]

Enteral nutrition (EN) is a valuable clinical intervention for patients of all ages in a variety of care settings. Along with its many outcome benefits come the potential for adverse effects. These safety issues are the result of clinical complications and of process-related errors. The latter can occur at any step from patient assessment, prescribing, and order review, to product selection, labeling, and administration. To maximize the benefits of EN while minimizing adverse events requires that a systematic approach of care be in place. This includes open communication, standardization, and incorporation of best practices into the EN process. This document provides recommendations based on the available evidence and expert consensus for safe practices, across each step of the process, for all those involved in caring for patients receiving EN.

CIRSE Standards of Practice Guidelines on Gastrostomy

PURPOSE

Surgical Gastrostomy has been around since the 19th century but in 1980 the first successful percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy was reported. A year later the first successful percutaneous gastrostomy was performed using fluoroscopic guidance. The technique for percutaneous insertion and the equipment used has been refined since then and it is now considered the gold standard for gastrostomy insertion. Here we present guidelines for image-guided enteral feeding tubes in adults.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

We performed a review and analysis of the scientific literature, other national and international guidelines and expert opinion.

RESULTS

Studies have shown fluoroscopic techniques have consistently higher success rates with lower rates of major complications than endoscopic techniques. However, the Achilles' heel of many fluoroscopic techniques is the requirement for smaller gastrostomy tube sizes resulting in them being more prone to blockages and thus requiring further intervention.

CONCLUSION

Radiological feeding tube insertion is a safe and effective procedure. Success rates are higher, and complication rates lower than PEG or surgical gastrostomy tube placement and innovative techniques for gastric and jejunal access mean that there are very few cases in which RIG is not possible. The principal weakness of radiologically inserted gastrostomies is the limitiation on tube size which leads to a higher rate of tube blockage. Per-oral image-guided gastrostomies have to an extent addressed this but have not been popularised. Currently many centres still consider endoscopic gastrostomies as the first line unless patients are too unwell to undergo this procedure or previous attempts have failed, in which case radioloically inserted gastrostomies are the technique of choice.

Retrograde gastrojejunostomy tube migration

Percutaneous enteral feeding tubes are placed about 250,000 times each year in the United States. Although they are relatively safe, their placement may be complicated by perforation, infection, bleeding, vomiting, dislodgment, and obstruction. There have been numerous reports of antegrade migration of gastrojejunostomy (G-J) tubes. We report a case of G-J tube regurgitation following protracted vomiting and discuss the management of this very rare entity.

Safety of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy after trauma laparotomy

BACKGROUND

Trauma patients frequently require long-term enteral access because of injuries to the head, neck, or gastrointestinal tract. Noninvasive methods for gastrostomy placement include percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and percutaneous radiographic gastrostomy (PRG). In patients with recent trauma laparotomy, PEG placement is felt to be relatively contraindicated because of the concerns about altered anatomy. We hypothesize that there is no increased rate of complications related to PEG placement in patients with trauma laparotomy compared with those without laparotomy provided that basic safety principles are followed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study evaluates all percutaneous gastrostomies (both PEG and PRG) placed in trauma patients admitted at a level I trauma center between January 1, 2007 and March 30, 2010. The electronic medical records of the 354 patients were reviewed through 30 days after procedure, and patients were further subdivided by the history of laparotomy. Statistical analysis was performed using Fisher exact test or two-tailed t-test, as appropriate.

RESULTS

In patients with no prior trauma laparotomy, successful PEG placement occurred in 92.2% of patients, the remainder underwent PRG placement. Of patients with prior trauma laparotomy, 82.4% had successful PEG placement. Two percent of attempted PEG placements failed in patients with no previous trauma laparotomy, whereas 11.8% failed in patients with recent trauma laparotomy. The overall complication rate was 2.0%, with no recorded complications in patients with trauma laparotomy before PEG placement.

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that surgeons should not consider recent trauma laparotomy a contraindication to PEG placement.

Gastrostomy site infections: dealing with a common problem

The most popular method of providing appropriate nutrition for large numbers of patients with swallowing difficulties is enteral feeding. However this treatment is not without complications, one of which is localized gastrostomy site infection. This is prevented initially by decolonisation of the oropharyngeal tract with antibiotic prophylaxis prior to insertion, and systemic antibiotics post insertion. Later complications include tracking infection, which is rare but can occur. Hypergranulation of the tissue can occur around the gastrostomy tube and this can become colonised or infected leading to further problems for the patient. A good gastrostomy site care pathway plan is required to maintain a healthy site and appropriate treatment required to minimize the infection risk.