Gastric metastases of oral carcinoma resulting from percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy placement via the introducer technique

Metastasis to the stomach: a systematic review

Background: This study reviews the literature on gastric metastases (GM) in terms of diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes. The goal of this study was to provide clinicians with a reliable and beneficial source to understand gastric metastases arising from various primary tumors and to present the growing literature in an easily accessible form. Methods: Articles published in English language from implementation of MEDLINE and Cochrane databases until May 2022 were considered for the systematic review. Articles other than English language, letters to the editor, posters, and clinical images were excluded. Hematogenous and lymphogenic metastases were included whereas direct tumoral invasion and seeding were excluded. Articles and abstracts were analyzed and last selection was done after cross-referencing and by use of defined eligibility criteria. Results: In total 1,521 publications were identified and 170 articles were finally included totaling 186 patients with GM. The median age of patients was 62 years. Gynecologic cancer was the most common cancer type causing GM (67 patients), followed by lung cancer (33 patients), renal cancer (20 patients), and melanoma (19 patients). One of the main treatment methods performed for metastasis was resection surgery (n=62), sometimes combined with chemotherapy (ChT) or immunotherapy. ChT was the other most used treatment method (n=78). Also, immunotherapy was amongst the most preferred treatment options after surgery and ChT (n=10). Conclusions: As 172 case reports were screened in the systematic review from different journals, heterogeneity was inevitable. Some articles missed important information such as complete follow-up or clinical information. Moreover, since all of the included articles were case reports quality assessment could not be performed. Among 172 case reports reviewed, resection surgery was performed the most and was sometimes combined with ChT and immunotherapy. Further research about what type of treatment has the best outcomes for patients with gastric metastases is needed.

Comparison of Pull and Introducer Techniques for Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy

Objective

To compare indications, success rates and complications of pull [P] and introducer [I] techniques for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG).

Methods

In this retrospective study, inpatients who underwent primary PEG tube insertion between January 2015 and February 2020 at the Endoscopy Center of the First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University were included.

Results

A total of 103 inpatients were included in this study (P group, n = 67; I group, n = 36). The rates of tube replacement within first six months in the P and I groups were 1.5% and 11.1%, respectively (P = 0.049). The most common primary indication of PEG was malignancy. The proportion of patients with esophageal cancer was significantly lower in the P group (24.4% vs 54.2%, P = 0.015). No significant difference was found in the overall, major, or minor complications between the two groups. In patients with esophageal stenosis, the pull method was a risk factor for complications (P = 0.03; odds ratio [OR] = 12, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.164–123.684). Logistic regression analysis showed that the risk factors for major and minor complications were the admission-to-gastrostomy interval (OR = 1.078, 95% CI: 1.016–1.145, P = 0.014) and lack of antibiotic use (OR = 4.735, 95% CI: 1.247–17.979, P = 0.022), respectively.

Conclusion

Both PEG techniques have high clinical success rates. The introducer technique is more suitable for patients with esophageal stricture, which has lower minor complications, but higher rate of tube replacement compared to the pull technique. Use of antibiotics may reduce minor complications following PEG. Early PEG insertion may help to reduce post-PEG major complications.

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

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Metastasis to the gastrostomy site in patients with upper aerodigestive tract (UADT) malignancies is a rare but devastating adverse event that has been poorly described. Our aim was to determine the overall incidence and clinicopathologic characteristics observed with development of gastrostomy site metastasis in patients with UADT cancers.

METHODS

This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of 6138 studies retrieved from Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Register after being queried for studies including gastrostomy site metastasis in patients with UADT malignancies.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 121 studies. Pooled analysis showed an overall event rate gastrostomy site metastasis of .5% (95% confidence interval [CI], .4%-.7%). Subgroup analysis showed an event rate of .56% (95% CI, .40%-.79%) with the pull technique and .29% (95% CI, .15%-.55%) with the push technique. Clinicopathologic characteristics observed with gastrostomy site metastasis were late-stage disease (T3/T4) (57.8%), positive lymph node status (51.2%), and no evidence of systemic disease (M0) (62.8%) at initial presentation. The average time from gastrostomy placement to diagnosis of metastasis was 7.78 ± 4.9 months, average tumor size on detection was 4.65 cm (standard deviation, 2.02), and average length of survival was 7.26 months (standard deviation, 6.23).

CONCLUSIONS

Gastrostomy site metastasis is a rare but serious adverse event that occurs at an overall rate of .5%, particularly in patients with advanced-stage disease, and is observed with a very poor prognosis. These findings emphasize a need for clinical practice guidelines to include a regular assessment of the PEG site and highlight the importance of detection and management of gastrostomy site metastasis by the multidisciplinary care oncology team.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Risk of tumor implantation in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in the upper aerodigestive tumors

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) has become a mainstay in providing enteral access for patients with obstructive head, neck and esophageal tumors. Tumor cell implantation is a rare complication in patients with aerodigestive cancers, who have undergone PEG tube placement. The objective of this review is to determine the incidence and contributing risk factors leading to the implantation of metastases into the abdominal wall following PEG placement. A comprehensive review of the literature in PUBMED (2008-2018) was performed. The literature search revealed reports of more than 50 cases of abdominal wall metastases after PEG placement. As most of these studies were case reports, the exact rate of metastasis remains unknown. Generally pharyngoesophageal location of primary cancer (100%), squamous cell histology (98%), poorly differentiated tumor cells (92%), advanced pathological stage (97%), and large primary cancer size were identified as strong risk factors for the development of stomal metastasis. Abdominal wall metastases following PEG placement are a rare but serious complication in patients with head and neck malignancy. (www.actabiomedica.it)

Usage characteristics and adverse event rates ​of the direct puncture and pull techniques for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in patients with malignant tumors of the upper aerodigestive tract

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

 Patients with malignant tumors of the upper gastrointestinal tract are at risk of weight loss. Early supportive nutrition therapy is therefore recommended and usually requires placement of a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG). The aim of this study was to compare adverse events and usage characteristics of the direct puncture technique with those of the traditional pull technique when used in patients with endoscopically passable tumors. The primary endpoint was the rate of inflammatory adverse events (AEs) at the gastrostomy fistula. The secondary endpoint was the long-term rate of puncture-site metastases.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

 One hundred twenty patients (median age 56; IQR 36, 86 years) were randomized and treated per protocol in this prospective open randomized single-center study. Follow-ups were conducted on the third and seventh post-interventional days, after 1, 3 and 6 months and the last follow-up 5 years after intervention.

RESULTS

 Within the short-term follow-up period of 6 months after PEG placement, AEs were noted in 47 patients (39.2 %). These included 22 inflammations and 16 device dislocations and were mainly found in the puncture group (33 vs. 14 in the pull group) with a significantly increased incidence in the first month after PEG insertion ( P  = 0.001). Evaluation of the 5-year data did not reveal any significant differences. The gastrostomy tube was used in 101 patients (84.2 %) (range 18 days to 5 years).

CONCLUSIONS

 Our results favor the pull technique for patients with endoscopically passable tumors of the upper gastrointestinal tract due to less short-term adverse events. Both systems contributed equally to secure long-term use.

Comparison of the pull and introducer percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy techniques in patients with head and neck cancer

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients is associated with higher complication and mortality rates when compared to a general patient population. The pull technique is still the preferred technique worldwide but it has some limitations. The aim of this study is to compare the pull and introducer PEG techniques in patients with HNC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study is based on a retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database of 309 patients with HNC who underwent PEG in the Cancer Institute of São Paulo.

RESULTS

The procedure was performed with the standard endoscope in 205 patients and the introducer technique was used in 137 patients. There was one procedure-related mortality. Age, sex and albumin level were similar in both groups. However in the introducer technique group, patients had a higher tumor stage, a lower Karnofsky status, and presented more frequently with tracheostomy and trismus. Overall, major, minor, immediate and late complications and 30-day mortality rates were similar but the introducer technique group presented more minor bleeding and tube dysfunctions.

CONCLUSION

The push and introducer PEG techniques seem to be both safe and effective but present different complication profiles. The choice of PEG technique in patients with HNC should be made individually.

When is feeding via a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy indicated?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review addresses current controversies regarding appropriate indications for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) insertion. We address specific indications, namely, dementia, stroke, aspiration, motor neurone disease/amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, and head and neck cancer. We recommend practical strategies for improving patient selection.

RECENT FINDINGS

There is now a general consensus in the United States that PEG feeding does not benefit patients with advanced dementia. 'Early' PEG insertion following stroke is similarly of no benefit. It is currently unclear whether patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and head and neck tumors should have PEG or radiologically inserted gastrostomy.

SUMMARY

Decisions relating to PEG insertion remain difficult. The gastroenterologist, working as a member of a multidisciplinary nutrition team, needs to take a lead role in this regard, rather than functioning as a technician.