Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
European Radiology
Erschienen in: European Radiology 11/2011

01.11.2011 | Interventional

Comparison of fluoroscopy-guided Pull-type Percutaneous Radiological Gastrostomy (Pull-type-PRG) with conventional Percutaneous Radiological Gastrostomy (Push-type-PRG): clinical results in 253 patients

verfasst von: Yang Yang, J. Schneider, C. Düber, M. B. Pitton

Erschienen in: European Radiology | Ausgabe 11/2011

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objectives

To analyze the clinical results and complications of fluoroscopy guided internal-external Pull-type percutaneous radiological gastrostomy (Pull-type-PRG) and conventional external-internal percutaneous radiological gastrostomy (Push-type-PRG).

Methods

A total of 253 patients underwent radiological gastrostomy between January 2002 and January 2010. Data were collected retrospectively from radiology reports, Chart review of clinical notes, procedure reports, discharge summaries and subsequent hospital visits. Statistical analysis was performed to compare the two methods for gastrostomy with respect to peri-interventional aspects and clinical results.

Results

128 patients received the Pull-type-PRG whereas the other 125 patients were served with the Push-type-PRG. Indications for gastrostomy were similar in these two groups. The most frequent indications for the both methods were stenotic oesophageal tumors or head/neck tumors (54.7% in Pull-type-PRG, 68% in Push-type-PRG). Gastrostomy procedures were successful in 98.3% in Pull-type-PRG compared to 92% in Push-type-PRG. There was no procedure-related mortality. Compared to Push-type-PRG, the peri-interventional complication rate was significantly reduced in Pull-type-PRG (14.8% versus 34.4%, P = 0.002).

Conclusions

Compared to the external-internal Push-type-PRG, the internal-external Pull-type-PRG showed a high primary success rate and a decreased incidence of peri-interventional complications.
Literatur
1.
Wills JS, Oglesby JT (1983) Percutaneous gastrostomy. Radiology 149:449–453PubMed
2.
Ho CS (1983) Percutaneous gastrostomy for jejunal feeding. Radiology 149:595–596PubMed
3.
Ho CS, Yeung EY (1992) Percutaneous gastrostomy and transgastric jejunostomy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 158:251–257PubMed
4.
Halkier BK, Ho CS, Yee AC, Yee (1989) Percutaneous feeding gastrostomy with the Seldinger technique: review of 252 patients. Radiology 171:359–362PubMed
5.
Saini S et al (1990) Percutaneous gastrostomy with gastropexy: experience in 125 patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 154:1003–1006PubMed
6.
Preshaw RM (1981) A percutaneous method for inserting a feeding gastrostomy tube. Surg Gynecol Obstet 152:658–660PubMed
7.
Sane SS et al (1998) Percutaneous gastrostomy tube placement in patients with ventriculoperitoneal shunts. Pediatr Radiol 28:521–523PubMedCrossRef
8.
Szymski GX et al (1997) Radiologically guided placement of pull-type gastrostomy tubes. Radiology 205:669–673PubMed
9.
Pitton MB, Herber S, Dueber C (2008) Fluoroscopy-guided pull-through gastrostomy. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 31:142–148PubMedCrossRef
10.
Towbin RB, Ball WS, Bissett GS (1998) Percutaneous gastrostomy and percutaneous gastrojejunostomy in children: antegrade approach. Radiology 168:473–476
11.
Kuo YC et al (2008) Large or small bore, push or pull: a comparison of three classes of percutaneous fluoroscopic gastrostomy catheters. J Vasc Interv Radiol 19:557–563PubMedCrossRef
12.
13.
Gauderer MW, Ponsky JL, Izant RJ (1998) Gastrostomy without laparotomy: a percutaneous endoscopic technique. Nutrition 14:736–738PubMedCrossRef
14.
Given MF, Hanson JJ, Lee MJ (2005) Interventional radiology techniques for provision of enteral feeding. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 28:692–703PubMedCrossRef
15.
Stern JS (1986) Comparison of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy with surgical gastrostomy at a community hospital. Am J Gastroenterol 81:1171–1173PubMed
16.
Cosentini EP et al (1998) Outcomes of surgical, percutaneous endoscopic, and percutaneous radiologic gastrostomies. Arch Surg 133:1076–1083PubMedCrossRef
17.
Wollman B et al (1995) Radiologic, endoscopic, and surgical gastrostomy: an institutional evaluation and meta-analysis of the literature. Radiology 197:699–704PubMed
18.
Bell SD et al (1995) Percutaneous gastrostomy and gastrojejunostomy: additional experience in 519 procedures. Radiology 194:817–820PubMed
19.
de Baere T et al (1999) Percutaneous gastrostomy with fluoroscopic guidance: single- center experience in 500 consecutive cancer patients. Radiology 210:651–654PubMed
20.
Mildenberger P et al (1996) Radiologically assisted percutaneous gastro-/enterostomy–a retrospective analysis of 90 procedures. Rofo 165:74–79PubMed
21.
Dinkel HP et al (2002) Establishing radiological percutaneous gastrostomy with balloon- retained tubes as an alternative to endoscopic and surgical gastrostomy in patients with tumours of the head and neck or oesophagus. Br J Radiol 75:371–377PubMed
22.
Thornton FJ et al (2000) Percutaneous gastrostomy in patients who fail or are unsuitable for endoscopic gastrostomy. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 23:279–284PubMedCrossRef
23.
Silas AM et al (2005) Percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy versus percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: a comparison of indications, complications and outcomes in 370 patients. Eur J Radiol 56:84–90PubMedCrossRef
24.
Deurloo EE et al (2001) Percutaneous radiological gastrostomy in patients with head and neck cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 27:94–97PubMedCrossRef
25.
McLoughlin RF, So B, Gray RR (1996) Fluoroscopically guided percutaneous gastrostomy: current status. Can Assoc Radiol J 47:10–15PubMed
26.
Munk PL et al (1997) Percutaneous gastrostomy in radiological practice. Australas Radiol 41:342–350PubMed
27.
Walton GM (1999) Complications of percutaneous gastrostomy in patients with head and neck cancer–an analysis of 42 consecutive patients. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 81:272–276PubMed
28.
Qanadli SD et al (1999) Percutaneous gastrostomy for enteral nutrition: long-term follow-up of 176 procedures. Can Assoc Radiol J 50:260–264PubMed
29.
Neeff M et al (2003) Comparison of the use of endoscopic and radiologicl gastrostomy in a single head and neck cancer unit. ANZ J Surg 73:590–593PubMedCrossRef
30.
31.
Jain NK et al (1987) Antibiotic prophylaxis for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. A prospective, randomized, double-blind clinical trial. Ann Intern Med 107:824–828PubMed
32.
Akkersdijk WL et al (1995) Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: comparison of push and pull methods and evaluation of antibiotic prophylaxis. Endoscopy 27:313–316PubMedCrossRef
33.
Yip D, Vanasco M, Funaki B (2004) Complication rates and patency of radiologically guided mushroom gastrostomy, balloon gastrostomy, and gastrojejunostomy: a review of 250 procedures. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 27:3–8PubMedCrossRef
34.
Funaki B et al (2001) Comparison of balloon- and mushroom-retained large-bore gastrostomy catheters. AJR Am J Roentgenol 177:359–362PubMed
35.
Dewald CL et al (1999) Percutaneous gastrostomy and gastrojejunostomy with gastropexy: experience in 701 procedures. Radiology 211:651–656PubMed
36.
Gottschalk A et al (2007) CT-guided percutaneous gastrostomy: success rate, early and late complications. Rofo 179:387–395PubMed
37.
Maccabee D, Sheppard BC (2003) Prevention of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy stoma metastases in patients with active oropharyngeal malignancy. Surg Endosc 17:1678PubMedCrossRef
38.
Cruz I et al (2005) Incidence of abdominal wall metastasis complicating PEG tube placement in untreated head and neck cancer. Gastrointest Endosc 62:708–711PubMedCrossRef
39.
Douglas JG, Koh W, Laramore GE (2000) Metastasis to a percutaneous gastrostomy site from head and neck cancer: radiobiologic considerations. Head Neck 22:826–830PubMedCrossRef
40.
Koscielny S et al (2001) Abdominal wall metastases as a complication of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in carcinoma of the upper aerodigestive tract. Hno 49:392–395PubMedCrossRef
41.
Cappell MS (2007) Risk factors and risk reduction of malignant seeding of the percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy track from pharyngoesophageal malignancy: a review of all 44 known reported cases. Am J Gastroenterol 102:1307–1311PubMedCrossRef
42.
Hawken RMA et al (2005) Puncture-site metastasis in a radiologically inserted gastrostomy tube: case report and literature review. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 28:377–380PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Comparison of fluoroscopy-guided Pull-type Percutaneous Radiological Gastrostomy (Pull-type-PRG) with conventional Percutaneous Radiological Gastrostomy (Push-type-PRG): clinical results in 253 patients
verfasst von
Yang Yang
J. Schneider
C. Düber
M. B. Pitton
Publikationsdatum
01.11.2011
Verlag
Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in
European Radiology / Ausgabe 11/2011
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-011-2194-3

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 11/2011

European Radiology 11/2011 Zur Ausgabe

Chest

Organizing pneumonia: a kaleidoscope of concepts and morphologies

Breast

Does the degree of background enhancement in breast MRI affect the detection and staging of breast cancer?

Radiological Education

The abstract format of original articles: differences between imaging and non-imaging journals

Nuclear Medicine

Role of 68Ga-DOTATOC PET-CT in the diagnosis and staging of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours

Vascular-Interventional

Computed tomography angiography of the carotid arteries at low kV settings: a prospective randomised trial assessing radiation dose and diagnostic confidence

Head and Neck

PET-MRI in the head and neck area: challenges and new directions

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

Screening-Mammografie offenbart erhöhtes Herz-Kreislauf-Risiko

26.04.2024 Mammografie Nachrichten

Routinemäßige Mammografien helfen, Brustkrebs frühzeitig zu erkennen. Anhand der Röntgenuntersuchung lassen sich aber auch kardiovaskuläre Risikopatientinnen identifizieren. Als zuverlässiger Anhaltspunkt gilt die Verkalkung der Brustarterien.

S3-Leitlinie zu Pankreaskrebs aktualisiert

23.04.2024 Pankreaskarzinom Nachrichten

Die Empfehlungen zur Therapie des Pankreaskarzinoms wurden um zwei Off-Label-Anwendungen erweitert. Und auch im Bereich der Früherkennung gibt es Aktualisierungen.

Fünf Dinge, die im Kindernotfall besser zu unterlassen sind

18.04.2024 Pädiatrische Notfallmedizin Nachrichten

Im Choosing-Wisely-Programm, das für die deutsche Initiative „Klug entscheiden“ Pate gestanden hat, sind erstmals Empfehlungen zum Umgang mit Notfällen von Kindern erschienen. Fünf Dinge gilt es demnach zu vermeiden.

„Nur wer sich gut aufgehoben fühlt, kann auch für Patientensicherheit sorgen“

13.04.2024 Klinik aktuell Kongressbericht

Die Teilnehmer eines Forums beim DGIM-Kongress waren sich einig: Fehler in der Medizin sind häufig in ungeeigneten Prozessen und mangelnder Kommunikation begründet. Gespräche mit Patienten und im Team können helfen.

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen
Bildnachweise