Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy 3/2019

21.08.2018

Complications of percutaneous endoscopic and radiologic gastrostomy tube insertion: a KASID (Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Diseases) study

verfasst von: Soo-Kyung Park, Ji Yeon Kim, Seong-Joon Koh, Yoo Jin Lee, Hyun Joo Jang, Soo Jung Park, Small Intestine and Nutrition Research Group of the Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Diseases (KASID)

Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy | Ausgabe 3/2019

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

Gastrostomy tube insertion is beneficial to selected patients, and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and percutaneous radiological gastrostomy (PRG) are two of the frequently used methods in gastrostomy. This study aimed to investigate the indications and complications of both PEG and PRG.

Methods

This was a retrospective multicenter cohort study. Patients who underwent initial PEG or PRG tube insertion for nutritional purpose between January 2010 and December 2015 at five university hospitals were included in the study. We analyzed the indications and all complications related to gastrostomy, which were divided into the major (systemic or life-threatening) and minor (local and non-life-threatening) categories.

Results

A total of 418 patients who underwent PEG (n = 324) and PRG (n = 94) were reviewed. The indications for gastrostomy tube insertion were different and included mainly neurological disease (n = 240, 74.1%) such as cerebrovascular accident in the PEG group (n = 119, 36.7%) and mainly surgical disease (n = 28, 29.8%) such as head and neck cancer (n = 16, 17.0%) in the PRG group (p = 0.05). There were no differences in the minor (16.4% vs. 19.1%, p = 0.52) and major (12.3% vs. 14.9%, p = 0.51) complication rates between the PEG and PRG groups. The risk factors for complications were age [yearly increments; odds ratio (OR) 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01–1.06], tube diameter (1-Fr increments; OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.01–1.58), insertion time (1-min increments; OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.01–1.13), and neurological disease as the gastrostomy indication (vs. surgical disease; OR 4.61 95% CI 1.47–14.42).

Conclusions

In our study, both PEG and PRG provided a safe route for nutrition delivery despite their different indications. Our data suggest that PEG might be the procedure of choice for patients with medical or neurological disease and PRG for patients with surgical disease in whom PEG is technically difficult or contraindicated.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Lee SP, Lee KN, Lee OY, Lee HL, Jun DW, Yoon BC, Choi HS, Kim SH (2014) Risk factors for complications of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. Dig Dis Sci 59:117–125CrossRefPubMed Lee SP, Lee KN, Lee OY, Lee HL, Jun DW, Yoon BC, Choi HS, Kim SH (2014) Risk factors for complications of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. Dig Dis Sci 59:117–125CrossRefPubMed
2.
Zurück zum Zitat MacLean AA, Alvarez NR, Davies JD, Lopez PP, Pizano LR (2007) Complications of percutaneous endoscopic and fluoroscopic gastrostomy tube insertion procedures in 378 patients. Gastroenterol Nurs 30:337–341CrossRefPubMed MacLean AA, Alvarez NR, Davies JD, Lopez PP, Pizano LR (2007) Complications of percutaneous endoscopic and fluoroscopic gastrostomy tube insertion procedures in 378 patients. Gastroenterol Nurs 30:337–341CrossRefPubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Gramlich L, Kichian K, Pinilla J, Rodych NJ, Dhaliwal R, Heyland DK (2004) Does enteral nutrition compared to parenteral nutrition result in better outcomes in critically ill adult patients? A systematic review of the literature. Nutrition 20:843–848CrossRefPubMed Gramlich L, Kichian K, Pinilla J, Rodych NJ, Dhaliwal R, Heyland DK (2004) Does enteral nutrition compared to parenteral nutrition result in better outcomes in critically ill adult patients? A systematic review of the literature. Nutrition 20:843–848CrossRefPubMed
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Moller P, Lindberg CG, Zilling T (1999) Gastrostomy by various techniques: evaluation of indications, outcome, and complications. Scand J Gastroenterol 34:1050–1054CrossRefPubMed Moller P, Lindberg CG, Zilling T (1999) Gastrostomy by various techniques: evaluation of indications, outcome, and complications. Scand J Gastroenterol 34:1050–1054CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Wollman B, D’Agostino HB (1997) Percutaneous radiologic and endoscopic gastrostomy: a 3-year institutional analysis of procedure performance. AJR Am J Roentgenol 169:1551–1553CrossRefPubMed Wollman B, D’Agostino HB (1997) Percutaneous radiologic and endoscopic gastrostomy: a 3-year institutional analysis of procedure performance. AJR Am J Roentgenol 169:1551–1553CrossRefPubMed
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Thornton FJ, Varghese JC, Haslam PJ, McGrath FP, Keeling F, Lee MJ (2000) Percutaneous gastrostomy in patients who fail or are unsuitable for endoscopic gastrostomy. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 23:279–284CrossRefPubMed Thornton FJ, Varghese JC, Haslam PJ, McGrath FP, Keeling F, Lee MJ (2000) Percutaneous gastrostomy in patients who fail or are unsuitable for endoscopic gastrostomy. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 23:279–284CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat ProGas Study Group (2015) Gastrostomy in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ProGas): a prospective cohort study. Lancet Neurol 14:702–709CrossRefPubMedCentral ProGas Study Group (2015) Gastrostomy in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ProGas): a prospective cohort study. Lancet Neurol 14:702–709CrossRefPubMedCentral
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Blondet A, Lebigot J, Nicolas G, Boursier J, Person B, Laccoureye L, Aube C (2010) Radiologic versus endoscopic placement of percutaneous gastrostomy in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: multivariate analysis of tolerance, efficacy, and survival. J Vasc Interv Radiol 21:527–533CrossRefPubMed Blondet A, Lebigot J, Nicolas G, Boursier J, Person B, Laccoureye L, Aube C (2010) Radiologic versus endoscopic placement of percutaneous gastrostomy in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: multivariate analysis of tolerance, efficacy, and survival. J Vasc Interv Radiol 21:527–533CrossRefPubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Allen JA, Chen R, Ajroud-Driss S, Sufit RL, Heller S, Siddique T, Wolfe L (2013) Gastrostomy tube placement by endoscopy versus radiologic methods in patients with ALS: a retrospective study of complications and outcome. Amyotroph Lateral Scler Frontotemporal Degener 14:308–314CrossRefPubMed Allen JA, Chen R, Ajroud-Driss S, Sufit RL, Heller S, Siddique T, Wolfe L (2013) Gastrostomy tube placement by endoscopy versus radiologic methods in patients with ALS: a retrospective study of complications and outcome. Amyotroph Lateral Scler Frontotemporal Degener 14:308–314CrossRefPubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Rustom IK, Jebreel A, Tayyab M, England RJ, Stafford ND (2006) Percutaneous endoscopic, radiological and surgical gastrostomy tubes: a comparison study in head and neck cancer patients. J Laryngol Otol 120:463–466CrossRefPubMed Rustom IK, Jebreel A, Tayyab M, England RJ, Stafford ND (2006) Percutaneous endoscopic, radiological and surgical gastrostomy tubes: a comparison study in head and neck cancer patients. J Laryngol Otol 120:463–466CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Neeff M, Crowder VL, McIvor NP, Chaplin JM, Morton RP (2003) Comparison of the use of endoscopic and radiologic gastrostomy in a single head and neck cancer unit. ANZ J Surg 73:590–593CrossRefPubMed Neeff M, Crowder VL, McIvor NP, Chaplin JM, Morton RP (2003) Comparison of the use of endoscopic and radiologic gastrostomy in a single head and neck cancer unit. ANZ J Surg 73:590–593CrossRefPubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Eze N, Jefford JM, Wolf D, Williamson P, Neild P (2007) PEG and RIG tube feeding in Head and Neck patients: a retrospective review of complications and outcome. J Eval Clin Pract 13:817–819CrossRefPubMed Eze N, Jefford JM, Wolf D, Williamson P, Neild P (2007) PEG and RIG tube feeding in Head and Neck patients: a retrospective review of complications and outcome. J Eval Clin Pract 13:817–819CrossRefPubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Silas AM, Pearce LF, Lestina LS, Grove MR, Tosteson A, Manganiello WD, Bettmann MA, Gordon SR (2005) Percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy versus percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: a comparison of indications, complications and outcomes in 370 patients. Eur J Radiol 56:84–90CrossRefPubMed Silas AM, Pearce LF, Lestina LS, Grove MR, Tosteson A, Manganiello WD, Bettmann MA, Gordon SR (2005) Percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy versus percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: a comparison of indications, complications and outcomes in 370 patients. Eur J Radiol 56:84–90CrossRefPubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Santos PM, McDonald J (1999) Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: avoiding complications. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 120:195–199CrossRefPubMed Santos PM, McDonald J (1999) Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: avoiding complications. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 120:195–199CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Preclik G, Grune S, Leser HG, Lebherz J, Heldwein W, Machka K, Holstege A, Kern WV (1999) Prospective, randomised, double blind trial of prophylaxis with single dose of co-amoxiclav before percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. BMJ 319:881–884CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Preclik G, Grune S, Leser HG, Lebherz J, Heldwein W, Machka K, Holstege A, Kern WV (1999) Prospective, randomised, double blind trial of prophylaxis with single dose of co-amoxiclav before percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. BMJ 319:881–884CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Gossner L, Keymling J, Hahn EG, Ell C (1999) Antibiotic prophylaxis in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG): a prospective randomized clinical trial. Endoscopy 31:119–124CrossRefPubMed Gossner L, Keymling J, Hahn EG, Ell C (1999) Antibiotic prophylaxis in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG): a prospective randomized clinical trial. Endoscopy 31:119–124CrossRefPubMed
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Sturgis TM, Yancy W, Cole JC, Proctor DD, Minhas BS, Marcuard SP (1996) Antibiotic prophylaxis in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. Am J Gastroenterol 91:2301–2304PubMed Sturgis TM, Yancy W, Cole JC, Proctor DD, Minhas BS, Marcuard SP (1996) Antibiotic prophylaxis in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. Am J Gastroenterol 91:2301–2304PubMed
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Thornton FJ, Fotheringham T, Haslam PJ, McGrath FP, Keeling F, Lee MJ (2002) Percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy with and without T-fastener gastropexy: a randomized comparison study. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 25:467–471CrossRefPubMed Thornton FJ, Fotheringham T, Haslam PJ, McGrath FP, Keeling F, Lee MJ (2002) Percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy with and without T-fastener gastropexy: a randomized comparison study. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 25:467–471CrossRefPubMed
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Galaski A, Peng WW, Ellis M, Darling P, Common A, Tucker E (2009) Gastrostomy tube placement by radiological versus endoscopic methods in an acute care setting: a retrospective review of frequency, indications, complications and outcomes. Can J Gastroenterol 23:109–114CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Galaski A, Peng WW, Ellis M, Darling P, Common A, Tucker E (2009) Gastrostomy tube placement by radiological versus endoscopic methods in an acute care setting: a retrospective review of frequency, indications, complications and outcomes. Can J Gastroenterol 23:109–114CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadaten
Titel
Complications of percutaneous endoscopic and radiologic gastrostomy tube insertion: a KASID (Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Diseases) study
verfasst von
Soo-Kyung Park
Ji Yeon Kim
Seong-Joon Koh
Yoo Jin Lee
Hyun Joo Jang
Soo Jung Park
Small Intestine and Nutrition Research Group of the Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Diseases (KASID)
Publikationsdatum
21.08.2018
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Surgical Endoscopy / Ausgabe 3/2019
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6339-1

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2019

Surgical Endoscopy 3/2019 Zur Ausgabe

Update Chirurgie

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

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

CME: 2 Punkte

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

CME: 2 Punkte

Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht, PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske Das Webinar S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“ beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?

PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske
Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

CME: 2 Punkte

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.