Cargando…

Laparoscopic-Assisted Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Tube Placement

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is the most common way of placing a feeding tube. Sometimes PEG cannot be used to safely place a feeding tube, most commonly secondary to an inability to transilluminate the abdominal wall. Whereas open gastrostomy was previously necessary in suc...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lopes, Gustavo, Salcone, Mark, Neff, Marc
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3021284/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20529530
http://dx.doi.org/10.4293/108680810X12674612014662
_version_ 1782196361917104128
author Lopes, Gustavo
Salcone, Mark
Neff, Marc
author_facet Lopes, Gustavo
Salcone, Mark
Neff, Marc
author_sort Lopes, Gustavo
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is the most common way of placing a feeding tube. Sometimes PEG cannot be used to safely place a feeding tube, most commonly secondary to an inability to transilluminate the abdominal wall. Whereas open gastrostomy was previously necessary in such cases, laparoscopic-assisted percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (LAPEG) is a viable option and is reviewed here. METHODS: All patients referred for surgical feeding tube placement after unsuccessful PEG were considered for LAPEG. A diagnostic laparoscopy was performed to identify the reason for the failed PEG attempt. Additional ports were placed as needed for the retraction of organs and lysis of adhesions. The stomach was visualized, and the PEG was placed. RESULTS: Eight patients who underwent an unsuccessful PEG were taken to the operating room for LAPEG. All patients had successful LAPEG placement. No postoperative complications occurred. The most common reason identified for failed PEG attempt was adhesions followed by overlying organs. Average OR time was 32 minutes. CONCLUSION: When conventional PEG placement is not possible, LAPEG placement should be considered as a time efficient, minimally invasive alternative to open gastrostomy.
format Text
id pubmed-3021284
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-30212842011-02-17 Laparoscopic-Assisted Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Tube Placement Lopes, Gustavo Salcone, Mark Neff, Marc JSLS Scientific Papers BACKGROUND: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is the most common way of placing a feeding tube. Sometimes PEG cannot be used to safely place a feeding tube, most commonly secondary to an inability to transilluminate the abdominal wall. Whereas open gastrostomy was previously necessary in such cases, laparoscopic-assisted percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (LAPEG) is a viable option and is reviewed here. METHODS: All patients referred for surgical feeding tube placement after unsuccessful PEG were considered for LAPEG. A diagnostic laparoscopy was performed to identify the reason for the failed PEG attempt. Additional ports were placed as needed for the retraction of organs and lysis of adhesions. The stomach was visualized, and the PEG was placed. RESULTS: Eight patients who underwent an unsuccessful PEG were taken to the operating room for LAPEG. All patients had successful LAPEG placement. No postoperative complications occurred. The most common reason identified for failed PEG attempt was adhesions followed by overlying organs. Average OR time was 32 minutes. CONCLUSION: When conventional PEG placement is not possible, LAPEG placement should be considered as a time efficient, minimally invasive alternative to open gastrostomy. Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons 2010 /pmc/articles/PMC3021284/ /pubmed/20529530 http://dx.doi.org/10.4293/108680810X12674612014662 Text en © 2010 by JSLS, Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/), which permits for noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not altered in any way.
spellingShingle Scientific Papers
Lopes, Gustavo
Salcone, Mark
Neff, Marc
Laparoscopic-Assisted Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Tube Placement
title Laparoscopic-Assisted Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Tube Placement
title_full Laparoscopic-Assisted Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Tube Placement
title_fullStr Laparoscopic-Assisted Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Tube Placement
title_full_unstemmed Laparoscopic-Assisted Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Tube Placement
title_short Laparoscopic-Assisted Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Tube Placement
title_sort laparoscopic-assisted percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement
topic Scientific Papers
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3021284/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20529530
http://dx.doi.org/10.4293/108680810X12674612014662
work_keys_str_mv AT lopesgustavo laparoscopicassistedpercutaneousendoscopicgastrostomytubeplacement
AT salconemark laparoscopicassistedpercutaneousendoscopicgastrostomytubeplacement
AT neffmarc laparoscopicassistedpercutaneousendoscopicgastrostomytubeplacement