Cargando…
Comparing open gastrostomy tube to percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube in heart transplant patients
INTRODUCTION: Impaired wound healing due to immunosuppression has led some surgeons to preferentially use open gastrostomy tube (OGT) over percutaneous gastrostomy tube (PEG) in heart transplant patients when long-term enteral access is deemed necessary. METHODS: The National Inpatient Sample (NIS)...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4840285/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27141303 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2016.03.023 |
_version_ | 1782428254588633088 |
---|---|
author | Ambur, Vishnu Taghavi, Sharven Jayarajan, Senthil Gaughan, John Toyoda, Yoshiya Dauer, Elizabeth Sjoholm, Lars Ola Pathak, Abhijit Santora, Thomas Goldberg, Amy J. |
author_facet | Ambur, Vishnu Taghavi, Sharven Jayarajan, Senthil Gaughan, John Toyoda, Yoshiya Dauer, Elizabeth Sjoholm, Lars Ola Pathak, Abhijit Santora, Thomas Goldberg, Amy J. |
author_sort | Ambur, Vishnu |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Impaired wound healing due to immunosuppression has led some surgeons to preferentially use open gastrostomy tube (OGT) over percutaneous gastrostomy tube (PEG) in heart transplant patients when long-term enteral access is deemed necessary. METHODS: The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database (2005–2010) was queried for all heart transplant patients. Those receiving OGT were compared to those treated with PEG tube. RESULTS: There were 498 patients requiring long-term enteral access treated with a gastrostomy tube, with 424 (85.2%) receiving a PEG and 74 (14.8%) an OGT. The PEG cohort had higher Charlson comorbidity Index (4.1 vs. 2.0, p = 0.002) and a higher incidence of post-operative acute renal failure (31.5 vs. 12.7%, p = 0.001). Post-operative mortality was not different when comparing the two groups (13.8 vs. 6.1%, p = 0.06). On multivariate analysis, while both PEG (OR: 7.87, 95%C.I: 5.88–10.52, p < 0.001) and OGT (OR 5.87, 95%CI: 2.19–15.75, p < 0.001) were independently associated with mortality, PEG conferred a higher mortality risk. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest reported study to date comparing outcomes between PEG and OGT in heart transplant patients. PEG does not confer any advantage over OGT in this patient population with respect to morbidity, mortality, and length of stay. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4840285 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-48402852016-05-02 Comparing open gastrostomy tube to percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube in heart transplant patients Ambur, Vishnu Taghavi, Sharven Jayarajan, Senthil Gaughan, John Toyoda, Yoshiya Dauer, Elizabeth Sjoholm, Lars Ola Pathak, Abhijit Santora, Thomas Goldberg, Amy J. Ann Med Surg (Lond) Original Research INTRODUCTION: Impaired wound healing due to immunosuppression has led some surgeons to preferentially use open gastrostomy tube (OGT) over percutaneous gastrostomy tube (PEG) in heart transplant patients when long-term enteral access is deemed necessary. METHODS: The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database (2005–2010) was queried for all heart transplant patients. Those receiving OGT were compared to those treated with PEG tube. RESULTS: There were 498 patients requiring long-term enteral access treated with a gastrostomy tube, with 424 (85.2%) receiving a PEG and 74 (14.8%) an OGT. The PEG cohort had higher Charlson comorbidity Index (4.1 vs. 2.0, p = 0.002) and a higher incidence of post-operative acute renal failure (31.5 vs. 12.7%, p = 0.001). Post-operative mortality was not different when comparing the two groups (13.8 vs. 6.1%, p = 0.06). On multivariate analysis, while both PEG (OR: 7.87, 95%C.I: 5.88–10.52, p < 0.001) and OGT (OR 5.87, 95%CI: 2.19–15.75, p < 0.001) were independently associated with mortality, PEG conferred a higher mortality risk. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest reported study to date comparing outcomes between PEG and OGT in heart transplant patients. PEG does not confer any advantage over OGT in this patient population with respect to morbidity, mortality, and length of stay. Elsevier 2016-03-19 /pmc/articles/PMC4840285/ /pubmed/27141303 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2016.03.023 Text en © 2016 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Original Research Ambur, Vishnu Taghavi, Sharven Jayarajan, Senthil Gaughan, John Toyoda, Yoshiya Dauer, Elizabeth Sjoholm, Lars Ola Pathak, Abhijit Santora, Thomas Goldberg, Amy J. Comparing open gastrostomy tube to percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube in heart transplant patients |
title | Comparing open gastrostomy tube to percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube in heart transplant patients |
title_full | Comparing open gastrostomy tube to percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube in heart transplant patients |
title_fullStr | Comparing open gastrostomy tube to percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube in heart transplant patients |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparing open gastrostomy tube to percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube in heart transplant patients |
title_short | Comparing open gastrostomy tube to percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube in heart transplant patients |
title_sort | comparing open gastrostomy tube to percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube in heart transplant patients |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4840285/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27141303 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2016.03.023 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT amburvishnu comparingopengastrostomytubetopercutaneousendoscopicgastrostomytubeinhearttransplantpatients AT taghavisharven comparingopengastrostomytubetopercutaneousendoscopicgastrostomytubeinhearttransplantpatients AT jayarajansenthil comparingopengastrostomytubetopercutaneousendoscopicgastrostomytubeinhearttransplantpatients AT gaughanjohn comparingopengastrostomytubetopercutaneousendoscopicgastrostomytubeinhearttransplantpatients AT toyodayoshiya comparingopengastrostomytubetopercutaneousendoscopicgastrostomytubeinhearttransplantpatients AT dauerelizabeth comparingopengastrostomytubetopercutaneousendoscopicgastrostomytubeinhearttransplantpatients AT sjoholmlarsola comparingopengastrostomytubetopercutaneousendoscopicgastrostomytubeinhearttransplantpatients AT pathakabhijit comparingopengastrostomytubetopercutaneousendoscopicgastrostomytubeinhearttransplantpatients AT santorathomas comparingopengastrostomytubetopercutaneousendoscopicgastrostomytubeinhearttransplantpatients AT goldbergamyj comparingopengastrostomytubetopercutaneousendoscopicgastrostomytubeinhearttransplantpatients |