Cargando…
Percutaneous endoscopic versus radiologic gastrostomy for enteral feeding: a retrospective analysis on outcomes and complications
Background and study aims Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PRG) are techniques used for long-term enteral feeding. Our primary aim was to analyze procedure-related and 30-day mortality and complications between PEG and PRG in relation to indications...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG
2019
|
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6811353/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31673622 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-0953-1524 |
_version_ | 1783462460978626560 |
---|---|
author | Strijbos, Denise Keszthelyi, Daniel Gilissen, Lennard P. L. Lacko, Martin Hoeijmakers, Janneke G. J. van der Leij, Christiaan de Ridder, Rogier J. J. de Haan, Michiel W. Masclee, Ad A. M. |
author_facet | Strijbos, Denise Keszthelyi, Daniel Gilissen, Lennard P. L. Lacko, Martin Hoeijmakers, Janneke G. J. van der Leij, Christiaan de Ridder, Rogier J. J. de Haan, Michiel W. Masclee, Ad A. M. |
author_sort | Strijbos, Denise |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background and study aims Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PRG) are techniques used for long-term enteral feeding. Our primary aim was to analyze procedure-related and 30-day mortality and complications between PEG and PRG in relation to indications. Patients and methods A single-center retrospective analysis was performed thath included all adult patients receiving initial PEG (January 2008 until April 2016) and PRG (January 2010 until April 2016). Outcomes were mortality (procedure-related, 30-day), complications (early (≤ 30 days) and late) and success rates. Results A total of 760 procedures (469 PRG and 291 PEG) were analyzed. Most common indications were head and neck cancer (HNC), cerebrovascular accident (CVA) and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). Success rates for placement were 91.2 % for PEG and 97.1 % for PRG ( P = 0.001). Procedure-related mortality was 1.7 % in PEG and 0.4 % in PRG ( P = 0.113). The 30-day mortality was 10.7 % in PEG and 5.1 % in PRG ( P = 0.481 after multivariate logistic regression) CVA was associated with higher 30-day mortality, whereas ALS, higher body weight, and prophylactic placements in HNC were associated with lower rates. Tube-related complications were less frequent in PEG, both early (2.7 % vs. 26.4 %, P ≤ 0.001) and late (8.6 % vs. 31.5 %, P ≤ 0.001). The percentage of major complications and infections did not differ. Conclusions With respect to procedure-related and 30-day mortality, PEG and PRG compare equally. PRG had a higher procedural success rate. Tube-related complications and pain are less frequent after PEG compared to PRG. The choice for either PEG or PRG therefore should primarily be based on local facilities and expertise. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6811353 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | © Georg Thieme Verlag KG |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-68113532019-11-01 Percutaneous endoscopic versus radiologic gastrostomy for enteral feeding: a retrospective analysis on outcomes and complications Strijbos, Denise Keszthelyi, Daniel Gilissen, Lennard P. L. Lacko, Martin Hoeijmakers, Janneke G. J. van der Leij, Christiaan de Ridder, Rogier J. J. de Haan, Michiel W. Masclee, Ad A. M. Endosc Int Open Background and study aims Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PRG) are techniques used for long-term enteral feeding. Our primary aim was to analyze procedure-related and 30-day mortality and complications between PEG and PRG in relation to indications. Patients and methods A single-center retrospective analysis was performed thath included all adult patients receiving initial PEG (January 2008 until April 2016) and PRG (January 2010 until April 2016). Outcomes were mortality (procedure-related, 30-day), complications (early (≤ 30 days) and late) and success rates. Results A total of 760 procedures (469 PRG and 291 PEG) were analyzed. Most common indications were head and neck cancer (HNC), cerebrovascular accident (CVA) and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). Success rates for placement were 91.2 % for PEG and 97.1 % for PRG ( P = 0.001). Procedure-related mortality was 1.7 % in PEG and 0.4 % in PRG ( P = 0.113). The 30-day mortality was 10.7 % in PEG and 5.1 % in PRG ( P = 0.481 after multivariate logistic regression) CVA was associated with higher 30-day mortality, whereas ALS, higher body weight, and prophylactic placements in HNC were associated with lower rates. Tube-related complications were less frequent in PEG, both early (2.7 % vs. 26.4 %, P ≤ 0.001) and late (8.6 % vs. 31.5 %, P ≤ 0.001). The percentage of major complications and infections did not differ. Conclusions With respect to procedure-related and 30-day mortality, PEG and PRG compare equally. PRG had a higher procedural success rate. Tube-related complications and pain are less frequent after PEG compared to PRG. The choice for either PEG or PRG therefore should primarily be based on local facilities and expertise. © Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2019-11 2019-10-23 /pmc/articles/PMC6811353/ /pubmed/31673622 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-0953-1524 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License, which permits unrestricted reproduction and distribution, for non-commercial purposes only; and use and reproduction, but not distribution, of adapted material for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Strijbos, Denise Keszthelyi, Daniel Gilissen, Lennard P. L. Lacko, Martin Hoeijmakers, Janneke G. J. van der Leij, Christiaan de Ridder, Rogier J. J. de Haan, Michiel W. Masclee, Ad A. M. Percutaneous endoscopic versus radiologic gastrostomy for enteral feeding: a retrospective analysis on outcomes and complications |
title | Percutaneous endoscopic versus radiologic gastrostomy for enteral feeding: a retrospective analysis on outcomes and complications |
title_full | Percutaneous endoscopic versus radiologic gastrostomy for enteral feeding: a retrospective analysis on outcomes and complications |
title_fullStr | Percutaneous endoscopic versus radiologic gastrostomy for enteral feeding: a retrospective analysis on outcomes and complications |
title_full_unstemmed | Percutaneous endoscopic versus radiologic gastrostomy for enteral feeding: a retrospective analysis on outcomes and complications |
title_short | Percutaneous endoscopic versus radiologic gastrostomy for enteral feeding: a retrospective analysis on outcomes and complications |
title_sort | percutaneous endoscopic versus radiologic gastrostomy for enteral feeding: a retrospective analysis on outcomes and complications |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6811353/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31673622 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-0953-1524 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT strijbosdenise percutaneousendoscopicversusradiologicgastrostomyforenteralfeedingaretrospectiveanalysisonoutcomesandcomplications AT keszthelyidaniel percutaneousendoscopicversusradiologicgastrostomyforenteralfeedingaretrospectiveanalysisonoutcomesandcomplications AT gilissenlennardpl percutaneousendoscopicversusradiologicgastrostomyforenteralfeedingaretrospectiveanalysisonoutcomesandcomplications AT lackomartin percutaneousendoscopicversusradiologicgastrostomyforenteralfeedingaretrospectiveanalysisonoutcomesandcomplications AT hoeijmakersjannekegj percutaneousendoscopicversusradiologicgastrostomyforenteralfeedingaretrospectiveanalysisonoutcomesandcomplications AT vanderleijchristiaan percutaneousendoscopicversusradiologicgastrostomyforenteralfeedingaretrospectiveanalysisonoutcomesandcomplications AT deridderrogierjj percutaneousendoscopicversusradiologicgastrostomyforenteralfeedingaretrospectiveanalysisonoutcomesandcomplications AT dehaanmichielw percutaneousendoscopicversusradiologicgastrostomyforenteralfeedingaretrospectiveanalysisonoutcomesandcomplications AT mascleeadam percutaneousendoscopicversusradiologicgastrostomyforenteralfeedingaretrospectiveanalysisonoutcomesandcomplications |