Cargando…

‘Cut and push’ as an alternative to endoscopic retrieval of PEG type gastrostomy tubes

PURPOSE: Percutaneous Endoscopically placed Gastrostomy (PEG) tubes are frequently used in children. The traditional endoscopic method to remove/change the PEG device requires general anaesthesia in children. A minimally invasive alternative is the ‘Cut and Push’ method (C&P): avoiding the risks...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Claxton, Harry, Dick, Karen, Taylor, Rhoda, Allam, Maddie, Stedman, Francesca, Keys, Charlie, Hall, Nigel J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9885393/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36715765
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00383-023-05382-5
_version_ 1784879921859919872
author Claxton, Harry
Dick, Karen
Taylor, Rhoda
Allam, Maddie
Stedman, Francesca
Keys, Charlie
Hall, Nigel J.
author_facet Claxton, Harry
Dick, Karen
Taylor, Rhoda
Allam, Maddie
Stedman, Francesca
Keys, Charlie
Hall, Nigel J.
author_sort Claxton, Harry
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Percutaneous Endoscopically placed Gastrostomy (PEG) tubes are frequently used in children. The traditional endoscopic method to remove/change the PEG device requires general anaesthesia in children. A minimally invasive alternative is the ‘Cut and Push’ method (C&P): avoiding the risks/wait times of general anaesthesia and reducing resource burden. Data regarding the safety/effectiveness of C&P in children are lacking with concerns raised about the possibility of gastrointestinal obstruction. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all cases of PEG removal / change to button in children (< 18 years) between December 2020 and January 2022. Cases were identified from a prospectively maintained database and all cases of C&P included. Parents/carers were asked if the child had suffered any complications following C&P and if flange was visualised in stools. RESULTS: During the time period, 27 PEGs were either removed or changed to button via C&P. The average waiting time for C&P was 14.29 days, significantly shorter than the minimum 6-month waiting time for elective endoscopy. Our evaluation revealed no complications of C&P at median 70 days (range 25–301). In three cases the flange was visualised in the stool, at 2 days, 3 days and 5 weeks following C&P respectively. DISCUSSION: These data support the available literature suggesting C&P is an effective means to facilitate minimally invasive and prompt PEG removal/change to button in children. We recommend minimum weight and age parameters for this procedure and further evaluation of the safety and resource implications of this technique. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00383-023-05382-5.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9885393
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98853932023-01-30 ‘Cut and push’ as an alternative to endoscopic retrieval of PEG type gastrostomy tubes Claxton, Harry Dick, Karen Taylor, Rhoda Allam, Maddie Stedman, Francesca Keys, Charlie Hall, Nigel J. Pediatr Surg Int Original Article PURPOSE: Percutaneous Endoscopically placed Gastrostomy (PEG) tubes are frequently used in children. The traditional endoscopic method to remove/change the PEG device requires general anaesthesia in children. A minimally invasive alternative is the ‘Cut and Push’ method (C&P): avoiding the risks/wait times of general anaesthesia and reducing resource burden. Data regarding the safety/effectiveness of C&P in children are lacking with concerns raised about the possibility of gastrointestinal obstruction. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all cases of PEG removal / change to button in children (< 18 years) between December 2020 and January 2022. Cases were identified from a prospectively maintained database and all cases of C&P included. Parents/carers were asked if the child had suffered any complications following C&P and if flange was visualised in stools. RESULTS: During the time period, 27 PEGs were either removed or changed to button via C&P. The average waiting time for C&P was 14.29 days, significantly shorter than the minimum 6-month waiting time for elective endoscopy. Our evaluation revealed no complications of C&P at median 70 days (range 25–301). In three cases the flange was visualised in the stool, at 2 days, 3 days and 5 weeks following C&P respectively. DISCUSSION: These data support the available literature suggesting C&P is an effective means to facilitate minimally invasive and prompt PEG removal/change to button in children. We recommend minimum weight and age parameters for this procedure and further evaluation of the safety and resource implications of this technique. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00383-023-05382-5. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023-01-30 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC9885393/ /pubmed/36715765 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00383-023-05382-5 Text en © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2023, Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.
spellingShingle Original Article
Claxton, Harry
Dick, Karen
Taylor, Rhoda
Allam, Maddie
Stedman, Francesca
Keys, Charlie
Hall, Nigel J.
‘Cut and push’ as an alternative to endoscopic retrieval of PEG type gastrostomy tubes
title ‘Cut and push’ as an alternative to endoscopic retrieval of PEG type gastrostomy tubes
title_full ‘Cut and push’ as an alternative to endoscopic retrieval of PEG type gastrostomy tubes
title_fullStr ‘Cut and push’ as an alternative to endoscopic retrieval of PEG type gastrostomy tubes
title_full_unstemmed ‘Cut and push’ as an alternative to endoscopic retrieval of PEG type gastrostomy tubes
title_short ‘Cut and push’ as an alternative to endoscopic retrieval of PEG type gastrostomy tubes
title_sort ‘cut and push’ as an alternative to endoscopic retrieval of peg type gastrostomy tubes
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9885393/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36715765
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00383-023-05382-5
work_keys_str_mv AT claxtonharry cutandpushasanalternativetoendoscopicretrievalofpegtypegastrostomytubes
AT dickkaren cutandpushasanalternativetoendoscopicretrievalofpegtypegastrostomytubes
AT taylorrhoda cutandpushasanalternativetoendoscopicretrievalofpegtypegastrostomytubes
AT allammaddie cutandpushasanalternativetoendoscopicretrievalofpegtypegastrostomytubes
AT stedmanfrancesca cutandpushasanalternativetoendoscopicretrievalofpegtypegastrostomytubes
AT keyscharlie cutandpushasanalternativetoendoscopicretrievalofpegtypegastrostomytubes
AT hallnigelj cutandpushasanalternativetoendoscopicretrievalofpegtypegastrostomytubes