Factors influencing gastrostomy tube removal.

BACKGROUND: When commencing enteral feeding, patients and families will want to know the likelihood of returning to an oral diet. There is a paucity of data on the prognosis of patients with gastrostomies. We describe a large dataset of patients, which identifies factors influencing gastrostomy removal and assesses the likelihood of the patient having at home enteral nutrition. METHODS: Retrospective data was collected on patients from Sheffield Teaching Hospitals who had received a gastrostomy and had outpatient enteral feeding between January 2016 and December 2019. Demographic data, indication and outcomes were analysed. RESULTS: A total of 451 patients were assessed, median age: 67.7. 183/451(40.6%) gastrostomies were for head and neck cancer, 88/451 (19.5%) for stroke, 28/451 (6.2%) for Motor Neuron Disease, 32/451 (7.1%) for other neurodegenerative causes, 120/451 (26.6%) other. Of the 31.2% who had their gastrostomy removed within 3 years, head and neck cancer was the most common indication (58.3%) followed by stroke (10.2%), Motor Neuron Disease (7.1%) and other neurodegenerative diseases (3.1%). Gastrostomy removal was significantly influenced by age, place of residence, and having head and neck cancer (p < 0.05). There was the greatest likelihood of removal within the first year (24%). 70.5% had enteral feeding at home. CONCLUSION: This large cohort study demonstrates 31.2% of patients had their gastrostomy removed within 3 years. Head and neck cancer patients, younger age and residing at home can help positively predict removal. Most patients manage their feeding at home rather than a nursing home. This study provides new information on gastrostomy outcomes when counselling patients to provide realistic expectations.

Comparison of anxiety and depression levels in caregivers of patients with percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy for home enteral tube feeding against other enteral nutrition methods.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to demonstrate whether the care burden of caregivers of bedridden patients, who experience feeding difficulties, decreases according to the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) (1) after the patient has undergone PEG (Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy). The hypothesis of the study was that the levels of anxiety and depression of caregivers for patients fed via PEG decrease more than those for caregivers of patients fed through other enteral methods. Based on this, the goal is to recommend to palliative care and home care professionals the type of feeding method for bedridden patients that will create less burden on their relatives. METHODS: A comparison was made of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) scores among caregivers of patients receiving PEG and other enteral nutrition, focusing on changes between hospital admission and discharge. These changes were analyzed based on the caregiver's age, gender, and the duration of the patient's hospital stay. METHODS: This study conducted a comparative analysis of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) scores among caregivers of patients receiving Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (PEG) versus other forms of enteral nutrition. The focus was on the variation in these scores from the time of the patients' hospital admission to their discharge. This analysis incorporated an examination of how these changes correlated with the caregiver's age and gender, as well as the duration of the patient's hospitalization. RESULTS: Despite longer hospital stays, a decrease in anxiety and depression was observed in caregivers of patients receiving PEG compared to the other group (p = 0.078). It was found that the decrease in anxiety and depression levels was less pronounced with increasing age of the caregiver (r=-0.202, p = 0.038). Hospital stay duration for patients receiving PEG was significantly longer than for those receiving other enteral nutrition methods (p = 0.017). CONCLUSIONS: We believe that Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (PEG) should be the preferred method for long-term enteral nutrition due to its facilitation of effective and comfortable feeding and medication administration by caregivers. In palliative care services, for patients requiring long-term nutrition, PEG should be considered more prominently than other enteral feeding methods to reduce the anxiety of caregivers.

Evaluation of community nurse-led traumatic tube displacements.

Home enteral tube feeding (HEF) has many benefits and is largely safe practice. Some complications have historically required intervention in the acute setting, including traumatic displacement of feeding tubes (i.e. internal bumper/balloon removed intact), and evidence to support the safe replacement of these tubes in the community is lacking. To address this, a service enabling community homecare nurses (CHN) to replace traumatically displaced feeding tubes was designed and evaluated. Adult patients presenting with a traumatically displaced feeding tube over 29 months were included in the service evaluation. Baseline characteristics and outcomes at day 1, 7 and 6 months post-replacement were recorded. A total of 71 tube replacements were performed by CHNs in 60 patients. No clinical complications were recorded at any follow-up points. A simple cost analysis estimated savings of £235 754.40. These results suggest that nurse-led replacement of traumatically displaced feeding tubes in adults in the community is low-risk and offers potential cost savings.

Effectiveness of betadine-coating gastrostomy tube to reduce peristomal infection after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Peristomal wound infection is a common complication in patients receiving percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG). The main reason for peristomal infection might be the oral microbes coating the gastrostomy tube during implantation. Povidone-iodine solution can be applied for skin and oral decontamination. We designed a randomized controlled trial to test the effectiveness of a Betadine® (povidone-iodine) coated gastrostomy tube to reduce peristomal infection after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. METHODS: A total of 50 patients were randomized to Betadine and control groups (25 patients in each group) from April 2014 to August 2021 at a tertiary medical center. All patients received the pull method for PEG implantation using a 24-french gastrostomy tube. The primary endpoint was peristomal wound infection rate 2 weeks after the procedure. RESULTS: Changes in Neutrophil/Lymphocyte ratio (N/L ratio) and C-Reative protein (Delta CRP) at 24 h after PEG were higher in the control group than in the Betadine group (N/L ratio, 3.1 vs. 1.2, p = 0.047; CRP, 2.68 vs.1.16, p = 0.009). The two groups did not differ in post-PEG fever, peristomal infection, pneumonia, or all-cause infection. Delta CRP could predict peristomal infection and all-cause infection within 2 weeks (AUROC 0.712 vs. 0.748; p = 0.039 vs. 0.008). The best cut-off-point of Delta CRP for the diagnosis of peristomal wound infection was 3 mg/dl. CONCLUSION: The betadine coating gastrostomy tube method could not reduce peristomal infection after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. CRP elevation of less than 3 mg/dl may be used to exclude the potential peristomal wound infection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04249570 ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04249570 ).

Gastrostomy Button Diameter and Length Variations after Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy: One Size Does Not Fit All.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is a useful option for long-term enteral nutrition. Low-profile gastrostomy tubes ("buttons") may afterward be placed in the stomach through the abdominal wall following maturation of the preexisting ostomy. Regular verification is essential since inadequate sizing is associated with accidental exteriorization or food leakage. We aimed to evaluate gastrostomy buttons diameter or length variations on the first year after their placement and possible factors associated with these variations. METHODS: We analyzed consecutive PEGs between 2016 and 2018. A minimum follow-up of 12 after gastrostomy button placement was required. Diameter or length variations were assessed in a specialized PEG appointment during the follow-up period. RESULTS: Final sample included 94 patients, from which 65 (69.1%) were women, and 29 (30.9%) were men, with a mean age of 76.9 ± 13.3 years. Measurements variations occurred in 44 (46.8%) patients. Diameter variation was significantly more frequent in patients living in a nursing home (OR = 5.43; 95% CI = 1.32-22.27; p = 0.019), patients with previous PEG tube dislodgement (OR = 3.84; 95% CI = 1.21-12.20; p = 0.023), and male patients (OR = 3.50; 95% CI = 1.06-11.49, p = 0.039). Length variation occurred more frequently in patients with a weight change during the follow-up period greater than 5 kg (OR = 3.71; 95% CI = 1.14-12.05; p = 0.029). CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of patients with gastrostomy buttons required a change in their measurements, especially if male, living in nursing homes, having significant weight changes, or accidental tube exteriorization. This emphasizes the importance of having a specialized PEG appointment to regularly assure the best fitted button for each patient and ultimately guarantee an adequate nutritional intake.

Direct Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Versus Radiological Gastrostomy in Patients Unable to Undergo Transoral Endoscopic Pull Gastrostomy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: A subset of patients needing long-term enteral access are unable to undergo a conventional transoral "pull" percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG). We assessed the safety and efficacy of an introducer-style endoscopic direct PEG (DPEG) and an interventional radiologist guided gastrostomy (IRG) among patients unable to undergo a pull PEG. METHODS: In this single center, non-randomized, pilot study, patients unable to undergo a transoral Pull PEG were prospectively recruited for a DPEG during the index endoscopy. IRG procedures performed at our center served as the comparison group. The primary outcome was technical success and secondary outcomes included 30-day and 90-day all-cause mortality, procedure duration, dosage of medications, adverse events, and 30-day all-cause hospitalization. The Charlson comorbidity index was used to compare comorbidities. RESULTS: A total of 47 patients (68.3 ± 7.13 years) underwent DPEG and 45 patients (68.6 ± 8.23 years) underwent IRG. The respective Charlson comorbidity scores were 6.37 ± 2 and 6.16 ± 1.72 (P = 0.59). Malignancies of the upper aerodigestive tract were the most common indications for DPEG and IRG (42 vs. 37; P = 0.38). The outcomes for DPEG and IRG were as follows: technical success: 96 vs. 98%; P = 1; 30-day all-cause mortality: 0 vs 15%, P < 0.01; 90-day all-cause mortality: 0 vs. 31%, P < 0.001; 30-day hospitalization: 19 vs. 38%; P = 0.06; procedure duration: 23.8 ± 1.39 vs. 29.5 ± 2.03 min, P = 0.02; midazolam dose: 4.5 ± 1.6 vs. 1.23 ± 0.6 mg; P < 0.001, and opiate dose: 105.6 ± 38.2 vs. 70.7 ± 34.5 µg, P < 0.001, respectively. Perforation of the colon during IRG was the sole serious adverse event. CONCLUSION: DPEG is a safe and effective alternative to IRG in patients unable to undergo a conventional transoral pull PEG and may be considered as a primary modality for enteral support. CLINICALTRIALS: gov Identifier: NCT04151030.

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: outcomes of a dedicated anesthesia and surgery protocol.

BACKGROUND: Patients requiring percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) related dysphagia represent a clinical challenge. Diminished pulmonary function and aspiration risks can lead to anesthesia-related complications, and gastric displacement from hemidiaphragm elevation may preclude safe gastric access. This study reports the efficacy and outcomes of a dedicated anesthesia/surgery management protocol for ALS patients undergoing PEG. METHODS: In 2013, a PEG placement protocol for ALS patients was developed emphasizing efficient pre-operative evaluation, rapidly metabolized anesthetic agents, and minimization of opioid use. Outcomes were analyzed retrospectively. Preoperative weight loss, pulmonary function tests, total analgesia, procedural time, and 90-day morbidity and mortality were recorded. RESULTS: From 2013-2019, 67 ALS patients (mean age 65.3 years, 52.2% female) received a PEG under the protocol. Mean percentage weight loss 6 months before PEG was 9.3 ± 5.1% with 38.8% of patients meeting criteria for severe malnutrition. Mean anesthesia time (propofol induction to anesthesia emergence) was 34.5 ± 10.8 min and mean operative time (endoscope insertion to dressing placement) was 16.4 ± 8.2 min. Regional anesthesia with liposomal bupivacaine was performed in 76.1%. All attempts at PEG placement were successful. With a mean follow-up of 6.1 ± 6.8 months, all PEGs were functional and there were no surgical site complications. Thirty-day readmission rate was 7.0% and 90-day mortality was 22.4% (46.7% occurring within 30 days). Mean time from surgery to death was 8.8 ± 7.8 months. CONCLUSIONS: Protocols for optimizing PEG may help overcome challenges present in the ALS patient population. Despite patient comorbidities, protocol implementation and dedicated team members resulted in a high procedural success rate and low complication rate. Further study is warranted to optimize the timing of PEG placement in relation to ALS disease progression and determine the utility of regional anesthesia during PEG placement.

Randomized controlled trial of intravenous sedation vs general anesthesia for esophageal dilation with percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in esophageal cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Esophageal squamous cell cancer (ESCC) is mostly diagnosed in its later stages, when patients present with dysphagia and weight loss. Esophageal dilation with percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is a common surgical procedure in patients with locally advanced ESCC because of tumor obstruction and enteral nutrition support during neoadjuvant or definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT). Esophageal dilation with PEG is widely performed under general anesthesia (GA) with endotracheal intubation. AIM OF THE STUDY: To determine the overall success rate of completing this procedure using intravenous (IV) sedation with dexmedetomidine (DEX) relative to GA and to compare its perioperative conditions, including procedure times, pain scores (visual analog scale), adverse events, and costs. SETTINGS: Songklanagarind Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University, Thailand. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) of locally advanced ESCC patients who had dysphagia and needed esophageal dilation with PEG between January 2020 and December 2021. Esophageal dilation (using a Savary-Gilliard dilator) and PEG were performed using the pull technique. RESULTS: Seventy patients were randomly assigned to either the DEX group (n = 34) or the GA group (n = 36). All patients in both groups underwent successful surgery. The DEX group had a significantly shorter procedure time, lower procedure cost, and lower total hospital cost than the GA group. However, there were no significant between-group differences in pain scores or length of hospital stay. There were no serious adverse events in either group; however, the GA group had some incidences of sore throat, transient hoarseness, and atelectasis. CONCLUSION: This study found that IV sedation with DEX during esophageal dilation with PEG was as effective and safe as using GA.

The "cut and push" method of removing percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube is not safe in paediatric patients.

PURPOSE: A "cut and push" (CP) approach has been described in the literature for removal of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tubes. The aim of this study is to investigate the safety profile of this method in children. METHOD: Our study included all children who underwent CP procedure for either removal or replacement of Freka PEG tube at our centre between January 2016 and August 2021. Parents contacted to establish if the internal component had been seen in the stools post-procedure. If not seen, a plain film of chest, abdomen and pelvis was arranged followed by computerised tomography (CT) scan. The presence of the internal component as a retained foreign body on imaging was evaluated along with any complication. RESULTS: Of the 27 patients included, six (22.2%) patients had the internal component seen in the stool. Five (18.5%) patients in total had a retained internal component with three (11.1%) patients had major complications requiring complex surgical interventions, and two (7.4%) patients required endoscopic retrieval. CONCLUSION: Our study reports more severe complications that required complex surgical interventions compared to the previous studies. We believe that this method of removal is not safe in children and should be abandoned. Also, patients with Down syndrome might be at higher risk of retention and complications.

Effect of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy prior to oesophageal cancer surgery on postoperative wound complications in patients: A meta-analysis.

It is still a matter of controversy whether percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy(PEG) should be used prior to the operation for the purpose of feeding the patient with resectable oesophageal carcinoma (EC). Comparison was made between EC and preoperatively treated PEG and non-preoperative PEG. An extensive literature review has been conducted to determine the results about PEG and No-PEG trials. In this paper, we chose 4 papers out of 407 of them through a strict selection process. In this trial, there were 1027 surgical cases of oesophagus carcinoma, 152 with PEG pre-surgery and 875 without PEG. The total sample size ranged from 14 to 657. Two studies showed that there was no statistically significant difference in the occurrence of postoperative wound infection among PEG and No-PEG(OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.38, 2.80 p = 0.96), there was no statistical significance in the likelihood of anastomotic leak among PEG after surgery compared to No-PEG in 4 trials (OR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.62-2.07 p = 0.69), and there were no statistical differences between PEG and No-PEG before operation on anastomotic stricture for esophagectomy(OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.31-1.56 p = 0.38). No wound or anastomosis complications were observed in the PEG group. Thus, PEG preoperatively is an effective and safe procedure without any harmful influence on gastrointestinal structure or anastomosing. It can be applied to patients with oesophagus carcinoma who have a high risk of undernutrition. Nevertheless, because of the limited number of randomized controlled trials in this meta-analysis, caution should be exercised in their treatment. More high-quality research involving a large sample is required to confirm the findings.

Nutrition nurse-led outpatient 'hot' clinics are efficient and cost-effective: a retrospective single-centre evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Nutrition nurses work in multidisciplinary and nurse-led outpatient clinics. The daily nutrition nurse-led 'hot' clinic in this study sees patients for enteral or home parenteral nutritional support. Appointments may be for routine procedures or emergency reviews. AIMS: This study aimed to identify activities and procedures performed in the nutrition nurse-led clinic, identifying admission avoidance activity. METHODS: Nurse-held records for the period from April 2018 to March 2020 were reviewed retrospectively. Data were collated in an Excel spreadsheet for analysis and results are presented using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Records covered a total of 590 patients, 294 men and 296 women with a median age of 59 years, and 606 procedures. Key activities were troubleshooting enteral feeding tubes (29%), insertion of fine-bore nasogastric feeding tubes (18%) and management of home parenteral nutrition issues (11%). The presenting problem or issue was resolved in 90% of patients, with no need for hospital admission or additional medical review. CONCLUSION: The nutrition nurse-led clinic provides an efficient and cost-effective service, preventing hospital admission and emergency department attendance in most cases.

[Complications of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in intensive care patients with dysphagia associated with neurological disorders]. / Oslozhneniya chreskozhnoi endoskopicheskoi gastrostomii u reanimatsionnykh bol'nykh s sindromom disfagii tsentral'nogo geneza.

OBJECTIVE: To develop an effective method for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy using gastropexy technology. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 260 ICU patients with dysphagia associated with neurological disorders between 2010 and 2020. All patients were divided into two groups: the main group (n=50) - percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy with gastropexy, control group (n=210) - surgery without fixing the anterior wall of the stomach to the abdominal wall. RESULTS. G: Astropexy significantly reduced the incidence of postoperative complications (p=0.045) and severe complications (grade IIIa and higher) (χ2=3.701, p=0.055). Early postoperative complications occurred in 20 (7.7%) patients. Surgery and subsequent treatment were associated with normalization of leukocyte count (p=0.041), C-reactive protein (p=0.024) and serum albumin (p=0.0012). Mortality was similar in both groups. Overall 30-day mortality rate in both groups was 20.8% that was associated with clinical severity of patients. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy was not the direct cause of death in any case. However, complications of endoscopic gastrostomy aggravated the underlying disease in 2.9% of cases. CONCLUSION: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy with gastropexy reduces the incidence of postoperative complications.

When Is It Safe to Feed After Surgical Feeding Tube Placement? A Survey of EAST Members.

INTRODUCTION: Many critically ill trauma and surgical patients require nutritional support. Patients needing long-term enteral access often undergo placement of surgical feeding tubes, including percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube, laparoscopic gastrostomy tube, and open gastrostomy tube. This study was performed to determine national practice patterns for feeding after feeding tube placement. METHODS: A 16-question online survey was administered to members of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma via Qualtrics about feeding practices after placement of the feeding tube. Questions included demographics, training, current practice, annual procedural volume, timing to resume feeds: <2, 6, 12, or 24 h, methods to advance feeds, and reasons behind management decisions. For comparison, responses were grouped into "early" (≤6 h) and "late" (18-24 h) groups. The chi-square test was used, and P < 0.05 was significant. RESULTS: Five hundred sixteen Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma members completed the survey. Most (95%) respondents worked at a level 1 or 2 trauma center, and 68% are in academic practice. The most common feeding tube placement was percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (median = 25/y, interquartile range = 15-40). Responses showed variability in timing of when feeds were resumed after procedure. Early feeding was not affected by age (≤42 y), trauma center designation, volume, or training programs at the respondent's hospital. Graduates of surgical critical care fellowship were less likely to feed early (P = 0.043). CONCLUSIONS: There is wide variability in feeding practices after surgical feeding tube placement. Given the large quantity of procedures performed, a randomized controlled trial should be performed to determine the optimal timing to resume feeds in critically ill patients.

Mortality and complications after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: a retrospective multicentre study.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is the method of choice for patients in need of long-term nutritional support or gastric decompression. Although it is considered safe, complications and relatively high mortality rates have been reported. We aimed to identify risk factors for complications and mortality after PEG in routine healthcare. METHODS: This retrospective study included all adult patients who received a PEG between 2013 and 2019 in Region Norrbotten, Sweden. RESULTS: 389 patients were included. The median age was 72 years, 176 (45%) were women and 281 (72%) patients received their PEG due to neurological disease. All-cause mortality was 15% at 30 days and 28% at 90 days. Malignancy as the indication for PEG was associated with increased mortality at 90 days (OR 4.41, 95% CI 2.20-8.88). Other factors significantly associated with increased mortality were older age, female sex, diabetes mellitus, heart failure, lower body mass index and higher C-reactive protein levels. Minor and major complications within 30 days occurred in 11% and 15% of the patients, respectively. Diabetes increased the risk of minor complications (OR 2.61, 95% CI 1.04-6.55), while those aged 75 + years were at an increased risk of major complications, compared to those younger than 65 years (OR 2.23, 95% CI 1.02-4.85). CONCLUSIONS: The increased risk of death among women and patients with malignancy indicate that these patients could benefit from earlier referral for PEG. Additionally, we found that age, diabetes, heart failure, C-reactive protein and body mass index all impact the risk of adverse outcomes.

Slow vital capacity as a useful indicator of the prognosis after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.

OBJECTIVES: Forced vital capacity (FVC) is recommended as a respiratory function test in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). However, in ALS associated with orofacial palsy, FVC may be an unreliable test. Slow vital capacity (SVC) is an easier and more reliable test even in cases with bulbar symptoms. However, it remains unclear whether respiratory function tests using SVC and FVC are associated with prognosis after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) placement. This study aimed to confirm whether both SVC and FVC are related to prognosis after PEG placement in patients with ALS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted this retrospective observational cohort study of 69 consecutive patients diagnosed with sporadic ALS who underwent PEG placement between July 2007 and February 2020. We analyzed the association with mortality 6 months after PEG placement and evaluated long-term prognosis. RESULTS: Forty-four patients met the inclusion criteria. In cases with decreased SVC (p < .01) and FVC (p < .01), a significant difference was observed in mortality 6 months after PEG placement, with an optimal cut-off of SVC ≤57.4% (sensitivity, 0.828; specificity, 0.867) and FVC ≤57.3% (sensitivity, 0.828; specificity, 0.867). Multivariate analysis showed that onset age ≥ 65 years (p < .05), SVC ≤57.4% (p < .01), and FVC ≤57.3% (p < .01) were associated with survival after PEG placement. CONCLUSIONS: SVC, like FVC, is an important prognostic factor after PEG placement in patients with ALS, and there is a possibility that evaluation using SVC can complement respiratory function testing even in cases where the evaluation of FVC is limited.

Outcomes of PEG placement by acute care surgeons compared to those placed by gastroenterology.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tubes are placed by gastroenterologists (GI) and surgeons throughout the country. At Rhode Island Hospital, before July of 2017, all PEGs were placed by GI. In July of 2017, in response to a growing need for PEGs, acute care surgeons (ACS) also began performing PEGs at the bedside in ICUs. The purpose of this study was to review and compare outcomes of PEG tubes placed by ACS and GI. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of patients who received a PEG placed by ACS or GI at the bedside in any ICU from December 2016 to September 2019. Charts were reviewed for the following outcomes: Success rates of placing PEG, duration of procedure, major complications, and death. Secondary outcomes included discharge disposition, and rates of comfort measures only after PEG. RESULTS: In 2017, 75% of PEGs were placed by GI and 25% surgery. In 2018, 47% were placed by GI and 53% by surgery. In 2019, 33% were placed by GI and 67% by surgery. There was no significant difference in success rates between surgery (146/156 93.6%) and GI (173/185 93.5%) (p 0.97). On average, GI performed the procedure faster than surgery [Median 10 (7-16) min vs 16 (13-21) mins, respectively, p < 0.001]. There were no significant differences between groups in any of the PEG outcomes or complications investigated. CONCLUSION: Bedside PEG tube placement appears to be a safe procedure in the ICU population. GI and Surgery had nearly identical success rates in placing PEGs. GI performed the procedure faster than surgery. There were no significant differences in the reviewed patient outcomes or complications between PEGs placed by ACS or GI. Of note, when a complication occurred, ACS PEG patients typically were managed in the OR while GI tended to re-PEG patients highlighting a potential difference in management that should be further investigated.

Is preparation of a sterile operative field before percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy necessary? A cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Despite the non-sterile nature of the alimentary tract, percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) procedures are often performed after creating a sterile surgical field to reduce infection risk. Our group has previously demonstrated no statistically significant difference in the rate of surgical site infection (SSI) following PEG performed with or without sterile operative fields. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of working with or without sterile operative fields during PEG. METHODS: A decision tree model of PEG with and without sterile operative fields was created to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of these two methods. The primary outcome was incremental cost-effectiveness ratio with a ceiling willingness to pay threshold assumed of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Costs were from the perspective of the healthcare system with a time horizon for the model of 90 days. Sensitivity analyses were performed on all model parameters. RESULTS: In the base case analysis, sterile operative field PEG was cost-effective resulting in 0.2225 QALYs at an expected cost of $2,099. PEG procedures without a sterile operative field yielded less QALYs (0.2224) at a higher cost ($2,199) and were dominated. These procedures became cost-effective when the expected cost was < $1618 (e.g., $140 less than sterile operative field PEG) or when the SSI rate was < 1.6% (e.g., 0.2% higher than sterile operative field PEG) while holding all other variables constant. CONCLUSION: PEG procedures performed without a sterile operative field can be cost-effective compared to procedures performed with a sterile operative field if the rates of SSI remain similar. Cost savings from foregoing a sterile operative field appear to be offset if the SSI rate increases > 0.2% above that of sterile operative field PEG procedures.

Utility of prophylactic percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube in head and neck cancer patients undergoing concurrent chemoradiation: A prospective observational cohort.

PURPOSE: The necessity of prophylactic percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PPEG) before concurrent chemoradiation (CCRT) in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients remains uncertain. We evaluated the utilization rate of PPEG tube. Weight changes and tube dependence were also assessed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective cohort study evaluated the utilization rate of PPEG tube in patients with newly diagnosed HNC undergoing CCRT. Baseline characteristics, nutrition status, and weight loss data were collected and compared between use and non-use groups. RESULTS: 110 patients (94.8%) used PPEG tube (70 fully-used and 40 partially-used groups). Non-users had a tendency to lose weight more than partially and fully-used groups; 9.13%, 3.42%, and 1.95%, respectively (p = 0.085). Fully-used group had significantly longer time of tube dependence than partially-used group, 7.0 months versus 4.9 months (p = 0.012). The type of PPEG tube use (full use or partial use) and presence of dysphagia were significantly related to tube dependence. The time ratio of tube dependence for partially-used patients versus fully-used patients was 0.82 (95% CI: 0.68-0.99) (p = 0.039). The time ratio for patients with symptoms of dysphagia was 1.29 (95% CI: 1.02-1.63) (p = 0.032). At the end of CCRT, 96.6% of patients agreed that PPEG tube was necessary. CONCLUSION: We recommend PPEG for patients undergoing CCRT. Partial use of PPEG with continuous oral intake as tolerated is strongly encouraged to maintain weight, and to reduce risk of tube dependence. Future study to evaluate effective swallowing exercise is warranted.

Benefits of prophylactic percutaneous gastrostomy in patients with nasopharyngeal cancer receiving concurrent chemoradiotherapy: A multicenter analysis.

PURPOSE: Prophylactic percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PPEG) is widely used for patients with head and neck cancer undergoing concurrent chemoradiation (CCRT). Nevertheless, the necessity of its use in patients with nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) is uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate the benefits of PPEG on prevention of weight loss and treatment tolerance in patients with NPC receiving CCRT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective multicenter chart review of 904 patients, 378 in the PPEG group and 526 in the non-PPEG group, was conducted. Baseline characteristics, weight loss, and treatment tolerance were analyzed and compared between the two groups. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the mean baseline body mass index (BMI) between the groups. At the end of CCRT, no difference in weight loss was found between the 2 groups (non-PPEG group, 6.6%; PPEG group, 5.9%). Nonetheless, the subgroup analysis demonstrated that a baseline BMI < 18.5 kg/m2 (underweight) and non-intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) technique were independent factors associated with prevention of weight loss by PPEG. More patients in the PPEG group were able to complete planned cycles of chemotherapy (73.3% vs. 49.0%, P < .0001). CONCLUSION: Although the benefits of PPEG on prevention of weight loss were not observed for the entire cohort, we found a potentially protective effect of PPEG in some subgroups of patients. Additionally, PPEG significantly enhanced chemotherapy tolerance. Therefore, PPEG tube insertion should be strongly considered for patients with NPC receiving CCRT, particularly for underweight patients and those undergoing a non-IMRT technique.

Antibiotic prophylaxis for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in pediatric patients: a meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To investigate if Antibiotic Prophylaxis (AP) can prevent wound and/or systemic infection in pediatric patients who underwent Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (PEG). METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT) and Observational Studies that compared AP vs. no Intervention (NI) in children submitted to PEG. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were pooled with random-effect models. Quality assessment and risk of bias were performed as outlined by Cochrane recommendations. RESULTS: Four studies, including one RCT, with a total of 568 patients were included, in which 230 (40.5%) individuals received AP. The use of AP during PEG reduced the incidence of systemic infection (OR 0.46; 95% CI 0.24-0.90; p = 0.02; I2 = 0). However, no statistical difference was found for wound infection (OR 0.85; 95% CI 0.43-1.69; p = 0.64; I2 = 12%) and for the composite outcome of any kind of infection (OR 0.74; 95% CI 0.13-4.06; p = 0.73; I2 = 67%). CONCLUSION: In this pooled analysis of 568 infants who underwent PEG, the use of AP reduced the incidence of systemic infection. Our results were compatible with findings obtained in the adult population. No differences were found regarding wound infection or the composite outcome of any kind of infection.