Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) with T-fasteners obviates the need for emergent replacement after early tube dislodgement

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement via the introducer technique is safe and effective in children when compared to the laparoscopic technique

PURPOSE

We compare our experience of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy, introducer technique (PEG) and laparoscopic technique (LapGT) at a tertiary care pediatric hospital.

METHODS

Isolated PEGs and LapGTs placements were reviewed at our institution from August 2016 through January 2018. Demographics, procedure time, operative charges, and 30-day complications were reviewed. Means of quantitative values were compared using the student's t test. Categorical values were compared using the X² test.

RESULTS

Ninety-three isolated gastrostomy tubes were placed in children aged 2 weeks to 19 years. There were 56 PEGs (60%) and 37 LapGTs (40%), based on surgeon preference. There was no significant difference in demographics between the two groups. Mean operative time for PEG was 59% shorter (14 vs. 33 min, p < 0.001). Operating room charges averaged $4500 less in the PEG group ($11,400 vs. $15,900, p < 0.001). Neither group had complications that required a return to the operating room within 30 days postoperatively. There was no difference in the rate of fundoplication after gastrostomy tube placement. In two cases PEGs were converted to LapGTs after safety criteria for PEG were not met.

CONCLUSION

The PEG introducer technique, when used with clearly defined safety criteria, decreased operative time and cost without compromising safety.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Gastrostomy tubes: Fundamentals, periprocedural considerations, and best practices

Gastrostomy tube placement is a procedure that achieves enteral access for nutrition, decompression, and medication administration. Preprocedural evaluation and selection of patients is necessary to provide optimal benefit and reduce the risk of adverse events (AEs). Appropriate indications, contraindications, ethical considerations, and comorbidities of patients referred for gastrostomy placement should be weighed and balanced. Additionally, endoscopist should consider either a transoral or transabdominal approach is appropriate, and radiologic or surgical gastrostomy tube placement is needed. However, medical history, physical examination, and imaging prior to the procedure should be considered to tailor the appropriate approach and reduce the risk of AEs.

Assessment of the effect of colored beverage on gastric returns after gastric tube replacement to enhance placement verification

BACKGROUND

Verification of appropriate placement of newly replaced gastrostomy tubes is essential prior to use to avoid potentially serious adverse events.

PROBLEM

A lack of standardized guidance regarding effective and practical means to verify placement exists. Aspiration or drainage of gastric-like contents is one mean suggested to help determine placement, yet when returns are minimal, this becomes challenging.

MATERIALS, METHOD, INTERVENTION

Oral ingestion or the instillation of a colored beverage prior to tube replacement was used in a midwestern healthcare clinical setting to enhance returns in both volume and color via the newly replaced gastrostomy tube. A retrospective review of this practice was conducted, which included 176 gastric tube replacements over 4 years.

RESULTS

A significant increase in volume of returns via the newly replaced tube was noted (P < .001) and a strong correlation of color to the ingested or consumed beverage was found with 95% of returns reflecting color tinting of the beverage or in many cases, strong color change to that of the beverage color.

CONCLUSION

Presented is a simple, cost-effective method that has shown to be clinically useful in assessing placement of newly replaced gastrostomy tubes that may be useful in other practices and settings.

An overview of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement in the intensive care unit

Critically ill patients are at increased risk for malnutrition as they often have underlying acute and chronic illness, stress related catabolism, decreased appetite, trauma and ongoing inflammation. Malnutrition is recognized as a leading cause of adverse outcomes, higher mortality, and increased hospital costs. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tubes provide a safe and effective route to provide supplemental enteral nutrition to these patients. PEG placement has essentially replaced surgical gastrostomy as the modality of choice for longer term feeding in patients. This is a highly prevalent procedure with 160,000 to 200,000 PEG procedures performed each year in the United States. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of current knowledge and practice standards with regards to placement of PEG tube in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). When a patient is considered for a PEG tube, it is important to evaluate the treatment alternatives and identify the best option for each patient. In this review, we provide the advantages and disadvantages of various feeding modalities and devices. We review the indications and contraindications for PEG tube placement as well as the risks of this procedure. We then describe in detail the per-oral pull, per-oral push, and direct percutaneous techniques for PEG tube placement. Additionally, we review the feasibility of having interventional pulmonologists place PEG tubes in the ICU.

Endoscopic Enteral Access

Various approaches for enteral access exist, but because there is no single best approach it should be tailored to the needs of the patient. This article discusses the various enteral access techniques for nasoenteric tubes, gastrostomy, gastrojejunostomy, and direct jejunostomy as well as their indications, contraindications, and pitfalls. Also discussed is enteral access in altered anatomy. In addition, complications associated with these endoscopic techniques and how to either prevent or properly manage them are reviewed.

Percutaneous radiologically guided gastrostomy tubes: Procedural description and biomechanical comparison in a canine model

OBJECTIVE

To describe the novel placement of percutaneous radiologically guided gastrostomy (PRG) tubes in a canine cadaveric model and to biomechanically compare PRG and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube constructs.

STUDY DESIGN

Descriptive and biomechanical experimental study.

ANIMALS

Fifteen large breed (>25 kg) canine cadavers.

METHODS

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tubes, low-profile PRG tubes, and standard PRG tubes were each placed in five canine cadavers. Body wall and stomach (with attached gastrostomy tube constructs) were harvested and biomechanically tested. Data regarding the maximal load to failure and procedure time were statistically analyzed.

RESULTS

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy and PRG tube placement was successful in all cadavers with no procedure-related complications. Gastrostomy tube placement time was longer for the PEG group vs the low-profile PRG (P = .005) and standard PRG (P = .037) groups. Peak construct strength was lower for the PEG group vs the low-profile PRG (P = .002) and standard PRG (P = .010) groups. The site of failure varied among groups.

CONCLUSION

Percutaneous radiologically guided gastrostomy tubes were successfully placed in all cases with shorter placement time and greater peak construct strength compared with PEG tubes.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Due to the increased load to failure as well as decreased placement time recorded for PRG tubes relative to PEG tubes, PRG tubes may be considered as an alternative minimally invasive gastrostomy option in large breed canine patients. Further evaluation in clinical animals is required. Results of this work were presented at the 2019 American College of Veterinary Surgeons Surgery Summit; October 16-19, 2019; Las Vegas, Nevada.

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: dealing with the issue of dislodgement

Introduction: Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (PEG) is accepted as an efficient method to provide long-term enteral nutrition. PEG accidental dislodgement (device exteriorization confirmed by expert evaluation) rate is high and can lead to major morbidity.Objective: To identify independent risk factors for PEG accidental dislodgement.Methods: Retrospective, single-center study, including consecutive patients submitted to PEG procedure, for 38 consecutive months. Every patient had 12 months minimum follow-up after PEG placement. Univariate analysis selected variables with at least marginal association (p < .15) with the outcome variable, PEG dislodgement, which were included in a logistic regression multivariate model. Discriminative power was assessed using area under curve (AUC) of the receiver operating curve (ROC).Results: We included 164 patients, 67.7% (111) were female, mean age was 81 years. We report 59 (36%) PEG dislodgements, of which 13 (7.9%) corresponded to early dislodgements. The variables with marginal association were hypoalbuminemia (p = .095); living at home (p = .049); living in a nursing home (p = .074); cerebrovascular disease (CVD) (p = .028); weight change of more than 5 kg, either increase or decrease (p = .001); psychomotor agitation (p < .001); distance inner bumper-abdominal wall (p = .034) and irregular appointment follow-up (p = .149). At logistic multivariate regression, the significant variables after model adjustment were CVD OR 4.8 (CI 95% 2.0-11.8), weight change OR 4.7 (CI 95%1.6-13.9) and psychomotor agitation OR 18.5 (CI 95% 5.2-65.6), with excellent discriminative power (AUC ROC 0.797 [CI95% 0.719-0.875]).Conclusion: PEG is a common procedure and accidental dislodgement is a frequent complication. CVD, psychomotor agitation and weight change >5 kg increase the risk of this complication and should be seriously considered when establishing patients' individual care requirements.

Radiologic versus Endoscopic Placement of Gastrostomy Tube: Comparison of Indications and Outcomes at a Tertiary Referral Center

OBJECTIVES

Percutaneous gastrostomy tube placement is performed in patients requiring long-term enteral nutrition. Although both endoscopic and fluoroscopic techniques may be used, there are inherent risks and potential complications associated with both procedures that are not generally known to referring physicians. The purpose of this study was to compare and contrast indications for placement and procedurally related complications between fluoroscopic and endoscopic gastrostomy tubes techniques at a tertiary care facility.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed. All consecutive patients with either percutaneous endoscopic (PEG) or percutaneous radiologic (PRG) gastrostomy tube placement between October 2011 and January 2013 were eligible for inclusion. Basic demographic information, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, procedure indication, laboratory data, and use of anticoagulation were recorded. Both direct and indirect procedural complications were documented if they occurred 30 days after gastrostomy tube placement, and were classified and scored based on severity and need for further intervention.

RESULTS

A total of 297 patients met the inclusion criteria, 150 of whom had gastrostomy tubes placed fluoroscopically and 147 of whom had them placed endoscopically. There was no statistically significant difference in direct complications within the first 30 days (PEG 6.8% vs PRG 8%); however, the type of complication observed varied between the two groups. Although superficial wound infections and buried bumpers were more common in the PEG group, bleeding was more common in the PRG group.

CONCLUSIONS

Placement of gastrostomy tubes either endoscopically or fluoroscopically is relatively safe with similar indications. Although the complication rate between the two groups was not significant, the types of procedural complications observed did vary.

Management of early PEG tube dislodgement: simultaneous endoscopic closure of gastric wall defect and PEG replacement

A 53-year-old man with dysphagia underwent uneventful placement of a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube for long-term enteral feeding access. 11 hours after the procedure, it was discovered that he had accidentally dislodged the feeding tube. On physical examination, he was found to have a benign abdomen without evidence of peritonitis or sepsis. He was observed overnight with serial abdominal examinations and nasogastric decompression. In the morning, he was taken back to the endoscopy suite where endoscopic clips were employed to close the gastric wall defect and a PEG tube was replaced at an adjacent site. The patient was fed 24 hours thereafter and discharged from the hospital 48 hours after the procedure. Early accidental removal of a PEG tube in patients without sepsis or peritonitis can be safely treated with simultaneous endoscopic closure of the gastrotomy and PEG tube replacement, resulting in earlier enteral feeding and shorter hospital stay.

Alexis St. Martin Gastropexy: A Novel Technique for Gastropexy During Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Tube Placement

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is a preferred method of long-term enteral nutritional support. Despite its ease of placement, it has a 4% major complication rate, requiring surgical intervention or hospitalization. Early PEG tube dislodgment can cause peritonitis, requiring emergent laparotomy at significant morbidity and cost. T-fasteners have been used as an adjunct gastropexy, but nearly one third migrate into the abdominal wall within the first 2 weeks. We describe a low-cost, minimally invasive technique using widely available surgical instruments to appose the gastric and abdominal walls.

METHODS

All PEG procedures were performed in our 60-bed surgical intensive care unit. Institutional IRB approval was obtained along with procedure specific consent for all patients. The adjunctive gastropexy procedure was performed on four patients at high risk for early PEG tube dislodgment. Following routine PEG tube placement, both ends of four 2-0 polyglactin ties were brought through the gastric and abdominal walls through separate stab incisions adjacent to the PEG tube exit site in the 3, 6, 9, and 12 o'clock positions. These were tied in the subcutaneous tissue, securing the gastric wall to the abdominal wall.

RESULTS

No PEG tube complications occurred. All patients were discharged to long-term care facilities with PEG tubes intact or electively removed.

CONCLUSIONS

We describe the results of a pilot study for a cost-effective, easily implementable, adjunct technique, named after the namesake of our institution, to decrease the incidence and severity of complications associated with PEG tube dislodgment. It was used in 4 patients at high risk for PEG tube dislodgment with satisfactory early results in all 4. Further recruitment of larger numbers of patients using this technique is ongoing to determine if this technique is truly effective at reducing PEG tube complications.

Temporary percutaneous T-fastener gastropexy and continuous decompressive gastrostomy in dogs with experimentally induced gastric dilatation

OBJECTIVE To evaluate a percutaneous, continuous gastric decompression technique for dogs involving a temporary T-fastener gastropexy and self-retaining decompression catheter. ANIMALS 6 healthy male large-breed dogs. PROCEDURES Dogs were anesthetized and positioned in dorsal recumbency with slight left-lateral obliquity. The gastric lumen was insufflated endoscopically until tympany was evident. Three T-fasteners were placed percutaneously into the gastric lumen via the right lateral aspect of the abdomen, caudal to the 13th rib and lateral to the rectus abdominis muscle. Through the center of the T-fasteners, a 5F locking pigtail catheter was inserted into the gastric lumen and attached to a device measuring gas outflow and intragastric pressure. The stomach was insufflated to 23 mm Hg, air was allowed to passively drain from the catheter until intraluminal pressure reached 5 mm Hg for 3 cycles, and the catheter was removed. Dogs were hospitalized and monitored for 72 hours. RESULTS Mean ± SD catheter placement time was 3.3 ± 0.5 minutes. Mean intervals from catheter placement to a ≥ 50% decrease in intragastric pressure and to ≤ 6 mm Hg were 2.1 ± 1.3 minutes and 8.4 ± 5.1 minutes, respectively. After catheter removal, no gas or fluid leakage at the catheter site was visible laparoscopically or endoscopically. All dogs were clinically normal 72 hours after surgery. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE The described technique was performed rapidly and provided continuous gastric decompression with no evidence of postoperative leakage in healthy dogs. Investigation is warranted to evaluate its effectiveness in dogs with gastric dilatation-volvulus.

Complications in pediatric enteral and vascular access

Obtaining reliable enteral and vascular access constitutes a significant fraction of a pediatric surgeon׳s job. Multiple approaches are available. Given the complicated nature of this patient population multiple complications can also occur. This article discusses the various techniques and potential complications associated with short- and long-term enteral and vascular access.

Laparoscopic versus percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy placement in children: Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND:

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and laparoscopic-assisted gastrostomy (LAG) are widely used in the paediatric population. The aim of this study was to determine which one of the two procedures is the most effective and safe method.

METHODS:

This systematic review was conducted according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses statement. Primary outcomes were success rate, efficacy of feeding, quality of life, gastroesophageal reflux and post-operative complications.

RESULTS:

Five retrospective studies, comparing 550 PEG to 483 LAG placements in children, were identified after screening 2347 articles. The completion rate was similar for both procedures. PEG was associated with significantly more adjacent bowel injuries (P = 0.047), early tube dislodgements (P = 0.02) and complications that require reintervention under general anaesthesia (P < 0.001). Minor complications were equally frequent after both procedures.

CONCLUSIONS:

Because of the lack of well-designed studies, we have to be cautious in making definitive conclusions comparing PEG to LAG. To decide which type of gastrostomy placement is best practice in paediatric patients, randomised controlled trials comparing PEG to LAG are highly warranted.

A Quality Improvement Initiative to Reduce Catheter Exchange Rates for Fluoroscopically Guided Gastrostomy Tubes

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effectiveness of a data-driven quality improvement initiative to reduce catheter exchange rates.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A single-institution retrospective analysis of all percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PRG) placement and replacement procedures between January 2010 and July 2015 was conducted. A statistical model predicting the risk for catheter exchange for any reason and exchanges specifically for tube malfunction was created; a quality improvement plan to reduce catheter exchanges was designed and implemented in June 2014. The outcomes for subsequent PRG procedures from July 2014 through March 2015 were followed until July 2015.

RESULTS

Between 2010 and June 2014, 1,144 primary PRG procedures and 442 replacement procedures were performed in 1,112 patients. Of the 442 exchange procedures, 289 were "rescue" procedures secondary to catheter malfunction. A quality improvement plan was implemented in June 2014 that encouraged primary gastrojejunostomy catheter and balloon-retained PRG catheter placement and placement of skin sutures in patients considered high risk for catheter dislodgment. From July 2014 through March 2015, 229 PRG catheters were placed, and 71 exchange procedures were performed through July 2015. There was a statistically significant decrease in the number of rescue exchanges performed secondary to catheter malfunction (P = .036).

CONCLUSIONS

Procedural and patient-specific risk factors for PRG complications were identified, and a statistical model to predict rates of minor complications was created. These findings were used to implement a quality improvement program that resulted in a decrease in PRG exchanges secondary to catheter malfunction.

T-fastener migration after percutaneous gastropexy for transgastric enteral tube insertion

Background/Aims

To determine the prevalence and time-course of t-fastener migration after gastropexy deployment.

Methods

We reviewed our procedural database for all percutaneous gastrostomy and gastrojejunostomy tube insertions performed over a 14-month period using a widely accepted t-fastener kit for gastropexy (Kimberly-Clark). Of 201 patients, 71 (41 males, 30 females; mean age, 56 years) underwent subsequent abdominal computed tomography (CT) imaging. The location and associated findings of each t-fastener were retrospectively recorded for each CT scan performed after the tube insertion.

Results

A total of 153 t-fasteners were deployed during 71 procedures with subsequent CT follow-up. In the short term (within 4 weeks after deployment), 5.1% of the t-fasteners had detached and were no longer present; 59.5% were intraluminal or within the gastric wall; and 35.5% were within the anterior abdominal wall musculature or subcutaneous. In the long term (>3 months), 48.6% of the t-fasteners had detached and were no longer present, 25.0% were intraluminal or within the gastric wall, and 26.4% were within the anterior abdominal wall musculature or subcutaneous. No t-fastener-related complications, such as abscesses, fluid collections, or fistulae, were identified.

Conclusions

Following gastropexy for percutaneous transgastric feeding tube placement, t-fastener migration into the abdominal wall frequently occurred soon after the tube insertion. Therefore, recent t-fastener deployment does not guarantee an intact gastropexy.

Gastrointestinal tract access for enteral nutrition in critically ill and trauma patients: indications, techniques, and complications

BACKGROUND

Enteral nutrition (EN) is a widely used, standard-of-care technique for nutrition support in critically ill and trauma patients.

OBJECTIVE

To review the current techniques of gastrointestinal tract access for EN.

METHODS

For this traditional narrative review, we accessed English-language articles and abstracts published from January 1988 through October 2012, using three research engines (MEDLINE, Scopus, and EMBASE) and the following key terms: "enteral nutrition," "critically ill," and "gut access." We excluded outdated abstracts.

RESULTS

For our nearly 25-year search period, 44 articles matched all three terms. The most common gut access techniques included nasoenteric tube placement (nasogastric, nasoduodenal, or nasojejunal), as well as a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG). Other open or laparoscopic techniques, such as a jejunostomy or a gastrojejunostomy, were also used. Early EN continues to be preferred whenever feasible. In addition, evidence is mounting that EN during the early phase of critical illness or trauma trophic feeding has an outcome comparable to that of full-strength formulas. Most patients tolerate EN through the stomach, so postpyloric tube feeding is not needed initially.

CONCLUSION

In critically ill and trauma patients, early EN through the stomach should be instituted whenever feasible. Other approaches can be used according to patient needs, available expertise, and institutional guidelines. More research is needed in order to ensure the safe use of surgical tubes in the open abdomen.

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube replacement: A simple procedure?

Replacement of gastrostomy tube in patients undergoing percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is generally considered as a safe and simple procedure. However, it could be associated with serious complications, such as gastrocutaneous tract disruption and intraperitoneal tube placement, which may lead to chemical peritonitis and even death. When PEG tube needs a replacement (e.g., occlusion or breakage of the tube), clinicians must realize that the gastrocutaneous tract of PEG is more friable than that of surgical gastrostomy because there is no suture fixation between gastric wall and abdominal wall in PEG. In general, the tract of PEG begins to mature in 1-2 wk after placement and it is well formed in 4-6 wk. However, this process could take a longer period of time in some patients. Accordingly, this article describes three major principles of a safe PEG tube replacement: (1) good control of the replacement tube along the well-formed gastrocutaneous tract; (2) minimal insertion force during the replacement, and, most importantly; and (3) reliable methods for the confirmation of intragastric tube insertion. In addition, the management of patients with suspected intraperitoneal tube placement (e.g., patients having abdominal pain or signs of peritonitis immediately after PEG tube replacement or shortly after tube feeding was resumed) is discussed. If prompt investigation confirms the intraperitoneal tube placement, surgical intervention is usually required. This article also highlights the fact that each institute should have an optimal protocol for PEG tube replacement to prevent, or to minimize, such serious complications. Meanwhile, clinicians should be aware of these potential complications, particularly if there are any difficulties during the gastrostomy tube replacement.