Randomized Trial Comparing Radiologic Pigtail Gastrostomy and Peroral Image-Guided Gastrostomy: Intra- and Postprocedural Pain, Radiation Exposure, Complications, and Quality of Life

Radiology guided antegrade GASTROSTOMY deployment of mushroom (pull type) catheters with classical and modified methods in patients with oropharyngeal, laryngeal carcinoma, and anesthesia risk

OBJECTIVE

The aim of study is to evaluate the results of deployment of Percutaneous Radiological Gastrostomy (PRG), which is a good alternative to Surgical Gastrostomy (SG), with transoral approach in cases where Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (PEG) is contraindicated, difficult or unsuccessful, in patients with high risk of American Society of Anesthesiologists with four scores. In addition, we aimed to demonstrate the advantages of mushroom pull type catheters over push type gastrostomy catheters.

METHODS

This retrospective study included a total of 40 patients (18 females and 22 males) aged 21-92 years who underwent PRG with the antegrade transoral approach. PRG was performed by retrograde passing through the esophagus or snaring the guidewire from the stomach and taking out of the anterior abdominal wall. Patients' demographic data, indications for PRG, procedural outcomes and complications were screened and recorded.

RESULTS

PRG was performed in 39 of 40 patients included in the study. Technical success rate was 97.5%. Procedure-dependent major complications such as death, aspiration, colon perforation, and deep abscess were not observed. Aspiration occurred in the first patient during the first feeding on the day after the procedure. Major complication rate was 2.5%. The total minor complication rate was 17.5% in 7 patients; parastomal leakage in 2 patients (5%), skin rash and infection in 3 (7.5%) patients, minor bleeding in 2 (5%) patients with oropharynx cancer, minimal bleeding from the gastrostomy catheter 1 week after the procedure in 1 (2.5%) patient. None of the cases had buried buffer. Tube functionality was preserved in all patients without any damage.

CONCLUSION

Mushroom tip (pull type) gastrostomy catheter is a safe treatment method for patients requiring prolonged feeding because of wide diameter, endurance, long staying opening duration, less excessive dilatation and parastomal leakage, and no need for gastropexy. Lower cost and easier access are advantageous for mushroom tip pull type catheters compared to push type gastrostomy catheters in our country. The less invasive PRG is an alternative option in patients who are difficult to administer PEG, are at high anesthesia risk and cannot be sedated.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

This article is valuable in terms of its contribution to develop an alternative radiological method for the deployment of gastrostomy tubes in medical difficult patients. This method has shortened the duration of the procedure and increased the success rate in patients with difficulty in transition from the stomach to the esophagus or with difficulty in the upper gastrointestinal tract. Mushroom tip catheters can be placed successfully by radiological methods.

Randomized Controlled Trial of Percutaneous Radiologic Gastrostomy Performed With and Without Gastropexy: Technical Success, Patient-Reported Outcomes and Safety

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to compare balloon-retention percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PRG) tube insertion performed with and without gastropexy, primarily focusing on pain and patient-reported outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Research ethics board approved a dual-arm, single-centre, randomized trial of 60 patients undergoing primary 14-French PRG tube insertion (NCT04107974). Patients were randomized to receive either PRG with gastropexy or without gastropexy. Data were collected for technical outcomes, patient-reported outcomes pre-procedure, post-procedure and at 1-month, as well as quality of life parameters at 1-month post-procedure (EQ5D-5L, Visual Analogue Scale and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Enteral Feeding questionnaires). Complications occurring up to 6-months post-procedure were recorded.

RESULTS

Sixty patients were randomized to the gastropexy group (n = 30) or non-gastropexy (n = 30) group. One non-gastropexy patient was withdrawn from the study due to failed insertion. PRG procedural time was significantly longer when using gastropexy (mean 11.4 ± 7.19 min) compared with non-gastropexy (mean 6.79 ± 4.63 min; p < 0.05). Pain scores did not differ between the two groups pre-procedure, post-procedure and at 1-month follow-up, nor did 1-month quality of life parameters. Six (20%) minor complications occurred in the gastropexy group and nine (31%) minor complications in the non-gastropexy group (p = 0.330). Two (6.9%) major complications occurred in the non-gastropexy group (p = 0.458).

CONCLUSION

There is comparable patient tolerability when balloon-retention PRG insertion is performed with or without gastropexy sutures. This study also demonstrated a trend towards fewer complications when gastropexy is utilized. However, further larger trials are required to compare complications of the two approaches for PRG insertion.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 2, randomized trial.

Single-Step Method for Pull-Type Gastrostomy Tube Placement

Single-step pull-type gastrostomy tube (PGT) placement is a method involving gastric puncture with a curved 18-gauge trocar needle allowing retrograde cannulation of the gastroesophageal junction without use of a sheath or snare. This retrospective review of 102 patients who underwent single-step PGT placement demonstrated 91% success in advancing the wire up the esophagus using only the curved trocar. Successful placement of a gastrostomy tube was 100%. Two major and 2 minor complications occurred within 30 days, all unrelated to the single-step technique. Mean fluoroscopy time for all patients was 5.1 min (range, 1.5-19.2 min). Single-step PGT placement is an effective, safe, fast, and equipment-sparing method for gastrostomy placement.

The Effect of Enteral Tube Feeding on Patients' Health-Related Quality of Life: A Systematic Review

Patients with functional gastrointestinal tract who are unable to meet their nutritional requirements may benefit from the use of enteral nutrition via feeding tubes which could be nasogastric, percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy and jejunostomy. Although enteral tube feeding has been shown to promote nutritional status, improve wound healing, and enhance patients’ quality of life (QoL), evidence of tube and feed complications and reduced QoL has also been reported. Despite the increasing prevalence of patients on enteral tube feeding, no systematic review examining the role of enteral tube feeding on patients’ QoL appears to have been published. Aim: The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the effect of enteral tube feeding on patients’ QoL. Method: Three databases (EMBASE, Pubmed, and PsycINFO) plus Google Scholar were searched for relevant articles based on the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcomes (PICO) framework. The review was in line with preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and involved the use of synonyms and medical subject headings. In addition, search terms were combined using Boolean operators (AND/OR) and all the articles retrieved were exported to EndNote for de-duplication. Results: Fourteen articles which met the criteria were included and three distinct areas were identified: the effect of early versus late enteral tube feeding on QoL; the QoL of patients on gastrostomy versus standard care, and the effect of enteral tube feeding on QoL. Overall, nine studies reported improvement in the QoL of patients on enteral tube feeding, while five studies demonstrated either no significant difference or reduction in QoL. Some factors which may have influenced these outcomes are differences in types of gastrostomy tubes, enteral feeding methods (including time patients spent connected to enteral feed/pump), and patients’ medical conditions, as well as the generic and/or type of QoL measuring instrument used. Conclusion: Most reviewed studies suggest that enteral tube feeding is effective in improving patients’ QoL. The use of enteral tube feeding-specific QoL measuring instruments is recommended for future research, and improved management strategies including use of mobile enteral feeding pumps should further enhance patients’ QoL. More studies on the effect of delivery systems/enteral feeding pumps on QoL are needed as research in this area is limited.

Retrospective comparison of outcomes and associated complications between large bore radiologically inserted gastrostomy tube types

PURPOSE

Multiple approaches to radiologically inserted gastrostomy (RIG) exist. The goal of this study was to compare 30-day outcomes and associated complications between large bore balloon-retained (BR), loop-retained (LR), and pull-type (PT) RIG devices.

METHODS

Data on 1477 patients who underwent RIG between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2016 were collected retrospectively using a dedicated interventional radiology database and electronic medical record. Statistical analysis was performed to compare complication rates between BR, LR, and PT devices.

RESULTS

Ninety-eight percent (1477/1507) of the procedures were successfully performed. A total of 752 BR, 323 LR, and 402 PT gastrostomy tubes were placed. The overall complication rate for BR catheters was 5.7% (25 major [3.3%] and 18 minor [2.4%]). The overall complication rate for PT catheters was 3.7% (8 major [2.0%] and 7 minor [1.7%]). The overall complication rate for LR catheters was 1.6% (4 major [1.4%] and 1 minor [0.8%]). Compared to BR catheters, LR catheters had significantly fewer total complications (P = 0.01) but not minor complications (P = 0.052). There were no significant differences in the number of complications between LR and PT catheters or between BR and PT catheters.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of BR, LR, and PT devices for RIG is safe with a low incidence of complications. Compared to BR catheters, primary insertion of a LR gastrostomy was associated with significantly fewer overall complications within the first 30 days. Therefore, for initial tube placement, large bore LR catheters may be preferred over BR devices.

Percutaneous gastric tube placement: Comparison of trans-abdominal and trans-oral approach in patients with chronic ascites

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare the trans-abdominal (TA) and trans-oral (TO) approaches for fluoroscopic-guided gastrostomy tube placement in patients with chronic ascites.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A 10-year review of clinical imaging and medical records at a single institution identified 29 patients with chronic recurrent ascites who underwent gastrostomy (GT) or gastro-jejunostomy tube (GJT) placement. In 22 patients (18 women, 4 men) aged from 22 to 76 years of age (mean age, 57.7±13.1 years), a GT or GJT was placed with the TO approach, and in 7 (7 women) from 31 to 86 years of age (mean age, 63±16.8 years) with the TA approach.

RESULTS

Technical success was 100% in both groups with one (1/22; 5%) immediate complication in the TO group. Fluoroscopy time was significantly greater in the TO group (P=0.002). Leakage of ascites was significantly more frequent in the TA group (P=0.04). There was no significant difference in bleeding or inflammation (P=0.14 and P=0.43, respectively). The cumulative tract related complication rate was significantly greater in the TA group (P=0.03).

CONCLUSION

Fluoroscopy times and the overall incidence of tract-related complications, in particular leakage of ascites from the stoma, are more frequent in patients in chronic ascites who underwent TA gastrostomy tube placement compared to those who underwent TO placement.

Push versus pull gastrostomy in cancer patients: A single center retrospective analysis of complications and technical success rates

PURPOSE

To compare the technical success and complication rates of push versus pull gastrostomy tubes in cancer patients, and to examine their dependence on operator experience.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of 304 cancer patients (170 men, 134 women; mean age 60.3±12.6 [SD], range: 19-102 years) referred for primary gastrostomy tube placement, 88 (29%) of whom had a previously unsuccessful attempt at percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) placement. Analyzed variables included method of insertion (push versus pull), indication for gastrostomy, technical success, operator experience, and procedure-related complications within 30 days of placement.

RESULTS

Gastrostomy tubes were placed for feeding in 189 patients and palliative decompression in 115 patients. Technical success was 91%: 78% after endoscopy had previously been unsuccessful and 97% when excluding failures associated with prior endoscopy. In the first 30 days, there were 29 minor complications (17.2%) associated with push gastrostomies, and only 8 minor complications (7.5%) with pull gastrostomies (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in major complications (push gastrostomy 5.3%, pull gastrostomy 5.6%). For decompressive gastrostomy tubes, the pull technique resulted in lower rates of both minor and major complications. There was no difference in complications or technical success rates for more versus less experienced operators.

CONCLUSION

Pull gastrostomy tube placement had a lower rate of complications than push gastrostomy tube placement, especially when the indication was decompression. The technical success rate was high, even after a failed attempt at endoscopic placement. Both the rates of success and complications were independent of operator experience.

Bowel Obstruction: Decompressive Gastrostomies and Cecostomies

Over the past 30 years, image-guided placement of gastrostomies and cecostomies for gastrointestinal decompression has developed into a safe and effective treatment for symptomatic bowel obstruction. Gastrostomies and cecostomies relieve patient symptoms, can prevent serious complications such as colonic perforation, and may bridge patients to more definitive treatment for the underlying cause of obstruction. This article will review the history of decompressive gastrostomies and cecostomies as well as the indications, contraindications, technique, complications, and outcomes of these procedures.

Placement of the AbbVie PEG-J tube for the treatment of Parkinson's disease in the interventional radiology suite

The primary treatment for Parkinson's disease is dopaminergic stimulation. Although levodopa has historically been administered orally, maintaining a predictable plasma concentration of the drug is challenging. As a result, enteral administration of carbidopa/levodopa (Duopa) has emerged as a promising tool in the treatment of the disease. This requires placement of an enteric catheter, two of which have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for delivery of Duopa. The approved tubes are placed using the "peroral" or "pull" technique, a method traditionally requiring endoscopy. This technical note describes placement of the AbbVie PEG-J tube by means of the peroral route while utilizing only sonographic and fluoroscopic guidance. After placing an orogastric tube and achieving percutaneous access to the stomach under fluoroscopic visualization, a snare catheter is advanced through the percutaneous access into the stomach. The orogastric tube is engaged with the snare and retracted, bringing the attached snare with it to the mouth. The AbbVie PEG tube is attached to the snare, pulled back down the esophagus and into the stomach before being retracted through the percutaneous access to the skin. Finally, the AbbVie J tube is advanced through the gastrostomy tube into the proximal jejunum and attached with the provided connectors. As demonstrated, the AbbVie PEG-J tube can be placed safely and effectively using a percutaneous image-guided technique without the use of an endoscope.

Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Radiologic Pigtail-Retained Gastrostomy and Radiologic Mushroom-Retained Gastrostomy

PURPOSE

To prospectively compare 2 different types of percutaneous fluoroscopic gastrostomy procedures (pigtail-retained gastrostomy [PG] vs mushroom-retained gastrostomy [MG]).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between March 2014 and February 2016, 100 patients were randomly assigned to receive 14-F PG or 20-F MG. Block randomization (block size 4) was performed, and sample size was calculated to assess the difference in minor complications. One patient withdrew from the study after allocation. Baseline characteristics were not significantly different between groups (P > .05). Technical success, defined as successful placement of gastrostomy tube, and procedural complications were evaluated. Procedural complications were divided into major and minor complications according to the Society of Interventional Radiology criteria.

RESULTS

Technical success rate was 100%. In the PG group, the major complication rate was 2% (1 of 50); 1 patient had a misplaced PG in the peritoneal cavity between the gastric and abdominal walls and developed peritonitis that had to be surgically treated. The minor complication rate was 34% (17 of 50) in the PG group. In the MG group, the major complication rate was 0%, and the minor complication rate was 12.2% (6 of 49). The most common minor complication was tube occlusion. Minor complication rate was significantly higher in the PG group (P = .016). Mean fluoroscopy time was significantly longer in the MG group (P = .013).

CONCLUSIONS

Both PG and MG demonstrated high technical success rates in all indications. MG had lower complication rates than PG at the cost of an increase in fluoroscopy times.

Percutaneous radiologically guided gastrostomy tube placement: comparison of antegrade transoral and retrograde transabdominal approaches

PURPOSE

We aimed to compare the antegrade transoral and the retrograde transabdominal approaches for fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous gastrostomy tube (G-tube) placement.

METHODS

Following institutional review board approval, all G-tubes at two academic hospitals (January 2014 to May 2015) were reviewed retrospectively. Retrograde approach was used at Hospital 1 and both antegrade and retrograde approaches were used at Hospital 2. Chart review determined type of anesthesia used during placement, dose of radiation used, fluoroscopy time, procedure time, medical history, and complications.

RESULTS

A total of 149 patients (64 women, 85 men; mean age, 64.4±1.3 years) underwent G-tube placement, including 93 (62%) placed via the retrograde transabdominal approach and 56 (38%) placed via the antegrade transoral approach. Retrograde placement entailed fewer anesthesiology consultations (P < 0.001), less overall procedure time (P = 0.023), and less fluoroscopy time (P < 0.001). A comparison of approaches for placement within the same hospital demonstrated that the retrograde approach led to significantly reduced radiation dose (P = 0.022). There were no differences in minor complication rates (13%-19%; P = 0.430), or major complication rates (6%-7%; P = 0.871) between the two techniques.

CONCLUSION

G-tube placement using the retrograde transabdominal approach is associated with less fluoroscopy time, procedure time, radiation exposure, and need for anesthesiology consultation with similar safety profile compared with the antegrade transoral approach. Additionally, it is hypothesized that decreased procedure time and anesthesiology consultation using the transoral approach are likely associated with reduced cost.

Safety and Short-Term Complication Rates Using Single-Puncture T-Fastener Gastropexy

PURPOSE

To report a single operator's experience using a modified single-puncture gastrostomy technique deploying up to three nonabsorbable gastropexy anchors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of 69 consecutive patients undergoing gastrostomy, gastrojejunostomy, or jejunostomy tube insertion between March 2012 and January 2014 was performed. Technical success and 30-day local, major, and minor complication rates were assessed according to the Society of Interventional Radiology (SIR) Standards of Practice for Gastrointestinal Access. Procedure time was also recorded.

RESULTS

Primary technical success of the procedure was 98.6% (68/69). In one patient, the procedure was aborted because the stomach could not be safely accessed. Major complications occurred in one of 69 (1.4%) patients, minor complications occurred in 10 of 69 (13%) patients, and local complications occurred in three of 69 (4.3%) patients. Local complications consisted of redness and mild tenderness at the enteric access site. Mean procedure time was 5 minutes (range, 3.1-36 min).

CONCLUSIONS

Single-puncture, multianchor gastrostomy is a feasible technique for radiologically guided enteric access tube insertion with technical success and complication rates similar to conventional gastrostomy techniques. This technique could be considered when expeditious performance of a procedure is required.