Percutaneous endoscopic versus radiologic gastrostomy for enteral feeding: a retrospective analysis on outcomes and complications

Importance of Enteral Feeding: Enhancing Patient Care through Interventional Radiology

Enteral feeding plays a vital role for patients who are unable to meet their nutritional needs through oral intake, providing benefit to those with conditions such as inflammatory bowel disease, postsurgical recovery, chronic dysphagia, dysfunctional gastrointestinal tract, and critical illness. The role of interventional radiologists in enteral access is expanding, reflecting our pivotal role in nutritional support in clinical practice. This review explores the development, comparative benefits, and clinical outcomes associated with enteral nutrition (EN), highlighting its strengths and weaknesses as compared to parenteral nutrition (PN). EN supports gut mucosal health and immune function by stimulating gastrointestinal systems' native cellular programs, while reducing infection risks compared to PN. Modern advancements in EN formulations and delivery methods have enhanced patient care, demonstrating improved survival rates, reduced hospital stays, and improved quality of life.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on gastrostomy feeding tubes: methodology and review of evidence

This article from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) provides a full description of the methodology used to inform the final guidance outlined in the accompanying summary and recommendations article for strategies to manage endoscopically placed gastrostomy tubes. This article was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework and specifically addresses the utility of PEG versus interventional radiology-guided gastrostomy (IR-G), the need for withholding antiplatelet and anticoagulant medications, appropriate timing to initiate tube feedings, and appropriate selection of the gastrostomy technique in patients with malignant dysphagia. In patients needing enteral access, the ASGE suggests PEG as the preferred technique for initial gastrostomy over IR-G. The ASGE recommends that tube feeding can be safely started within 4 hours of the gastrostomy without the need for an intentional delay. The ASGE suggests that a PEG can be performed without the need to withhold antiplatelet medications. In patients on anticoagulants who need to undergo PEG placement, the ASGE suggests that the periprocedural management of anticoagulants should be based on a multidisciplinary discussion with the patient regarding the risk of bleeding versus cardiovascular adverse events. In patients with malignant dysphagia, either transoral "Pull" PEG or transcutaneous "Direct" PEG can be performed for initial enteral access.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on gastrostomy feeding tubes: summary and recommendations

This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) provides an evidence-based approach for strategies to manage endoscopically placed gastrostomy tubes. This document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. The guideline addresses the utility of PEG versus interventional radiology-guided gastrostomy (IR-G), need for withholding antiplatelet and anticoagulant medications before PEG tube placement, appropriate timing to initiate tube feeding after PEG, and selection of the appropriate technique of gastrostomy in patients with malignant dysphagia. In patients needing enteral access, the ASGE suggests PEG as the preferred technique for initial gastrotomy over IR-G. The ASGE recommends that tube feeding can be safely started within 4 hours of gastrostomy. The ASGE suggests that PEG can be performed without withholding antiplatelet medications. The ASGE suggests that the periprocedural management of anticoagulants should be based on a multidisciplinary discussion regarding the risk of bleeding versus cardiovascular events. In patients with malignant dysphagia, either transoral "pull" PEG or direct PEG can be performed for initial enteral access.

Iatrogenic vascular complications of non-vascular percutaneous abdominal procedures

PURPOSE

The purpose of this paper is to compile and present all of the reported vascular complications that resulted from common non-vascular abdominal procedures in the literature. Non-vascular procedures include, though are not limited to, percutaneous abscess/fluid collection drainage (PAD), percutaneous nephrostomy (PN), paracentesis, percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography (PTC)/percutaneous biliary drainage (PBD), percutaneous biliary stone removal, and percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PG)/percutaneous radiologic gastrojejunostomy (PG-J). By gathering this information, radiologists performing these procedures can be aware of the associated vascular injuries, as well as take steps to minimize risks.

METHODS

A literature review was conducted using the PubMed database to catalog relevant articles, published in the year 2000 onward, in which an iatrogenic vascular complication occurred from the following non-vascular abdominal procedures: PAD, PN, paracentesis, PTC/PBD, percutaneous biliary stone removal, and PG/PG-J. Biopsy and tumor ablation were deferred from this article.

RESULTS

214 studies met criteria for analysis. 28 patients died as a result of vascular complications from the analyzed non-vascular abdominal procedures. Vascular complications from paracentesis were responsible for 19 patient deaths, followed by four deaths from PTC/PBD, three from biliary stone removal, and two from PG.

CONCLUSION

Despite non-vascular percutaneous abdominal procedures being minimally invasive, vascular complications still can arise and be quite serious, even resulting in death. Through the presentation of vascular complications associated with these procedures, interventionalists can improve patient care by understanding the steps that can be taken to minimize these risks and to reduce complication rates.

Narrative review of diagnosis, management and treatment of dysphagia and sialorrhea in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

The degenerative motor neuron disorder amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) frequently leads bulbar symptoms like dysarthria, dysphagia, and sialorrhea, in approximately one-third of cases being the initial symptom. Throughout the disease, more than two-thirds of ALS patients experience dysphagia, regardless of the region of onset. In this review, we aimed to offer an updated overview of dysphagia and sialorrhea in ALS, covering its diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment in clinical practice. Regular assessment of dysphagia and sialorrhea during each patient visit is essential and should be a standard aspect of ALS care. Early discussion of potential treatments such as high-calorie diets or percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is crucial. Furthermore, this review highlights and discusses potential areas for improvement in both clinical practice and research.

Outcomes in Enteral Access Based on Specialty and Approach: A Single-Center Three-Year Experience

INTRODUCTION

Interventional radiologic, endoscopic, and surgical approaches are commonly utilized to establish durable enteral access in adult patients. The purpose of this study is to examine differences in nutritional outcomes in a large cohort of patients undergoing enteral access creation.

METHODS

Adult patients who underwent enteral access procedures by interventional radiologists, gastroenterologists, and surgeons between 2018 and 2020 at a single institution were reviewed. Included access types were percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG), open or laparoscopic gastrostomy, laparoscopic jejunostomy, and percutaneous gastrostomy (perc-G), percutaneous jejunostomy , or primary gastrojejunostomy.

RESULTS

912 patients undergoing enteral access cases met the criteria for inclusion. PEGs and perc-Gs were the most common procedures. PEGs had higher Charlson scores (4.5 [3.0-6.0] versus 2.0 [1.0-2.0], P = 0.007) and lower starting albumin (3.0 [2.6-3.4] versus 3.6 [3.5-3.8] g/dL, P < 0.0001). Time to goal feeds (4 [2-6] vs 4 [3-5] d, P = 0.970), delta prealbumin (3.6 [0-6.5] versus 6.2 [2.3-10] mg/L, P = 0.145), time to access removal (160 [60-220] versus 180 [90-300] d, P = 0.998), and enteral access-related complications (19% versus 16%, P = 0.21) between PEG and perc-G were similar and differences were not statistically significant. A greater percent change in prealbumin was noted for perc-G (10 [-3-20] versus 41.7% [11-65], P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite having higher Charlson scores and worse preoperative nutrition, there is a similar incidence of enteral access-related complications, time to goal feeds, delta prealbumin, or time to access removal between PEG and perc-G patients. Our data suggest that access approach should be made on an individual basis, accounting for anatomy and technical feasibility.

Endoscopic vs radiologic gastrostomy for enteral feeding: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and percutaneous radiological gastrostomy (PRG) are minimally invasive techniques commonly used for prolonged enteral nutrition. Despite safe, both techniques may lead to complications, such as bleeding, infection, pain, peritonitis, and tube-related complications. The literature is unclear on which technique is the safest.

AIM

To establish which approach has the lowest complication rate.

METHODS

A database search was performed from inception through November 2022, and comparative studies of PEG and PRG were selected following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. All included studies compared the two techniques directly and provided absolute values of the number of complications. Studies with pediatric populations were excluded. The primary outcome of this study was infection and bleeding. Pneumonia, peritonitis, pain, and mechanical complications were secondary outcomes. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB2) and we used The Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies (ROBINS-I) to analyze the retrospective studies. We also performed GRADE analysis to assess the quality of evidence. Data on risk differences and 95% confidence intervals were obtained using the Mantel-Haenszel test.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies were included, including two randomized controlled trials and fifteen retrospective cohort studies. The total population was 465218 individuals, with 273493 having undergone PEG and 191725 PRG. The only outcome that showed a significant difference was tube related complications in retrospective studies favoring PEG (95%CI: 0.03 to 0.08; P < 0.00001), although this outcome did not show significant difference in randomized studies (95%CI: -0.07 to 0.04; P = 0.13). There was no difference in the analyses of the following outcomes: infection in retrospective (95%CI: -0.01 to 0.00; P < 0.00001) or randomized (95%CI: -0.06 to 0.04; P = 0.44) studies; bleeding in retrospective (95%CI: -0.00 to 0.00; P < 0.00001) or randomized (95%CI: -0.06 to 0.02; P = 0.43) studies; pneumonia in retrospective (95%CI: -0.04 to 0.00; P = 0.28) or randomized (95%CI: -0.09 to 0.11; P = 0.39) studies; pain in retrospective (95%CI: -0.05 to 0.02; P < 0.00001) studies; peritonitis in retrospective (95%CI: -0.02 to 0.01; P < 0.0001) studies.

CONCLUSION

PEG has lower levels of tube-related complications (such as dislocation, leak, obstruction, or breakdown) when compared to PRG.

12Fr-Pigtail Versus 14Fr-Balloon Percutaneous Radiologic Gastrostomy (PRG), Retrospective Evaluation of Outcomes and Complications; A Maastricht University Medical Centre Study

PURPOSE

To retrospectively compare tube and placement related results of a 12Fr-pigtail and a 14Fr-balloon gastrostomy tube.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All consecutive patients who underwent percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PRG) between January 2016 and June 2020 were enrolled in this retrospective single-center analysis. Follow-up for all patients was 180 days. Mortality after 30 days, technical success, days to first complication within 180 days, reason of unexpected visit (tube, anchor or pain related), and tube specific complications (obstruction, pain, luxation, leakage) were taken as outcome measures. Data were obtained from both PACS software and electronic health records.

RESULTS

A total of 247 patients were enrolled (12Fr-pigtail: n = 139 patients and 14Fr-balloon: n = 108 patients). 30-day mortality was very low in both groups and never procedure related. Technical success was 99% in both groups. The average number of complications within 180 days after initial PRG placement was significantly higher in the 12Fr-pigtail group (12Fr-pigtail: 0.93 vs. 14Fr-balloon: 0.64, p = 0.028). Time to first complication within 180 days was significantly longer in the 14Fr-balloon group (12Fr-pigtail: 29 days vs. 14Fr-balloon: 53 days, p = 0.005). In the 14Fr-balloon group, the rate of tube-related complications (luxation and obstruction) was significantly lower compared to 12Fr-pigtail (29% vs. 45%, p = 0.011).

CONCLUSION

14Fr-balloon gastrostomy tubes have significantly lower (tube-related) complications rates and longer time to first complication compared to 12Fr-pigtail tubes. No procedure-related mortality was observed in either group. Technical success was very high in both groups. Level of Evidence Level 3, non-controlled retrospective cohort study.

Complications of Percutaneous Radiologic Gastrostomy Among Patients in a Tertiary Care Hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PRG) is the method of choice for patients incapable of ingesting nutrition orally. The complications related to PRG are classified into major and minor complications. This article presents the prevalence of major and minor complications of PRG among adult patients admitted to King Abdulaziz Medical City (KAMC) in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia between 2017 and 2018.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cross-sectional study, which included adult patients who underwent a new PRG intubation between 2017 and 2018 in KAMC in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The variables reviewed were the demographics, comorbidities, indications of tube insertion, major and minor complications, and mortality rates.

RESULTS

A total of 105 patients who underwent PRG were covered in this study with a mean age of 69.2 + 20.4 years. The most common indications were neurogenic pharyngeal dysphagia (31%) and dementia (29%). Most of the complications reported were minor (40%) and major complications were found in 2%. The percentage of patients with both minor and major complications was 37%. The patients who had no complications made up 21%. Major skin complication was reported in 19 patients (18%), while leakage was the most occurring minor complication found in 49 patients (47%). The 30-day mortality was observed in five patients (5%) and one-year mortality was observed in 21 patients (20%), and none of them were related to the PRG tube.

CONCLUSION

This study found that the PRG procedure had low rates of complications in KAMC. The majority were minor complications, and the mortality rate was low with none being related to the tube itself. So PRG may be considered to be a relatively safe procedure.

Outcomes and Complications of Radiological Gastrostomy vs. Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy for Enteral Feeding: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and percutaneous radiological gastrostomy (PRG) are commonly utilized to establish access to enteral nutrition. However, data comparing the outcomes of PEG vs. PRG are conflicting. Therefore, we aimed to conduct an updated systemic review and meta-analysis comparing PRG and PEG outcomes.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, and Cochrane library databases were searched until February 24, 2023. Primary outcomes included 30-day mortality, tube leakage, tube dislodgement, perforation, and peritonitis. Secondary outcomes included bleeding, infectious complications, and aspiration pneumonia. All analyses were conducted using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Software.

RESULTS

The initial search revealed 872 studies. Of these, 43 of these studies met our inclusion criteria and were included in the final meta-analysis. Of 471,208 total patients, 194,399 received PRG and 276,809 received PEG. PRG was associated with higher odds of 30-day mortality when compared to PEG (odds ratio (OR): 1.205, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.015 - 1.430, I2 = 55%). In addition, tube leakage and tube dislodgement were higher in the PRG group than in PEG (OR: 2.231, 95% CI: 1.184 - 4.2 and OR: 2.602, 95% CI: 1.911 - 3.541, respectively). Perforation, peritonitis, bleeding, and infectious complications were higher with PRG than PEG.

CONCLUSION

PEG is associated with lower 30-day mortality, tube leakage, and tube dislodgement rates than PRG.

Role of Endoscopy in Management of Upper Gastrointestinal Cancers

Upper gastrointestinal (GI) malignancy is a leading cause of cancer-related morbidity and mortality. Upper endoscopy has an established role in diagnosing and staging upper GI cancers, screening for pre-malignant lesions, and providing palliation in cases of advanced malignancy. New advances in endoscopic techniques and technology have improved diagnostic accuracy and increased the therapeutic potential of upper endoscopy. We aim to describe the different types of endoscopic technology used in cancer diagnosis, summarize the current guidelines for endoscopic diagnosis and treatment of malignant and pre-malignant lesions, and explore new potential roles for endoscopy in cancer therapy.

Comparative outcomes of endoscopic and radiological gastrostomy tube placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis with GRADE analysis

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and percutaneous radiological gastrostomy (PRG) are invasive interventions used for enteral access. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis with assessment of certainty of evidence to compare the risk of adverse outcomes and technical failure between PEG and PRG.

METHODS

We queried PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane from inception through January 2022 to identify studies comparing outcomes of PEG and PRG. The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality; secondary outcomes included the risk of colon perforation, peritonitis, bleeding, technical failure, peristomal infections, and tube-related complications. We performed GRADE assessment to assess the certainty of evidence and leave-one-out analysis for sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

In the final analysis, 33 studies, including 26 high-quality studies, provided data on 275,117 patients undergoing PEG and 192,691 patients undergoing PRG. Data from high quality studies demonstrated that, compared to PRG, PEG had significantly lower odds of selected outcomes, including 30-day all-cause mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.60-0.95; P=0.02), colon perforation (OR 0.61, 95%CI 0.49-0.75; P<0.001), and peritonitis (OR 0.71, 95%CI 0.63-0.81; P<0.001). There was no significant difference between PEG and PRG in terms of technical failure, bleeding, peristomal infections or mechanical complications. The certainty of the evidence was rated moderate for colon perforation and low for all other outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

PEG is associated with a significantly lower risk of 30-day all-cause mortality, colon perforation, and peritonitis compared to PRG, while having a comparable technical failure rate. PEG should be considered as the first-line technique for enteral access.

Efficacy and Safety of Percutaneous Radiological Gastrostomy (PRG) as a Rescue Measure for Enteral Feeding in Patients with Advanced Head, Neck, and Upper Digestive Malignancies

Background Percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy is an established mode of enteral feeding for nutritional support for patients with dysphagia from upper digestive tract malignancy. Its role as a rescue measure in patients with advanced malignancy, presenting with absolute dysphagia and failure of nasogastric tube insertion has not been well established.

Purpose This study was performed to assess technical success and long-term outcomes of percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (push type) for nutritional support for patients with absolute dysphagia as a last ditch nonsurgical rescue effort for enteral access.

Materials and Methods This was a prospective observational study of 31 patients who underwent push-type percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy over a period of 2 years (March 2017–March 2019). The study was a part of a larger trial approved by the institutional ethics committee. Patients were followed till the removal of tube, death, or 1 year, whichever was earlier. Gastrostomy tube-related problems and complications were documented. Descriptive summary statistics were employed to analyze the success rate and complications.

Results Thirty-one patients with mean age 56 years (26–78 years) including 18 males and 13 females with head and neck squamous cell cancer and esophageal cancer presenting with absolute dysphagia or significant dysphagia with failed nasogastric or endoscopic enteral access were included. Overall technical success was 93.5% (29/31), achieved in 26/31 patients with just fluoroscopy guidance and 3/5 patients with computed tomography guidance. One major (3.3%) and two minor (6.5%) complications were encountered. Five out of 29 gastrostomy tubes had to be exchanged, after a mean of 44 days (1–128 days) after insertion.

Conclusion Percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy is a safe and effective intervention even as a rescue measure in patients with absolute dysphagia from advanced upper digestive tract malignancies.

Laparoscopic Janeway gastrostomy as preferred enteral access in specific patient populations: A systematic review and case series

BACKGROUND

Nutrition is one of the fundamental needs of both patient and non-patient populations. General trends promote enteral feeding as a superior route, with the most common enteral access being the percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) as the first-line procedure, with surgical access including Witzel gastrostomy, Stamm Gastrostomy, Janeway gastrostomy (JG) as secondary means.

AIM

To describe cases and technique of laparoscopic Janeway gastrostomy (LJG) and perform a systematic review of the data.

METHODS

We successfully performed two LJG procedures, after which we conducted a literature review of all documented cases of LJG from 1991 to 2022. We surveyed these cases to show the efficacy of LJG and provide comparisons to other existing procedures with primary outcomes of operative time, complications, duration of gastrostomy use, and application settings. The data were then extracted and assessed on the basis of the Reference Citation Analysis (https://www.referencecitationanalysis.com/).

RESULTS

We presented two cases of LJG, detailing the simplicity and benefits of this technique. We subsequently identified 26 articles and 56 cases of LJG and extrapolated the data relating to our outcome measures. We could show the potential of LJG as a viable and preferred option in certain patient populations requiring enteral access, drawing reference to its favorable outcome profile and low complication rate.

CONCLUSION

The LJG is a simple, reproducible procedure with a favorable complication profile. By its technical ease and benefits relating to the gastric tube formed, we propose this procedure as a viable, favorable enteral access in patients with the need for permanent or palliative gastrostomy, those with neurologic disease, agitation or at high risk of gastrostomy dislodgement, or where PEG may be infeasible.

Interventional Pulmonology and the Esophagus: Tracheostomy and Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Placement

Tracheostomy is a procedure commonly performed in intensive care units (ICU) for patients who are unable to be weaned from mechanical ventilation. Both percutaneous and surgical techniques have been validated and are chosen based on the local expertise available. A primary advantage to the percutaneous technique is the ability to perform this procedure in the ICU without transporting the patient to a procedure suite or operating room; this has become particularly important with the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. An additional advantage is the ability to perform both the tracheostomy and the gastrostomy tube placement, if needed, during the same anesthetic episode. This decreases the need for additional sedation, interruption of anticoagulation, repeat transfusion, and coordination of care between multiple services. In the context of COVID-19, combined tracheostomy and gastrostomy placement exposes less health care providers overall and minimizes transportation needs.

Ultrasound-Guided Gastrostomy Tube Placement: An Evaluation of Postoperative Complications in the Pediatric Population

Background: Using ultrasound guidance has been demonstrated as a feasible alternative method for gastrostomy tube placement in the pediatric population. The aim of this study is to evaluate short- and long-term postoperative complications after ultrasound-guided gastrostomy tube placement (USGTP) and to compare them with complications after laparoscopic gastrostomy tube placement (LGTP). Methods: A retrospective chart review evaluated patients who underwent USGTP (n = 41) and LGTP (n = 120) at the same institution. Comparisons were made between the two groups in the context of demographics as well as 30-day and 6-month postoperative complications. A phone survey (n = 26) further identified USGTP complications potentially not captured in the electronic medical records. Results: There were no significant differences in age, gender, and indication for procedure between the two groups. Chart review revealed that USGTP and LGTP had statistically comparable rates of emergency department (ED) visits for postoperative complications. Among USGTP patients, 8% had a recorded ED visit within 30 days of the operation and 13% presented to the ED within 6 months, compared with 6% and 11%, respectively, in the LGTP group (P = .65, P = .69). The USGTP phone survey reported total complications over an average postoperative follow-up time of 34.6 months (range 8-87) and revealed a total ED visit rate of 35%, which is comparable with rates reported in the literature for minimally invasive feeding tube placement. Conclusion: USGTP is a safe and feasible alternative option for gastrostomy tube placement in the pediatric population and it has postoperative complication rates that are comparable with LGTP.

Percutaneous Radiologic Gastrostomy in Patients After Partial Gastrectomy: A Retrospective Study to Assess the Technical Feasibility of Postsurgical Remnant Stomach Access

PURPOSE

To evaluate the technical feasibility of percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy in patients after partial gastrectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study included 15 consecutive gastrectomized patients with attempted percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy at our institution between April 2014 and March 2021. When the stomach was sufficiently insufflated to distend below the left anterior subcostal margin, percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy with gastropexy was conventionally performed by the Seldinger technique. When the stomach was still highly positioned and/or overlaid by the other organs, some adjunctive maneuvers, such as hydro-displacement, intragastric balloon support, or cephalad oblique puncture or left intercostal puncture, were employed as modified gastrostomy. Ultrasonography or x-ray or computed tomography fluoroscopy was used for imaging guidance during the gastric puncture. Adequate tube placement was defined as technical success. Technical details, clinical outcomes, and complications were reviewed.

RESULTS

One patient underwent percutaneous radiologic jejunostomy instead of gastrostomy because safe gastric access could not be ensured. Seven patients underwent conventional gastrostomy; the other seven underwent modified gastrostomy with no gastropexy. The technical success rate was 100% (7/7) in the conventional group and 85.7% (6/7) in the modified group. The stomach was punctured under x-ray or computed tomography fluoroscopy for conventional gastrostomy. In contrast, the combination of various modalities was used for modified gastrostomy except for one failed case with unintentional transhepatic access. During a median follow-up of 108 days, no major complications occurred.

CONCLUSION

The adequate combination of multimodal imaging guidance and technical modifications could secure radiological creation of gastrostomy for the postsurgical stomach.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 4, Case Series.

Development and external validation of a prediction model for tube feeding dependency for at least four weeks during chemoradiotherapy for head and neck cancer

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Patients who receive chemoradiotherapy or bioradiotherapy (CRT/BRT) for locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (LAHNSCC) often experience high toxicity rates interfering with oral intake, causing tube feeding (TF) dependency. International guidelines recommend gastrostomy insertion when the expected use of TF exceeds 4 weeks. We aimed to develop and externally validate a prediction model to identify patients who need TF ≥ 4 weeks and would benefit from prophylactic gastrostomy insertion.

METHODS

A retrospective multicenter cohort study was performed in four tertiary head and neck cancer centers in the Netherlands. The prediction model was developed using data from University Medical Center Utrecht and the Netherlands Cancer Institute and externally validated using data from Maastricht University Medical Center and Radboud University Medical Center. The primary endpoint was TF dependency ≥4 weeks initiated during CRT/BRT or within 30 days after CRT/BRT completion. Potential predictors were extracted from electronic health records and radiotherapy dose-volume parameters were calculated.

RESULTS

The developmental and validation cohort included 409 and 334 patients respectively. Multivariable analysis showed predictive value for pretreatment weight change, texture modified diet at baseline, ECOG performance status, tumor site, N classification, mean radiation dose to the contralateral parotid gland and oral cavity. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve for this model was 0.73 and after external validation 0.62. Positive and negative predictive value for a risk of 90% or higher for TF dependency ≥4 weeks were 81.8% and 42.3% respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed and externally validated a prediction model to estimate TF-dependency ≥4 weeks in LAHNSCC patients treated with CRT/BRT. This model can be used to guide personalized decision-making on prophylactic gastrostomy insertion in clinical practice.

Current practices and barriers in gastrostomy indication in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a survey of ALS care teams in The Netherlands

OBJECTIVE

To describe current practices and barriers and support needs in gastrostomy indication and decision-making amongst rehabilitation physicians of ALS care teams in the Netherlands. Methods: Cross-sectional online survey of rehabilitation physicians of ALS care teams in the Netherlands. Survey items covered current practices in timing of indication (i.e. indicators and criteria), goals, initiating discussion about gastrostomy, and criteria for preferred method of placement; and barriers and support needs in indication and decision-making. Descriptive analysis was used for quantitative responses, thematic, and content analysis for qualitative data. Results: Twenty-nine physicians (41%) of 27 ALS care teams (71%) responded. Timing of indication: physicians agreed on important indicators but not cutoff values/criteria. Goals: optimizing nutritional status (100%), ensuring safe food-intake (72%), and reducing effort of meals (59%). Initiating discussion about gastrostomy: 52% introduces the topic early after diagnosis, 48% at indication. Criteria for method of placement included physician preference (69%), availability of service (21%), lower complication risk (17%), contraindication (59%), and patient preference (24%). Reported barriers (69% of respondents) were: patient readiness (52%), timing of indication (31%), and organizational barriers (18%). Support needs (62%): evidence-based timing of indication (35%) and tailored patient education (31%). Conclusions: There is practice variation in the timing of first introduction of gastrostomy and preferred method of placement, but agreement on goals and indicators . More evidence on optimal timing of gastrostomy placement is needed. However, until then early and regular discussion of the topic of gastrostomy and better patient information may promote patient readiness and support patient choice.

Size Matters: Early Gastrostomy Tube Dislodgment in Children

Background: Gastrostomy tube (g-tube) complications are typically minor and site related with major complications related to dislodgment before tract establishment. With the recent adoption of 12F g-tubes; size of tube has not been evaluated. There is limited research on the efficacy and dislodgment rates of 12 and 14F g-tubes within the early dislodgment window (<42 days postsurgery). Materials and Methods: A retrospective study from June 1, 2013 to May 25, 2020 was performed. A total of 888 patient encounters were identified, with a final data set of 835 being used for analysis. A subset of 21 patients was evaluated based on early dislodgment status. Fisher's exact test and Welch's two-sample test analyses were used to test for significance between groups (P < .05). Results: The early dislodgment rate is low at 2.5% (21/835). There was a significant impact of g-tube size on dislodgment rates. When evaluated by g-tube size, 12F g-tubes are nearly four times more likely to dislodge before 6 weeks than 14F g-tubes. In addition, the average age of 12F patients who dislodged early was significantly lower than that of the population for 14F patients. Conclusions: There is a significant difference in early dislodgment rate and age between the 12F g-tube compared with a 14F. These data suggest a trade-off of the smaller balloon in 12F g-tubes and potential for more limited use in our smallest children.

Safety of endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement compared with radiologic or surgical gastrostomy: nationwide inpatient assessment

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

A gastrostomy tube is often required for inpatients requiring long-term nutritional access. We compared the safety and outcomes of 3 techniques for performing a gastrostomy: percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG), fluoroscopy-guided gastrostomy by an interventional radiologist (IR-gastrostomy), and open gastrostomy performed by a surgeon (surgical gastrostomy).

METHODS

Using the Nationwide Readmissions Database, we identified hospitalized patients who underwent a gastrostomy from 2016 to 2017. They were identified using the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Procedure Coding System. The selected patients were divided into 3 cohorts: PEG (0DH64UZ), IR-gastrostomy (0DH63UZ), and open surgical gastrostomy (0DH60UZ). Adjusted odds ratios for adverse events associated with each technique were calculated using multivariable logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 184,068 patients meeting the selection criteria, the route of gastrostomy tube placement was as follows: PEG, 16,384 (53.7 ± 29.0 years); IR-gastrostomy, 154,007 (67.2 ± 17.5 years); and surgical gastrostomy, 13,677 (57.9 ± 24.3 years). Compared with PEG, the odds for colon perforation using IR-gastrostomy and surgical gastrostomy, respectively, were 1.90 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.26-2.86; P = .002) and 6.65 (95% CI, 4.38-10.12; P < .001), for infection of the gastrostomy 1.28 (95% CI, 1.07-1.53; P = .006) and 1.61 (95% CI, 1.29-2.01; P < .001), for hemorrhage requiring blood transfusion 1.84 (95% CI, 1.26-2.68; P = .002) and 1.09 (95% CI, .64-1.86; P = .746), for nonelective 30-day readmission 1.07 (95% CI, 1.03-1.12; P = .0023) and 1.13 (95% CI, 1.06-1.2; P = .0002), and for inpatient mortality 1.09 (95% CI, 1.02-1.17; P = .0114) and 1.55 (95% CI, 1.42-1.69; P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Placement of a gastrostomy tube (PEG) endoscopically is associated with a significantly lower risk of inpatient adverse events, mortality, and readmission rates compared with IR-gastrostomy and open surgical gastrostomy.

Emergency Presentations for Gastrostomy Complications Are Similar in Adults and Children

Gastrostomy tube (GT) complications are often managed in the Emergency Department (ED). We aimed to characterize and compare the pattern of ED presentations of GT complications in adults and children. A retrospective chart review of patients with GT complications presenting to 3 Australian EDs in 2 years was undertaken. ED visits for GT complications occurred in 70 GT patients (36 adults, 34 children) with 122 presentations. When comparing adults to children, infections occurred in 21% versus 36%, respectively; P = 0.08, mechanical issues in 48% versus 52%; P = 0.86, vomiting in 23% versus 8%; P = 0.02, and other issues in 7% versus 5%; P = 0.7. Presentation to ED within 28 days of initial GT insertion occurred in 3 (8%) adults and 3 (9%) children, predominantly with tube dislodgement. GT complications seen in ED are predominantly infectious and mechanical in nature, with an increased frequency of vomiting in adults when compared with children.

Outcomes following percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy versus fluoroscopic procedures in the Medicare population

Background

In the United States, few high-quality manuscripts have directly compared the complication profiles of percutaneous endoscopic versus fluoroscopic gastrostomy. Thus, it is our goal to compare these 2 common procedures to better understand their efficacy and complication profiles.

Materials and Methods

A retrospective analysis of patient records from Medicare parts A/B from 2007 to 2012 was used to identify percutaneous fluoroscopic gastrostomy and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy procedures. Patient demographics were stratified by age, sex, comorbidities, and complications.

Results

A total of 258,641 patients were found to have either percutaneous fluoroscopic gastrostomy (26,477, 10.2%) or percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (232,164, 89.8%). Percutaneous fluoroscopic gastrostomy experienced greater rates for all complications queried. Multivariate analysis revealed that the percutaneous fluoroscopic gastrostomy cohort had statistically significant increased odds for short-term complications, such as ileus (odds ratio 1.4, 95% confidence interval 1.22–1.54), mechanical (odds ratio 2.4, 95% confidence interval 2.28–2.58), wound infection (odds ratio 1.4, 95% confidence interval 1.24–1.52), persistent fistula after tube removal (odds ratio 1.9, 95% confidence interval 1.78–2.12), and other complications (odds ratio 2.2, 95% confidence interval 2.03–2.37), and long-term complications, including abdominal wall pain (odds ratio 1.4, 95% confidence interval 1.33–1.44), wound infection (odds ratio 1.1, 95% confidence interval 1.01–1.15), and persistent fistula after tube removal (odds ratio 1.8, 95% confidence interval 1.72–1.87).

Conclusion

Gastrostomy tubes are more frequently being placed via percutaneous endoscopic and fluoroscopic methods. This study suggests that those undergoing fluoroscopic placement have higher odds of developing short- and long-term postoperative complications.

•

Fluoroscopic g-tubes have higher odds of developing short- and long-term complications.

•

Fluoroscopy has higher odds for abdominal wall pain and mechanical complications.

•

Hyperlipidemia, smoking, and hypertension are risk factors for abdominal wall pain.