PEG with introducer or pull method: a prospective randomized comparison

Abstract

Background: PEG by the conventional pull method has the potential drawback of being associated with a higher frequency of wound infection, presumably caused by contamination of the gastrostomy catheter as it passes through the oral cavity. This study investigated the occurrence of peristomal wound infection after PEG placement by using the pull and introducer techniques.

Methods: Between September 1999 and May 2002, consecutive patients with dysphagia for whom PEG was recommended were enrolled in the study and randomly assigned to two groups: PEG with the introducer method (Group I) or PEG with the pull method (Group II). The peristomal area of each patient was evaluated on a daily basis for one week after PEG. Erythema and exudate were scored on a scale from 0 to 4 and induration on a scale of 0 to 3. Criteria for infection were a maximum combined score of 8 or higher, or the presence of microscopic and microbiologic evidence of suppurating exudate. In each group, the endoscope was passed once during the procedure, and an antibiotic (piperacillin) was given prophylactically. All procedures were performed by one investigator with the assistance of another physician.

Results: Of the 60 patients enrolled, 30 were assigned to each group. PEG was successful in all patients. One patient was excluded from each group because of death (Group I, stroke; Group II, myocardial infarction) within one week of the procedure. Therefore, 58 patients, 29 in each group, were evaluated. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of clinical parameters (age, gender, disease, performance score, mode of previous feeding, and recent antibiotic exposure). The occurrence of peristomal infection within one week of PEG was lower in Group I (introducer method) (0 vs. 9; p = 0.00094). The mean daily combined scores in Group I were significantly lower than those in Group II. Median of maximum parameter scores in Group I were significantly lower than those in Group II. There were no procedure-related mortalities or clinically significant wound infections that required surgical intervention.

Conclusions: The risk of peristomal wound infection after PEG is lower with the introducer method compared with the pull method.