Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2015 Jan;29(1):170-5.
doi: 10.1007/s00464-014-3673-9. Epub 2014 Jul 4.

Comparison of 231 patients receiving either "pull-through" or "push" percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparison of 231 patients receiving either "pull-through" or "push" percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy

Gernot Köhler et al. Surg Endosc. 2015 Jan.

Abstract

Background: A percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) can be performed as a direct stomach puncture, known as Seldinger technique ("push") or a thread pulling method ("pull"). The aim of this study was to compare the final results deriving from both application methods.

Methods: Data of all pull-through-PEG and push-PEG applications, which had been carried out in our department from 2009 to 2012, were analyzed and compared retrospectively. Data collection included patients' demographics, indications, comorbidities, peri-interventional chemotherapy, and/or radiotherapy. The complications were graded according to the Clavien-Dindo classification and divided in early- and late-term complications (before and after 10 days after PEG insertion).

Results: A total of 231 patients received a PEG. Of these, 131 (56.7 %) were treated with pull-through-PEGs and 100 (43.3 %) with the push-PEG method. Overall, in 61 of 231 (26.4 %) patients, a complication was documented and 37 of 61 (60.6 %) were assigned to Clavien-Dindo grade 1. Only 5 of 231 patients (2.2 %) required a re-intervention or surgical treatment under general anesthesia. The overall complication rate was significantly increased by the type of push-PEG tube used (push 33/100 = 33 vs. pull 28/131 = 21.4 %, p = 0.047). A dislocation of the tube was noticed in 5/131 (3.8 %) cases of pull-PEGs and 12/100 (12 %) cases of push PEGs (p = 0.018). An occlusion of the PEG also occurred significantly more frequent in connection with the push-PEG (10/100 = 10 vs. 1/131 = 0.8 %; p < 0.001).

Conclusion: Both PEG techniques are safe and well established. Push PEG showed a significantly higher rate of overall complications, dislocations, and occlusions. The decision which PEG tube should be used depends on individual conditions with preference of push-PEGs in patients with head, neck, and esophageal cancer.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1997 Apr;116(4):489-92 - PubMed
    1. Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2012 Mar;124(5-6):148-53 - PubMed
    1. Gastroenterology. 1995 Apr;108(4):1282-301 - PubMed
    1. Ann Surg. 2004 Aug;240(2):205-13 - PubMed
    1. Endoscopy. 1995 May;27(4):313-6 - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources