Fluoroscopy-guided jejunal extension tube placement through existing gastrostomy tubes: analysis of 391 procedures
- PMID: 26380895
- PMCID: PMC4622397
- DOI: 10.5152/dir.2015.14524
Fluoroscopy-guided jejunal extension tube placement through existing gastrostomy tubes: analysis of 391 procedures
Abstract
Purpose: We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of fluoroscopically placed jejunal extension tubes (J-arm) in patients with existing gastrostomy tubes.
Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of 391 J-arm placements performed in 174 patients. Indications for jejunal nutrition were aspiration risk (35%), pancreatitis (17%), gastroparesis (13%), gastric outlet obstruction (12%), and other (23%). Technical success, complications, malfunctions, and patency were assessed. Percutaneous gastrostomy (PEG) tube location, J-arm course, and fluoroscopy time were correlated with success/failure. Failure was defined as inability to exit the stomach. Procedure-related complications were defined as adverse events related to tube placement occurring within seven days. Tube malfunctions and aspiration events were recorded and assessed.
Results: Technical success was achieved in 91.9% (95% CI, 86.7%-95.2%) of new tubes versus 94.2% (95% CI, 86.7%-95.2%) of replacements (P = 0.373). Periprocedural complications occurred in three patients (0.8%). Malfunctions occurred in 197 patients (50%). Median tube patency was 103 days (95% CI, 71-134 days). No association was found between successful J-arm placement and gastric PEG tube position (P = 0.677), indication for jejunal nutrition (P = 0.349), J-arm trajectory in the stomach and incidence of malfunction (P = 0.365), risk of tube migration and PEG tube position (P = 0.173), or J-arm length (P = 0.987). A fluoroscopy time of 21.3 min was identified as a threshold for failure. Malfunctions occurred more often in tubes replaced after 90 days than in tubes replaced before 90 days (P < 0.001). A total of 42 aspiration events occurred (OR 6.4, P < 0.001, compared with nonmalfunctioning tubes).
Conclusion: Fluoroscopy-guided J-arm placement is safe for patients requiring jejunal nutrition. Tubes indwelling for longer than 90 days have higher rates of malfunction and aspiration.
Figures



References
-
- Nicholas JM, Cornelius MW, Tchorz KM, et al. A two institution experience with 226 endoscopically placed jejunal feeding tubes in critically ill surgical patients. Am J Surg. 2003;186:583–590. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2003.09.005. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Itkin M, DeLegge MH, Fang JC, et al. Multidisciplinary Practical Guidelines for Gastrointestinal Access for Enteral Nutrition and Decompression from the Society of Interventional Radiology and American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute, with Endorsement by Canadian Interventional Radiological Association (CIRA) and Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe (CIRSE) Gastroenterology. 2011;141:742–765. http://dx.doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2011.06.001. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Zopf Y, Rabe C, Bruckmoser T, Maiss J, Hahn EG, Schwab D. Percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy and jejunal extension tube through percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: a retrospective analysis of success, complications and outcome. Digestion. 2009;79:92–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000207808. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Srinathan S, Hamin T, Walter S, Tan A, Unruh H, Guyatt G. Jejunostomy tube feeding in patients undergoing esophagectomy. Can J Surg. 2013;56:409–414. http://dx.doi.org/10.1503/cjs.008612. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Shin JH, Park A-W. Updates on percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy/gastrojejunostomy and jejunostomy. Gut Liver. 2010;4(Suppl 1):S25. http://dx.doi.org/10.5009/gnl.2010.4.S1.S25. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources