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
. 2023 Mar;68(3):852-859.
doi: 10.1007/s10620-022-07569-7. Epub 2022 Jun 16.

Direct Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Versus Radiological Gastrostomy in Patients Unable to Undergo Transoral Endoscopic Pull Gastrostomy

Divyanshoo R Kohli  1   2 , Craig Smith  3 , Omer Chaudhry  3 , Madhav Desai  4 , Dion DePaolis  3 , Prateek Sharma  4
Affiliations

Direct Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Versus Radiological Gastrostomy in Patients Unable to Undergo Transoral Endoscopic Pull Gastrostomy

Divyanshoo R Kohli et al. Dig Dis Sci. 2023 Mar.

Abstract

Background and aims: A subset of patients needing long-term enteral access are unable to undergo a conventional transoral "pull" percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG). We assessed the safety and efficacy of an introducer-style endoscopic direct PEG (DPEG) and an interventional radiologist guided gastrostomy (IRG) among patients unable to undergo a pull PEG.

Methods: In this single center, non-randomized, pilot study, patients unable to undergo a transoral Pull PEG were prospectively recruited for a DPEG during the index endoscopy. IRG procedures performed at our center served as the comparison group. The primary outcome was technical success and secondary outcomes included 30-day and 90-day all-cause mortality, procedure duration, dosage of medications, adverse events, and 30-day all-cause hospitalization. The Charlson comorbidity index was used to compare comorbidities.

Results: A total of 47 patients (68.3 ± 7.13 years) underwent DPEG and 45 patients (68.6 ± 8.23 years) underwent IRG. The respective Charlson comorbidity scores were 6.37 ± 2 and 6.16 ± 1.72 (P = 0.59). Malignancies of the upper aerodigestive tract were the most common indications for DPEG and IRG (42 vs. 37; P = 0.38). The outcomes for DPEG and IRG were as follows: technical success: 96 vs. 98%; P = 1; 30-day all-cause mortality: 0 vs 15%, P < 0.01; 90-day all-cause mortality: 0 vs. 31%, P < 0.001; 30-day hospitalization: 19 vs. 38%; P = 0.06; procedure duration: 23.8 ± 1.39 vs. 29.5 ± 2.03 min, P = 0.02; midazolam dose: 4.5 ± 1.6 vs. 1.23 ± 0.6 mg; P < 0.001, and opiate dose: 105.6 ± 38.2 vs. 70.7 ± 34.5 µg, P < 0.001, respectively. Perforation of the colon during IRG was the sole serious adverse event.

Conclusion: DPEG is a safe and effective alternative to IRG in patients unable to undergo a conventional transoral pull PEG and may be considered as a primary modality for enteral support.

Clinicaltrials: gov Identifier: NCT04151030.

Keywords: Adverse events; Mortality; Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. ASGE Training Committee 2013–2014, Enestvedt BK, Jorgensen J, Sedlack RE, Coyle WJ, Obstein KL, et al. Endoscopic approaches to enteral feeding and nutrition core curriculum. Gastrointest Endosc. 2014;80(1):34–41.
    1. ASGE Technology Committee, Kwon RS, Banerjee S, Desilets D, Diehl DL, Farraye FA, et al. Enteral nutrition access devices. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010;72(2):236–48.
    1. Currie BM, Getrajdman GI, Covey AM, Alago W, Erinjeri JP, Maybody M et al. Push versus pull gastrostomy in cancer patients: A single center retrospective analysis of complications and technical success rates. Diagn Interv Imag. 2018;99:547–553. - DOI
    1. Siu J, Fuller K, Nadler A, Pugash R, Cohen L, Deutsch K et al. Metastasis to gastrostomy sites from upper aerodigestive tract malignancies: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2020;91:1005-1014.e17. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Itkin M, DeLegge MH, Fang JC, McClave SA, Kundu S, d’Othee BJ 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. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data

LinkOut - more resources