ABSTRACT
Objective:To compare and analyze the technical success rate and safety between computed tomography(CT)-percutaneous radiological gastrostomy (PRG) and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG).Methods:From January 2017 to January 2022, at the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, the data of 76 patients who underwent gastrostomy due to inability to eat orally were collected, including 38 patients in PEG group and 38 patients in CT-PRG group. Surgical outcomes and complications were compared between the PEG and CT-PRG groups. Surgical outcomes included technical success rate, operation time, postoperative body mass index and hospital stay; while complications included minor complications (such as perifistula infection, granulation tissue proliferation, leakage, pneumoperitoneum, fistula tube obstruction, fistula tube detachment and persistent pain) and serious complications (such as bleeding, peritonitis, colonic perforation and death within 30 d). Independent sample t test, chi-square test, and Fisher exact probability test were used for statistical analysis. Results:The technical success rate of CT-PRG group was higher than that of the PEG group (100.0%, 38/38 vs. 78.9%, 30/38), and the operation time was shorter than that of the PEG group ((17.16±8.52) min vs. (29.33±16.22) min), and the differences were statistically significant ( χ2=1.19, t=2.36; P=0.038 and 0.011). There were no significant differences in postoperative body mass index ((16.29±3.56) kg/m 2 vs. (16.12±3.17) kg/m 2) and hospital stay ((4.13±1.26) d vs. (3.52±1.13) d) between PEG group and CT-PRG group (both P>0.05). The incidence of minor complications in the PEG group was 42.1% (16/38), including 6 cases of perifistulal infection, 1 case of leakage, 5 cases of fistula tube obstruction, 1 case of fistula tube detachment, and 3 cases of persistent pain. The incidence of serious complications was 5.3% (2/38), including 1 case of bleeding and 1 case of colonic perforation. The incidence of minor complications in the CT-PRG group was 39.5% (15/38), including 5 cases of perifistula infection, 1 case of granulation tissue proliferation, 3 cases of pneumoperitoneum, 3 cases of fistula tube obstruction, 2 cases of fistula tube detachment, and 1 case of persistent pain. The incidence of serious complications was 0. There was no significant difference in the incidence of minor complications between the PEG group and the CT-PRG group ( P>0.05), while the incidence of serious complications in the CT-PRG group was lower than that of the PEG group, and the difference was statistically significant (Fisher exact probability test, P=0.043). Conclusion:PEG is a safe and effective method of gastrostomy, but for patients with esophageal obstruction, CT-PRG can be an effective supplement to PEG.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: To determine the technical feasibility and success rate of percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PRG) after failure of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG). METHODS: Consecutive patients referred for PRG after failure of PEG between May 2011 and June 2016 were included in this study. The reasons for the failure of PEG, as well as the technical success and complications of PRG were noted. RESULTS: Fifteen patients (14 men, 1 woman; age, 27-93 years) were included. The most common reasons for PEG failure were esophageal stricture due to malignancies (n = 8), unfavorable abdominal wall conditions (n = 3), unstable patient condition during endoscopy (n = 2), and other miscellaneous conditions (n = 2). PRG placement was technically successful in all 15 cases. In one case, early slip-out of the gastrostomy tube occurred, which required removal and repositioning. No mortality was noted. CONCLUSION: PRG is technically feasible in patients with failed PEG insertion, and has advantages over PEG and a high overall success rate.
Subject(s)
Female , Humans , Male , Abdominal Wall , Endoscopy , Esophageal Stenosis , Gastrostomy , MortalityABSTRACT
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Interventional radiologists have played a main role in the technical evolution of gastrostomy, from the first surgical/endoscopical approaches to percutaneous interventional procedures. This study evaluated the results obtained in a 12-year series. METHODS: During the period December 1996 to December 2008, 254 new consecutive gastrostomies and 275 replacement procedures were performed in selected patients. All of the cases were treated by a T-fastener gastropexy and tube placement. The procedures were assessed by analyzing indications, patient selection, duration of the procedures, and mortality. RESULTS: All 254 first gastrostomies were successful; replacement procedures were also successfully performed. One (0.2%) patient with severe neurologic disorders died after the procedure without signs of procedure-related complications, and seven (1.3%) major complications occurred (four duodenal lesions with peritoneal leakage, two gastric bleedings, and one gastric lesion). Minor complications were easily managed; three tube ruptures were resolved. CONCLUSIONS: This long-term series and follow-up showed that a group of interventional radiologist can effectively provide gastrostomy placement and long-term tube management. Percutaneous gastrostomy is less invasive than other approaches and it satisfies the needs even of high-risk patients.