Endoscopically placed venting gastrostomy can be a safe and effective palliative intervention in benign and malignant gastrointestinal obstruction.

Introduction: Chronic gastrointestinal obstruction can precipitate a constellation of symptoms including nausea, vomiting, abdominal distension and pain that negatively impact on health-related quality of life. Decompression via venting gastrostomy can offer symptomatic relief but safety and efficacy data are sparse. This study characterises the diverse venting percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (vPEG) cohort at our tertiary referral centre and defines the safety and efficacy of this procedure. Methods: Patients undergoing vPEG between May 2012 and June 2020 were identified from a prospectively maintained database and demographic, procedure-related and mortality data were extracted. Retrospective analysis of case notes provided data on patient symptoms. Last follow-up was May 2021. Results: 27 patients (median age 63, range 18-90 years) underwent vPEG insertion. The majority of vPEGs were for patients with obstruction secondary to locally advanced or metastatic malignancy (n=21/27, 77.8%). Six procedures were performed for benign disease (n=6/27, 22.2%). No patients developed the recognised serious complications of bleeding, perforation or peritonitis from vPEG insertion. Symptoms of nausea (p=0.006), vomiting (p<0.001), abdominal distension (p<0.001) and abdominal pain (p=0.002) were improved following vPEG. Pain beyond the expected postprocedural discomfort was associated with a lower number of days survived postprocedure (p=0.026). Conclusion: vPEG can be a safe and efficacious palliative intervention for benign and malignant chronic gastrointestinal obstruction. Severe postprocedural pain should be promptly investigated to exclude a potential complication. A defined clinical strategy for assessing and managing these patients would facilitate wider recognition of the benefits of vPEG and improve the safety profile in centres with more limited experience.

Predicting 30-day mortality following PEG insertion: External validation of the Sheffield Gastrostomy Score and analysis for additional predictors.

BACKGROUND: and study aims: The Sheffield Gastrostomy Score (SGS) was devised to stratify patients by calculating their risk of mortality at 30 days following PEG insertion. The aim was to externally validate the SGS and identify any further predictors of 30-day mortality. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective review of all PEG insertions performed over a ten year period in our centre. All patients who had a new PEG inserted were identified and the SGS calculated. Additionally, demographic, indication for PEG insertion and other blood results were recorded. Receiver operating characteristic curves were calculated and subsequent univariate and multivariate analysis was performed to identify additional risk factors for 30 day mortality. RESULTS: The PEG database comprised 1373 patients, of which 808 were suitable for analysis. For each increasing SGS gradation mortality rose, with 4% of those scoring 0 compared to 50% scoring 3. An area under the ROC curve of 0.69 (95% confidence interval 0.64-0.74) indicated good discriminative capacity. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that age ≥60 years (OR = 2.1 p = 0.016), serum albumin concentrations of 25-34 g/l (OR = 2.5 p = 0.001) or <25 g/l (OR = 6.8 p < 0.001), C-Reactive Protein ≥10 mg/l (OR = 2.7 p = 0.009) and lymphocyte count of <1.5 × 109/l (OR = 2.0 p = 0.004) increased the odds of 30-day mortality, whilst referral for PEG placement whilst an inpatient decreased the risk of death (OR = 0.53 p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: The SGS displayed reasonable predictive ability but the area under the curve is not high enough for routine clinical use. Modelling of further predictors from a multicentre study could provide scope for updating the SGS potentially improving patient selection.

Gastropexy can be as safe as conventional percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG), and biomarkers do not predict short-term or long-term outcomes: a 7-year follow-up audit.

OBJECTIVE: Gastrostomy facilitates artificial enteral feeding but controversy exists around associated morbidity and mortality. This study aimed to report short and long-term outcomes, and identify parameters associated with overall survival. METHODS: A 7-year follow-up audit was undertaken at Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, UK. All patients undergoing endoscopic gastrostomy insertion October 2011-September 2018 were included. Last follow-up was February 2019. Clinical data were prospectively collected. Blood results were retrospectively obtained from electronic records. Statistical analysis was with IBM SPSS V.25. RESULTS: 691 procedures were performed over the 7-year period (520 traditional pull-through percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and 171 gastropexy procedures to facilitate gastrostomy). Frequency of complications (gastrointestinal bleeding, perforation and peritonitis) was low (each n=1). Overall 7-day and 30-day mortality was 2.2% and 8.4%, respectively. One-year mortality reached 47.6%. There was no difference in survival between PEG and gastropexy procedures (p=0.410). Multivariate analysis reported increased age (p<0.001), increased alkaline phosphatase (p<0.001) and clinical indication (p=0.002) as independently associated with an increased hazard of death. Only age was moderately predictive of mortality (area under the curve 0.74, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.78, p<0.001) in the PEG group. Clinical indication was the only parameter independently associated with mortality in the gastropexy cohort (p=0.003). CONCLUSION: Endoscopic gastrostomy placement can be safe with a low mortality and low risk of serious complications. Blood markers were not associated with short-term or long-term outcomes. Gastropexy to facilitate gastrostomy is a safe alternative to traditional pull-through PEG procedures. Future work should consider quality of life outcomes to assess the benefit of gastrostomy from a patient perspective.

The clinical and psychometric validation of a questionnaire to assess the quality of life of adult patients treated with long-term parenteral nutrition.

BACKGROUND: Home parenteral nutrition (HPN) is an established treatment for the management of patients with chronic intestinal failure. No quality-of-life assessment tools have been developed and validated specifically for this patient population, and previous studies have used generic instruments or techniques not validated in HPN. The assessment of quality of life (QOL) should produce clinically relevant data reflecting patients' issues. The HPN-QOL was designed to assess the QOL of HPN patients. The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesized scale structure of the questionnaire with regard to reliability and validity in a sample of patients. METHODS: A provisional questionnaire was prepared following recognized guidelines and then subjected to field testing. The questionnaire was administered to 100 adult patients receiving HPN. Psychometric tests examined the reliability and validity of the questionnaire, and patients' debriefing comments were analyzed. RESULTS: The provisional questionnaire was adapted using evidence from quantitative and qualitative analysis. Multitrait scaling analysis and face validity refined the questionnaire to 48 items. Compliance rates were high, and the questionnaire was well accepted. CONCLUSIONS: A method of objectively assessing the QOL of patients treated with HPN has been developed. The HPN-QOL has been rigorously prepared and demonstrates psychometric and clinical validity to assess the QOL of long-term HPN patients.

Implementing nutritional standards: the Scottish experience.

In the United Kingdom, 5% of the population are underweight or have features of malnutrition. The prevalence of malnutrition rises with age and is more common in the north of England than in the south, but comparable data are not available for Scotland. In 2003, the National Health Service Quality Improvement Scotland (NHS QIS) developed a standard for food, fluid and nutritional care in hospitals (FFNCH). In 2006, a peer review of Scottish health boards was published. The reviewers reported that all Scottish health boards had started to implement the standards, but not across all clinical areas. Every health board had set up a nutritional care group to oversee and advise on the implementation of the standards, but none had produced a financial framework to support the work of the groups. Most health boards had not fully developed a policy or strategic plan to improve nutritional care as required, and there was a shortage of specialist nutrition nurses and clinical and nutrition support teams to supervise the treatment of patients with complex nutritional needs. The Scottish experience emphasizes the size of the task that health services face to bring about change.

A review of the quality of life of adult patients treated with long-term parenteral nutrition.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Some previous studies have assessed quality of life (QoL) in home parenteral nutrition (HPN) using generic instruments or non-validated questionnaires. A systematic search of electronic databases and relevant publications identified 50 publications. This paper reviews the QoL of patients receiving HPN and discusses the factors affecting QoL. RESULTS: There is little available data about the QoL of HPN patients. Both HPN and the underlying disease may affect QoL, and an evaluation of QoL requires the separation of these two issues. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need for a standardised, scientifically validated, treatment-specific instrument to measure QoL in this population. The use of a treatment-specific QoL questionnaire should become part of the routine clinical management of HPN patients.

A review of the instruments used to assess the quality of life of adult patients with chronic intestinal failure receiving parenteral nutrition at home.

Home parenteral nutrition is an established method of supporting patients with intestinal failure, but this treatment may be life long and imposes severe restrictions on daily life. Impact on quality of life is an important outcome when considering the management of home parenteral nutrition patients. This paper reviews studies in which the quality of life of patients receiving home parenteral nutrition has been assessed. A systematic search of electronic databases and relevant publications was undertaken to identify generic or treatment-specific questionnaires used with home parenteral nutrition patients. Many of the thirty-four reports discovered were small studies. Nineteen used non-specific generic instruments, eight used non-validated questionnaires, four used a combination of both, and three did not use any formal tool. Few systematic patterns emerged. There are few available data on the quality of life of home parenteral nutrition patients, and there is a need for standardised, scientifically validated, treatment-specific instruments to measure quality of life in this population.