Direct Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Versus Radiological Gastrostomy in Patients Unable to Undergo Transoral Endoscopic Pull Gastrostomy.
Digestive diseases and sciences
Adverse events; Mortality; Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy; washington; spokane; pshmc
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.
Kohli, Divyanshoo R; Smith, Craig; Chaudhry, Omer; Desai, Madhav; DePaolis, Dion; and Sharma, Prateek, "Direct Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Versus Radiological Gastrostomy in Patients Unable to Undergo Transoral Endoscopic Pull Gastrostomy." (2022). Articles, Abstracts, and Reports. 6132.