Çocuklarda perkütan endoskopik gastrostomi deneyimi ve aile memnuniyeti

Year 2019, Volume: 44 Issue: 3, 723 - 728, 30.09.2019

Oğuz Canan

https://doi.org/10.17826/cumj.472611

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmada perkütan endoskopik gastrostomi (PEG) işlemi uygulanmış çocukların demografik verilerinin, komplikasyon oranlarının irdelenmesi ve aile memnuniyetinin sorgulanması amaçlanmıştır.

Gereç ve Yöntem: Hasta dökümanlarından demografik bilgiler, altta yatan hastalık, PEG öncesi ve sonrası antropometrik ölçümler ve z skorları, PEG’e bağlı komplikasyonlar ile izlem süresi kaydedildi. 

Bulgular: Üç yıl içinde 21 hastaya PEG işlemi gerçekleştirilmişti. Olguların ortanca yaşı 74 ay idi. Olguların çoğunluğunu nörolojik, onkolojik ve metabolik hastalığı olan çocuklar oluşturmaktaydı (sırasıyla %71.4, %14.3 ve %14.3). Hastaların başlangıç ile 6.ay, 6-12. ay ve başlangıç ile 12.ay arasındaki tüm antropometrik ölçümlerinde istatistiksel olarak anlamlı artışı bulundu. Ancak 6-12.ay arasında boy ve kilo ortanca z skorları karşılaştırıldığında anlamlı yükseklik gözlenmedi). Ebeveynlerin işlem sonrası PEG ile ilgili görüşleri olumlu idi. İşlem sonrasında bir hastada ostomi sızıntısı ve üç hastada yerel stoma enfeksiyonu geliştiği tesbit edildi. 

Sonuç: Perkütan endoskopik gastrostomi, çocuklarda ve ergenlerde olduğu gibi, süt çocuklarında da oldukça başarılı ve güvenilir bir yöntemdir. Ailelerin işlem sonrası perkütan endoskopik gastrostomi ile ilgili görüşleri olumludur. 

Keywords

aile memnuniyeti, çocuk, malnütrisyon, perkütan endoskopik gastrostomi

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy experience in children and family satisfaction

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the demographic data, complication rates of children who underwent percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and to question family satisfaction.

Materials and Methods: Demographic information, underlying diseases, anthropometric measurements before and after PEG and z scores advanced complications due to processing and follow-up periods were obtained from patient files.

Results: In three years, 21 patients underwent PEG procedures. The median age of the patients was 74 months. The majority of the cases consisted of children with neurological, oncological and metabolic diseases (71.4%, 14.3% and 14.3%, respectively). There was a statistically significant increase between baseline and 6th month and between baseline and 12th month of the all antropometric measures z scores. But no significant difference was observed between 6th month and 12th month of the median weight and height z scores. Parents' opinions about PEG were positive. After the procedure, one patient had ostomy leakage and three patients had local stoma infection. 

Conclusion: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy is a very successful and reliable method in children and adolescents as well as in infants. Families' opinions on PEG after the procedure were positive. 

Keywords

Parental satisfaction, children, complication, percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy

References

• Refferences1. Aumar M, Lalanne A, Guimber D, Coopman S, Turck D, Michaud L, Gottrand F. Influence of percutenous endoscopic gastrostomy on gastroesophageal reflux disease in children. J Pediatr 2018;197:116-20.
• 2. Gauderer MW. Percutanous endoskcopic gastrostomy: a 10-year experience with 220 children. J Pediatr Surg 1991;26:288-94.
• 3. Avitsland TL, Kristensen C, Emblem R, Veenstra M, Mala T, Bjørnland K. Percutenous endoscopic gastrostomy in children: a safe technique with major symptoms relief and high parental satisfaction. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2006;43:624-8.
• 4. Wu FY, Wu JF, Ni YH. Long-term outcome after percutenous endoscopic gastrostomy in children. Pediatr Neonatol 2013;54:326-9.
• 5. Wilson L, Oliva-Hemker M. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in small medically complex infants. Endoscopy 2001;33: 433-6.
• 6. Quitadamo P, Thapar N, Staiano A, Borrelli O. Gastrointestinal and nutritional problems in neurologic impaired children. Eur J Paediart Neurol 2016;20:810-15.
• 7. Srinivasan R, Irvine T, Dalzell M. Indications for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy and procedure-related outcome. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2009;49:584-8.
• 8. Fortunato JE, Troy AL, Cuffari C, Davis JE, Loza MJ, Oliva-Hemker M et al. Outcome after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in children and young adults. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2010;50:390-3.
• 9. Lalanne A, Gottrand F, Salleron J, Puybasset-Jonquez AL, Guimber D, Turck D et al. Long term outcome of children receiving percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy feeding. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2014;59:172-6.
• 10. Zhou F, Gao YL, Liu ZJ, Hu YQ. Therapeutic efficacy of nutritional support by percutanous endoscopic gastrostomy in critically ill patients: A self-control clinical trial. Pak J Med Sci 2017;33:75-80
• 11. Nakao FS, Brant CQ, Stanich P, Ferrari Junior AP. Nutritional status improvement in neorologically impaired patients by percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy feding. Arq Gastroenterol 1999;36:148-53
• 12. El-Matary W. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in children. Can J Gastroenterol 2008;22:993-8.
• 13. van Els AL, van Driel JJ, Kneepkens CF, de Meij TG. Antibiotic prpphlaxix does not reduce the infection rate following percutaneous endoscopicgastrostomy in infant and children. Acta Paediatr 2017;106:801-805.
• 14. Rey JR, Axon A, Budzynska A, et al. Guidelines of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (E.S.G.E.) antibiotic prophylaxis for gastrointestinal endoscopy. European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Endoscopy 1998;30:318-24.
• 15. Brotherton AM, Abbott J, Aggett PJ. The impact of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy feeding in children; the parental perspective. Child Care Health Dev 2007; 33:539-46.
• 16. Tawfik R, Dickson A, Clarke M, Thomas AG. Caregivers’ perceptions following gastrostomy in severely disabled children with feeding problems. Dev Med Child Neurol 1997;39:746-51.