EXPERIENCES WITH PERCUTANEOUS ENDOSCOPIC GASTROSTOMY IN A GENERAL SURGERY CLINIC

Year 2019, Volume: 26 Issue: 3, 234 - 238, 01.09.2019

Murat Akıcı , Ogün Erşen , Girayhan Çelik , Murat Çilekar

https://doi.org/10.17343/sdutfd.532154

Cited By: 1

Abstract

Aim: In our study, we aimed to present the results of our experiences
and the results we detected in the retrospective examination of patients
undergoing percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy.

 

Material and Method: 378 patients in whom percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy
tube were placed at the patient's bedside in Afyon Kocatepe University
of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Department of General Surgery
Endoscopy Unit between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2017 were included in
the study. Patient records were examined by the file scanning methods. The
records were evaluated in terms of demographic information, technical
information, indications, complications and results.

 

Results: Of a total of 378 patients in whom PEG catheter was placed, 230
(60.9%) were male and 148 (39.1%) were female. The mean age of all patients was
73.4 ± 2 (20-93). While 244 (64.5%) of the patients had swallowing disorder due
to neurological causes, PEG procedure was performed in 98 (26%) due to
swallowing disorder caused by mechanical reasons. In 36 patients (9.5%) PEG
catheter was opened for diversion due to surgical reasons. No procedure-related
mortality or major complication was observed in any patient after the procedure.
The rate of wound infection was determined to be significantly higher in
patients with high subcutaneous adipose tissue when compared to the level at
which the gastrostomy catheter was detected. The risk of complication
development was detected higher in patients over the age of sixty (p = 0.038).

 

Conclusion: In a general surgical clinic, peg catheter
placement procedure is performed in patients with surgical or medical diseases in
accordance with the complication and success rates in the literature. 

Keywords

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy, gastrostomy, dysphagia

References

• 1- Stratton RJ, Elia M. Who benefits from nutritional support: what is the evidence? Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2007:19; 353-358.
• 2- Vanis N, Saray A, Gornjakovic S, Mesihovic R. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG): retrospective analysis of a 7-year clinical experience. Acta Inform Med 2012; 20: 235-237
• 3- Vyawahare MA, Shirodkar M, Gharat A, Patil P, Mehta S, Mohandas KM. A comparative observational study of early versus delayed feeding after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. Indian J Gastroenterol 2013; 32: 366-368
• 4- Conroy T. The Prevention and Management of Complications associated with established Percutaneous Gastrostomy Tubes in Adults: A Systematic Review. JBI Lib Sys Rev 2009; 7: 1-37
• 5- Heyland DK, Dhaliwal R, Drover JW, et al. Canadian clinical practice guidelines for nutrition support in mechanically ventilated, critically ill adult patients. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 2003;27:355-373.
• 6- Gauderer MWL, Ponsky JL, Izant RJ. Gastrostomy without laparotomy: a percutaneous endoscopic technique. J Paediatr Surg 1980;15:872–875.
• 7- Toporowska-Kowalska E, Gèbora-Kowalska B, Jabłoñski J, Fendler W, Wásowska-Królikowska K. Influence of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy on gastro-oesophageal reflux evaluated by multiple intraluminal impedance in children with neurological impairment. Dev Med Child Neurol 2011; 53: 938-43.
• 8- Pulkkinen J, Rekola J, Asanti M, Grénman R. Prophylactic percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in head and neck cancer patients: results of tertiary institute. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2014; 271: 1755-1758
• 9- Blomberg J, Lagergren J, Martin L, Mattsson F, Lagergren P. Complications after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in a prospective study. Scand J Gastroenterol 2012; 47: 737-742
• 10- RS Kwon, S Banerjee, D Desilets, DL Diehl, FA Farraye, V Kaul et al.Enteral nutrition access devices Gastrointest Endosc, 72 (2)(2010), pp.236-248
• 11- Evi Van Dyck, Elisabeth J Macken, Bernard Roth, Paul A Pelckmans, Tom G Moreels. Safety of pull-type and introducer percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tubes in oncology patients: a retrospective analysis BMC Gastroenterol, 11(2011), p.23
• 12- Demirci H, Kilciler G, Öztürk K, Kantarcıoglu M, Uygun A., Bagcı S. Our experience in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. Endoscopy Gastrointestinal 2015;23:73-76.
• 13- Ekin, N., Uçmak, F., Oruç, M., Tuncer, E. T., Yalçin, K. The results of the percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy insertion: Analysis of 113 cases. Dicle Medical Journal, 2015;42(3), 346.
• 14- Şenol, Z., Karakaş, D. Ö., Yılmaz, İ., Balta, A. Z., Özdemir, Y., Kendirli, T., & Sücüllü, İ. Our experience in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: Analysis of 113 cases. Van Med J, 2013;20, 52-6.
• 15- Blomberg, J., Lagergren, P., Martin, L., Mattsson, F., & Lagergren, J. Novel approach to antibiotic prophylaxis in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG): randomised controlled trial. Bmj 2010;341, c3115.