Año 2016 / Volumen 108 / Número 12
Original
The role of surgical gastrostomy in the age of endoscopic gastrostomy: a 13 years and 543 patients retrospective study

776-779

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2016.4060/2015

Gabriel Paiva de Oliveira, Carla Adriana Santos, Jorge Fonseca,

Resumen
Background: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) became the gold standard for enteral feeding. Currently, surgical gastrostomy is seldom used. Objective: Evaluating the role of surgical gastrostomy in a center with a large experience in PEG. Methods: A retrospective study ranged 13 years, collecting from clinical records: age, gender, underlying disease, date of procedure, technique, primary surgery, complications, 30-day mortality. Patients were divided according to indication for gastrostomy: a) neurological; b) head and neck cancer; c) other diseases; and d) drainage. PEG, open surgical and laparoscopic gastrostomies were compared concerning evolution of the number of procedures, characteristics of patients, complications and mortality. Results: We identified 509 PEG, 26 open and 8 laparoscopic surgical gastrostomies. An increasing number of the percutaneous approach over the years was observed, while the number of surgical gastrostomies remains steady (mean: 2.6/year). All percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomies but three were feeding procedures, mostly in neurological patients. All laparoscopic gastrostomies were feeding procedures in head and neck cancer. Most open surgical gastrostomies were secondary procedures, part of more complex surgeries, and frequently for drainage purposes. The open surgical approach displayed more morbidity and mortality, reflecting the severity of underlying diseases. Conclusions: In our institution, open surgical gastrostomy is seldom used, and mostly as part of complex procedures, frequently for drainage purposes. PEG is the choice to most dysphagic patients needing an enteral feeding access. When not feasible, laparoscopic gastrostomy is a suitable alternative.
Share Button
Nuevo comentario
Comentarios
No hay comentarios para este artículo.
Bibliografía
1. Loser C, Aschl G, Hebuterne EMH, Mathus-Vliegen M, Muscaritoli, Niv Y, Rollins P, Singer RH. ESPEN guidelines artificial enteral nutrition – Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG). Clin Nutr. 2005;24:848-61.
2. Paski C, Dominitz JA. Endoscopic solutions to challenging enteral feeding problems. Curr. Opin. Gastroenterol. 2012 ;28 :427–31. DOI 10.1097/MOG.0b013e328355ecc9
3. Ponsky JL, Gauderer MW. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: indications, limitations, techniques, and results. World J Surg. 1989;13:165–70.
4. Moller P, Lindberg G-G, Zilling T. Gastrostomy by various techniques: evaluation of indications, outcome, and complications. Scand J. Gastroentrol. 1999;34:1050-4.
5. Rahnemai-Azar AA. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: Indications, technique, complications and management. World Journal of Gastroenterology. 2014;20(24):7739.
6. Ljungdahl M, Sundbom M. Complication rate lower after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy than after surgical gastrostomy: a prospective, randomized trial. Surg Endosc. 2006;20:1248–51.
7. Cosentini EP, Sautner T, Gnant M, Winkelbauer F, Teleky B, Jakesz R. Outcomes of surgical, percutaneous endoscopic, and percutaneous radiologic gastrostomies. Arch Surg. 1998;133:1076–83.
8. Covarrubias DA, O’Connor OJ, McDermott S, Arellano RS. Radiologic percutaneous gastrostomy: review of potential complications and approach to managing the unexpected outcome. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;200:921–31.
9. Edelman DS. Laparoendoscopic approaches to enteral access. Semin Laparosc Surg. 2001;8:195–201.
10. Anselmo CB, Tercioti Junior V, Lopes LR, Neto C, de Souza J, Andreollo NA. Surgical gastrostomy: current indications and complications in a university hospital. Revista do Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões. 2013;40:458–62.
11. Stiegmann, G.V., Goff, J.S., Silas, D., Pearlman, N., Sun, J., Norton, L., 1990. Endoscopic versus operative gastrostomy: final results of a prospective randomized trial. Gastrointest. Endosc. 36, 1–5.
12. Pomerantz MA, Salomon J, Dunn R. Permanent gastrostomy as a solution to some nutritional problems in the elderly. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1980;28:104–7.
13. Lucendo AJ, Friginal-Ruiz AB. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: An update on its indications, management, complications, and care. Rev Esp Enferm Dig. 2014 Dec;106(8):529–39.
14. Grilo A, Santos CA, Fonseca J. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy for nutritional palliation of upper esophageal cancer unsuitable for esophageal stenting. Arq Gastroenterol. 2012;49:227–31.
15. Duarte H, Santos C, Capelas ML, Fonseca J. Peristomal infection after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: a 7-year surveillance of 297 patients. Arq Gastroenterol. 2012;49:255–8.
16. Shimizu Y, Okuyama H, Sasaki T, Nose S, Saka R. Laparoscopic-assisted percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: a simple and efficient technique for disabled elderly patients. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2014 May;38(4):475–80.
17. Hermanowicz A. Laparoscopy-assisted percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy enables enteral nutrition even in patients with distorted anatomy. World Journal of Gastroenterology. 2013;19(43):7696.
Artículos relacionados

Carta

PEG use in patients with squamous cell carcinoma

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2019.6381/2019

Carta al Editor

Manejo del neumoperitoneo no quirúrgico

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2016.4215/2016

Carta al Editor

Respuesta de los autores: Español o inglés en la comunicación científica

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2015.3945/2015

Instrucciones para citar
Oliveira G, Santos C, Fonseca J. The role of surgical gastrostomy in the age of endoscopic gastrostomy: a 13 years and 543 patients retrospective study. 4060/2015


Descargar en un gestor de citas

Descargue la cita de este artículo haciendo clic en uno de los siguientes gestores de citas:

Métrica
Este artículo ha sido visitado 580 veces.
Este artículo ha sido descargado 72 veces.

Estadísticas de Dimensions


Estadísticas de Plum Analytics

Ficha Técnica

Recibido: 20/10/2015

Aceptado: 01/09/2016

Prepublicado: 08/11/2016

Publicado: 30/11/2016

Tiempo de revisión del artículo: 317 días

Tiempo de prepublicación: 385 días

Tiempo de edición del artículo: 407 días


Compartir
Este artículo aun no tiene valoraciones.
Valoración del lector:
Valora este artículo:




Asociación Española de Ecografía Digestiva Sociedad Española de Endoscopia Digestiva Sociedad Española de Patología Digestiva
La REED es el órgano oficial de la Sociedad Española de Patología Digestiva, la SociedadEspañola de Endoscopia Digestiva y la Asociación Española de Ecografía Digestiva
Política de cookies Política de Privacidad Aviso Legal © Copyright 2023 y Creative Commons. Revista Española de Enfermedades Digestivas