经皮内镜胃造瘘和空肠造瘘术研究进展

经皮内镜胃造瘘(PEG)和空肠造瘘术(PEJ)人工肠内营养可有效避免患者营养状况进一步恶化,提高患者生活质量。随着对治疗目的更清晰的认识以及内镜技术的进步,PEG/PEJ适应证增加而禁忌证相对减少,操作技术及并发症防治研究有了许多进展。     

Single endoscopist-performed percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement

AIM: To investigate whether single endoscopist-performed percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is safe and to compare the complications of PEG with those reported in the literature. METHODS: Patients who underwent PEG placement between June 2001 and August 2011 at the Baskent University Alanya Teaching and Research Center were evaluated retrospectively. Patients whose PEG was placed for the first time by a single endoscopist were enrolled in the study. PEG was performed using the pull method. All of the patients were evaluated for their indications for PEG, major and minor complications resulting from PEG, nutritional status, C-reactive protein (CRP) levels and the use of antibiotic treatment or antibiotic prophylaxis prior to PEG. Comorbidities, rates, time and reasons for mortality were also evaluated. The reasons for PEG removal and PEG duration were also investigated. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients underwent the PEG procedure for the first time during this study. Eight patients who underwent PEG placement by 2 endoscopists were not enrolled in the study. A total of 54 patients were investigated. The patients’ mean age was 69.9 years. The most common indication for PEG was cerebral infarct, which occurred in approximately two-thirds of the patients. The mean albumin level was 3.04 ± 0.7 g/dL, and 76.2% of the patients’ albumin levels were below the normal values. The mean CRP level was high in 90.6% of patients prior to the procedure. Approximately two-thirds of the patients received antibiotics for either prophylaxis or treatment for infections prior to the PEG procedure. Mortality was not related to the procedure in any of the patients. Buried bumper syndrome was the only major complication, and it occurred in the third year. In such case, the PEG was removed and a new PEG tube was placed via surgery. Eight patients (15.1%) experienced minor complications, 6 (11.1%) of which were wound infections. All wound infections except one recovered with antibiotic treatment. Two patients had bleeding from the P     

The safety and feasibility of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy placement

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is now becoming increasingly popular. However, an increasing number of complications has also been reported. Regarding such complications, iatrogenic perforation of the colon is considered to be the most dangerous. METHODOLOGY: We routinely check the course of the colon using preoperative abdominal computed tomography with air injected into the stomach (pre-PEG CT), and thereafter the patients are classified into two groups, consisting of a Low-risk group and High-risk group, according to the locations of the stomach and colon. The patients in the High-risk group underwent PEG in combination with contrast radiography of the large intestine. We evaluated the safety and feasibility of PEG placement using a Pre-PEG CT and contrast radiography of the large intestine. RESULTS: A Pre-PEG CT showed a Low-risk type in 84.4% and a High-risk type in 15.6%. High-risk type patients underwent contrast radiography on the large intestine in conjunction with PEG. As a result, we were able to perform PEG safely with no iatrogenic perforation in any patients. CONCLUSIONS: A pre-PEG CT and contrast radiography of the large intestine combination with PEG are thus considered to be an effective modality for reducing the incidence of serious complications of PEG.     

Patient outcomes related to percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy placement

Although many aspects of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) have been addressed in the literature, attention to psychologic and social outcomes of PEG has been limited. Our goal was to assess a range of physical, psychologic, and social outcomes related to PEG feeding. This study is a follow-up survey of patients undergoing PEG and/or their surrogates. Data were collected by semistructured interviews in two tertiary hospitals in Alberta, Canada. Measurements consisted of PEG status at 1-year follow-up, quality of life, impact on caregivers, and opinions about long-term support via PEG. We included 71 patients in the study. Of all 39% of patients died, 32% had the PEG still in place, and for 28% the PEG was removed at the end of the 1-year follow-up. The prognosis of the attending physician at the initial visit and the underlying disease were significantly related to the outcome (p < 0.05). After 1 year, 85% of all patients whose PEGs were still in place, were not working or studying or managing their own household in any capacity, 67% were not managing personal care, and 19% were feeling very ill. Fifty-two percent of the caregivers spent 15 hours or more per week visiting and caring for the patient. At the 1-year follow-up, all ten surviving patients who could be interviewed agreed they would have a PEG again. Seventy percent of the caregivers said that they would want the same decision to be made. Although a majority of patients and caregivers did not regret the decision to place a PEG, this did not necessarily mean enhanced quality of life. Developing strategies to select patients who will benefit from long-term nutritional support could improve patient outcomes.     

Indications for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy insertion: ethical aspects

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is a popular technique for long-term enteral nutrition. However it is not beneficial in all cases, and may even prolong the process of dying. The present article discusses the main indications for PEG insertion, and the ethical considerations involved. Three main questions need to be answered: (1) for what purposes should PEG be used; (2) for what type of patients, and (3) when should PEG be inserted in the natural history of the patient's illness? PEG is used in patients unable to maintain sufficient oral intake. It has been found to improve quality of life and/or to increase survival in patients with head and neck cancer, acute stroke, neurogenic and muscle dystrophy syndrome, growth failure (children) and gastric decompression. It led to no improvement in nutritional or functional status in patients with cachexia, anorexia, aspiration (and aspiration pneumonia), and cancer with a short life expectancy. Several court decisions have stipulated that PEG need be offered in patients in a persistent vegetative state or patients with senile dementia who have lost the ability for self-determination. Since the 30-day mortality after PEG insertion is very high for patients hospitalized in a general medical center, a 'cooling off' period of 30-60 days should be scheduled from the time of the PEG request to actual insertion.     

Survival after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy placement in older persons

BACKGROUND: The prolongation of life is an important consideration in the decision to initiate long-term tube feeding. This report critically synthesizes the evidence regarding the impact of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube placement on survival in older persons. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted using MEDLINE from January 1980 until January 1999. Articles reporting survival data in older persons (mean or median age >65 years) after PEG tube placement were identified. The number and age of subjects, length of follow-up, setting, and survival data were extracted from all eligible studies. Mortality data at 1, 2, 6, and 12 months after PEG placement were quantitatively synthesized. Clinical characteristics associated with decreased survival among subjects with PEG tubes were identified. RESULTS: Five cohort studies compared survival in patients with and without feeding tubes in nursing homes, but none demonstrated a survival benefit. Another cohort study reported increased survival for tube-fed patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. The pooled proportion of all subjects surviving after PEG placement was as follows: 1 month = 0.81 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74-0.88), 2 months = 0.70 (95% CI, 0.65-0.74), 6 months = 0.56 (95% CI, 0.20-0.92), and 12 months = 0.38 (95% CI, 0.26-0.49). Advanced age and malignancy were the factors most often reported to be associated with poorer survival among subjects with PEG tubes. CONCLUSIONS: The impact of PEG placement on survival is not known because the level of evidence is limited. PEG tubes may prolong life in selected populations. However, the majority of older patients selected for PEG placement will not survive 1 year after the procedure. Certain factors may identify those patients more likely to derive a survival benefit from long-term tube feeding. This information may offer some guidance to decision makers for whom prolongation of life is an important factor in the tube-feeding decision.     

Long-term outcome after placement of a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube

Aim:   To evaluate long-term survival and prognostic factors in patients who have undergone placement of a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube.
Methods:   A retrospective analysis of all patients without malignancy who underwent percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy at Hanyu General Hospital during the period January 2001–December 2005.
Results:   A total of 198 patients (100 men, 98 women) were assessed. Median age was 78 years (range, 25–97 years). The primary diagnosis was a cerebrovascular disorder in 149 (75.3%) of the patients. Prior to placement, 120 (60.6%) had suffered pneumonia. Survival was 87.4% at 1 month, 67.8% at 3 months, 52.6% at 6 months, 38.1% at 1 year, 27.8% at 2 years and 22.3% at 3 years. Pneumonia was the most common cause of death during the follow-up period (91 of 140 patients, 65.0%). Cox's proportional hazards model showed independent predictors of mortality to be a low serum albumin concentration (≤2.9 g/dL) and history of pneumonia before the procedure.
Conclusions:   Mortality of patients who underwent percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy appears to be high. In particular, the long-term prognosis was poor for patients with hypoalbuminemia, and this procedure is probably not preferred for patients with recurrent aspiration pneumonia.     

Investigation and prediction of enteral nutrition problems after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy

AIM： To investigate and predict enteral nutrition problems after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy （PEG）.
METHODS： We retrospectively analyzed data for 252 out of 285 patients who underwent PEG at our hospital from 1999 to 2008 after PEG were defined as： Enteral nutrition problems （1） patients who required ≥ 1 mo after surgery to switch to complete enteral nutrition, or who required additional parenteral alimentation continuously; or （2） patients who abandoned switching to enteral nutrition using the gastrostoma and employed other nutritional methods. We attempted to identify the predictors of problem cases by using a logistic regression analysis that examined the patients＇ backgrounds and the specific causes that led to their problems. RESULTS： Mean age of the patients was 75 years, and in general, their body weight was low and their overall condition was markedly poor. Blood testing revealed that patients tended to be anemic and malnourished. A total of 44 patients （17.5%） were diagnosed as having enteral nutrition problems after PEG. Major causes of the problems included pneumonia, acute enterocolitis （often Clostridium difficile-related）, paralytic ileus and biliary tract infection. A multivariate analysis identified the following independent predictors for problem cases： （1） enteral nutrition before gastrectomy （a risk reduction factor）; （2） presence of esophageal hiatal hernia; （3） past history of paralytic ileus; and （4） presence of chronic renal dysfunction.
CONCLUSION： Enteral nutrition problems after PEG occurred at a comparatively high rate. Patient background analysis elucidated four predictive factors for the problem cases.     

The percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube. medical and ethical issues in placement

OBJECTIVE: Offering and recommending PEG tube placement to patients has been a topic of considerable interest in the medical literature. The role of individual health care professionals in the decision making process is poorly defined. PEG tubes are often placed inappropriately because of unrealistic and inaccurate expectations of what they can accomplish in patients unable to tolerate adequate oral intake. We have developed an algorithm for PEG placement for the geriatric, oncology, and neurology patients based on a critical review of current literature. METHODS: An extensive review of the literature was performed focusing on PEG tube placement in oncology, neurology, and geriatric patients. This algorithm was developed to provide both the primary care provider and the specialist with appropriate indications for PEG placement in these patient populations. RESULTS: Appropriate indications for PEG placement are 1) Esophageal obstruction (e.g., esophageal cancer), 2) Neurologic etiology of dysphagia without obstruction (e.g., status post cerebrovascular accident, pseudobulbar palsy), 3) Prolonged refusal to swallow without evidence of concomitant terminal illness (e.g., protracted pseudodementia due to severe depression), 4) Supplemental nutrition for patients undergoing chemotherapy or radiation therapy. CONCLUSIONS: If no physiologic benefit is expected with PEG placement (anorexia-cachexia syndrome), the health care team has no obligation to offer or perform an intervention. This same principle would apply if intervention improves physiologic states but has no effect on quality of life (e.g., permanent vegetative state). Small-bore feeding tubes are cost effective and relatively safe for enteral feedings of up to 6-8 weeks. This is especially pertinent in the population with acute neurological deficits, in which prognostication on extent of impairment is best estimated by communication with neurologist. In the geriatric population there is no proved benefit in weight gain or markers of nutrition (albumin, prealbumin) in patients with malnutrition due to impaired oral intake.     

Long-term outcome following placement of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in younger and older patients

Objective. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is the method of choice in maintaining enteral nutrition in patients with swallowing and nutritional disorders of different etiology. The aim of this study was to assess the long-term outcome of patients following placement of a PEG. Material and methods. All patients who received a PEG between October 1999 and September 2000 were included in this prospective study. Long-term function, replacement or removal of the PEG, complications and survival of the patients were analyzed in group A (younger than 75 years) and group B (75 years or older). Results. The indications for PEG placement in group A (54 patients, mean age 54.5 years) were neurological (66.7%) and malignant (31.5%) disorders, whereas in group B (40 patients, mean age 81 years) the indications were predominantly neurological diseases (87.5%). The majority of patients (91 of 94 patients; 96.8%) could be followed long term or until death. In group A, 46 patients (85.2%) had uncomplicated long-term function of their PEG and interventions were necessary in only 8 patients. Removal of the PEG was possible during the course in 17 patients (31.5%). In group B, uncomplicated long-term function was observed in 34 patients (85%) and interventions were required in only 6 patients. Removal of the PEG was not possible in group B. Survival rates for 1-, 2- and 5 years in group A were 73.9%, 61.8% and 43.9%, respectively, and in group B 41.4%, 31.9% and 15.9%, respectively; the difference was statistically significant (p=0.002). Conclusions. Excellent long-term function of PEG was seen in this study of 94 consecutive patients, and interventions were necessary only in a minority of patients. The prognosis for older patients was worse; however, the 2-year survival rate of 32% justified the PEG insertion.     

Long-term outcome following placement of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in younger and older patients

OBJECTIVE: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is the method of choice in maintaining enteral nutrition in patients with swallowing and nutritional disorders of different etiology. The aim of this study was to assess the long-term outcome of patients following placement of a PEG. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All patients who received a PEG between October 1999 and September 2000 were included in this prospective study. Long-term function, replacement or removal of the PEG, complications and survival of the patients were analyzed in group A (younger than 75 years) and group B (75 years or older). RESULTS: The indications for PEG placement in group A (54 patients, mean age 54.5 years) were neurological (66.7%) and malignant (31.5%) disorders, whereas in group B (40 patients, mean age 81 years) the indications were predominantly neurological diseases (87.5%). The majority of patients (91 of 94 patients; 96.8%) could be followed long term or until death. In group A, 46 patients (85.2%) had uncomplicated long-term function of their PEG and interventions were necessary in only 8 patients. Removal of the PEG was possible during the course in 17 patients (31.5%). In group B, uncomplicated long-term function was observed in 34 patients (85%) and interventions were required in only 6 patients. Removal of the PEG was not possible in group B. Survival rates for 1-, 2- and 5 years in group A were 73.9%, 61.8% and 43.9%, respectively, and in group B 41.4%, 31.9% and 15.9%, respectively; the difference was statistically significant (p=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Excellent long-term function of PEG was seen in this study of 94 consecutive patients, and interventions were necessary only in a minority of patients. The prognosis for older patients was worse; however, the 2-year survival rate of 32% justified the PEG insertion.     

Complications of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) has become the method of choice for mid-to long-term enteral feeding. The majority of complications that occur are minor, but the rare major complications may be life threatening. Some complications occur soon after tube placement, others develop later, when the gastrostomy tract has matured. Older patients with comorbidities and infections appear to be at a greater risk of developing complications. Apart from being aware of indications and contraindications, proper technique of PEG placement, including correct positioning of the external fixation device, and daily tube care are important preventive measures. Adequate management of anticoagulation and antithrombotic agents is important to prevent bleeding, and administration of broad spectrum antibiotics prior to the procedure helps prevent infectious complications. Early recognition of complications enables prompt diagnosis and effective therapy.     

Palliative percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy placement for gastrointestinal cancer: Roles,goals, and complications

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement is an invaluable tool in clinical practice that has an important role in the palliative care of patients with gastrointestinal cancer. While there is no extensive data regarding the use of this procedure in patients with gastrointestinal malignancy, inferences can be made from the available information derived from studies of similar or mixed populations. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tubes can be used to provide enteral nutrition for terminal malignancies of the upper gastrointestinal tract as well as for decompression of malignant obstructions. The rates of successful placement for cancer patients with either of these indications are high, similar to those in mixed populations. There is no conclusive evidence that the procedure will help patients reach nutritional goals for those needing alimental supplementation. However, it is effective at relieving symptoms caused by malignant obstruction. A high American Society of Anesthesiologist physical status score and an advanced tumor stage have been shown to be independent predictors of poor outcomes following placement in cancer patients. This suggests the potential for similar outcomes in the palliative care of patients with advanced stage gastrointestinal cancer who may be in relatively poor physiologic condition. However, this potential should not preclude its use in patients with terminal gastrointestinal cancer considering the high rate of successful tube placement, the possible benefits and the ultimate goal of comfort in palliative care.