Literature DB >> 10223359

Antibiotic prophylaxis in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG): a prospective randomized clinical trial.

L Gossner1, J Keymling, E G Hahn, C Ell.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: The most frequent complication reported for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is peristomal wound infection which occurs in as many as 30 % of patients. In the studies published so far, the question of whether antibiotic prophylaxis reduces the incidence of peristomal wound infection has remained controversial. We therefore conducted a prospective, randomized trial to determine whether antibiotic prophylaxis can reduce the incidence of peristomal wound infection associated with PEG. PATIENTS AND METHODS: During a 2-year-period a total of 347 patients (251 men, 96 women; mean age 60.2+/-5) were included in our study. In all cases, a 9-French gauge Freka gastrostomy tube was inserted using the "pull" technique. The patients were randomly assigned to three different treatment groups (group 1, antibiotic prophylaxis with 2 g cefotaxime; group 2, antibiotic prophylaxis with 4g piperacillin plus 0.5g tazobactam; group 3, no antibiotic prophylaxis). For a period of one week after gastrostomy, the peristomal area was evaluated using a wound score. According to the score, peristomal infections were classified as being of degree I-IV. Infections of up to degree III were regarded as minor, while an infection of degree IV was defined as a severe complication.
RESULTS: PEG tubes were successfully placed in 336/347 patients (97 %). Of the 336 patients, 29 were excluded because of incomplete follow up (dropout rate 9%). Cases included were: in group 1, n = 101; in group 2, n = 100, and in group 3, n = 106. There was no mortality related to PEG insertion. There were five instances of severe complications (1.6%). Patients who received antibiotic prophylaxis had mean daily combined wound scores that were significantly lower than those of patients without antibiotic prophylaxis (P < 0.01). The control group (no antibiotic prophylaxis) exhibited significantly more peristomal wound infections of degree III (n = 8) than antibiotic prophylaxis group 1 (n = 0, P < 0.001) or antibiotic prophylaxis group 2 (n = 1, P < 0.012). Three patients in group 3 (no antibiotic prophylaxis) and one patient in group 2 developed peritonitis.
CONCLUSIONS: Severe wound infections requiring medical or endoscopic intervention are very rare events after PEG insertion. Antibiotic prophylaxis significantly reduces the risk of peristomal wound infection associated with PEG insertion. Antibiotic prophylaxis, therefore, is to be recommended as a general measure in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10223359     DOI: 10.1055/s-1999-13658

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Endoscopy        ISSN: 0013-726X            Impact factor:   10.093


  27 in total

1.  Antibiotic prophylaxis after percutaneous endoscopic gastrotomy insertion. All encompassing study is needed.

Authors:  S Sanders; M J Carter
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-03-25

2.  Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in head and neck cancer patients: indications, techniques, complications and results.

Authors:  Barbara F Zuercher; Pierre Grosjean; Philippe Monnier
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2010-11-03       Impact factor: 2.503

3.  [The value of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in ENT tumor patients].

Authors:  K Mantsopoulos; M Koch; J Zenk; H Iro
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 1.284

4.  Covering the percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube prevents peristomal infection.

Authors:  Yutaka Suzuki; Mitsuyoshi Urashima; Yoshio Ishibashi; Masahiro Abo; Hiroshi Mashiko; Yukimoto Eda; Toshiro Kusakabe; Naruo Kawasaki; Katsuhiko Yanaga
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 3.352

5.  Indications, complications and long-term follow-up of patients undergoing percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: A retrospective study.

Authors:  Fatih Ermis; Melih Ozel; Kemal Oncu; Yusuf Yazgan; Levent Demirturk; Ahmet Kemal Gurbuz; Taner Akyol; Hasan Nazik
Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr       Date:  2012-03-05       Impact factor: 1.704

6.  Complications of percutaneous endoscopic and radiologic gastrostomy tube insertion: a KASID (Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Diseases) study.

Authors:  Soo-Kyung Park; Ji Yeon Kim; Seong-Joon Koh; Yoo Jin Lee; Hyun Joo Jang; Soo Jung Park
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-08-21       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  [Indications and complications of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy].

Authors:  Gerhard Aschl; Andreas Kirchgatterer; Stephan Allinger; Max Hinterreiter; Dietmar Hubner; Wolfgang Kranewitter; Bernhard Stadler; Ludwig Wimmer; Peter Knoflach
Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr       Date:  2003-02-28       Impact factor: 1.704

Review 8.  Complications of and controversies associated with percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: report of a case and literature review.

Authors:  Jonathan Z Potack; Sita Chokhavatia
Journal:  Medscape J Med       Date:  2008-06-17

Review 9.  Systemic antimicrobial prophylaxis for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy.

Authors:  Allyson Lipp; Gail Lusardi
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2013-11-14

10.  Local infection after placement of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tubes: a prospective study evaluating risk factors.

Authors:  Y Zopf; P Konturek; A Nuernberger; J Maiss; J Zenk; H Iro; E G Hahn; D Schwab
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 3.522

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.