Literature DB >> 16530112

The role of endoscopically placed feeding or decompression tubes.

Stephen A McClave1, Christine S Ritchie.   

Abstract

The minimally invasive nature of endoscopically placed gastrostomy tubes makes them a viable consideration in palliative care. Complications related to the procedure appear to correlate with age and underlying comorbidities.However, in many instances, the scientific basis for establishing benefit or harm from tube placement is methodologically inadequate. Decisions must be preceded by a discussion of the value and potential risk of artificial nutrition in a particular setting, respecting the wishes and beliefs of each patient and his or her family. The decision to use PEG placement for any reason should be consistent with legal and ethical principles, reflect patient autonomy over any other consideration (including beneficence), and arise from a clear determination of the goals of care (and whether the PEG placement will truly help meet those goals). Whenever possible, further studies with better design are needed to evaluate whether the use of PEG truly affects quality of life and patient outcome in palliative care. PEG tubes for decompression are placed successfully most of the time. Symptom relief occurs usually within 7 days of the procedure. Overall, the morbidity related to the PEG procedure for decompression is only slightly higher than when the same technique is used for nutritional purposes. The appropriate timing for PEG tube placement for nutritional support and for decompression throughout the course of disease progression may be difficult to determine and yet may be a factor in its overall efficiency. Only minor modifications of the basic technique used for PEG placement for nutritional purposes are required to adapt the technique to a variety of other applications in palliative care.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16530112     DOI: 10.1016/j.gtc.2005.12.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastroenterol Clin North Am        ISSN: 0889-8553            Impact factor:   3.806


  6 in total

Review 1.  Palliative percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy placement for gastrointestinal cancer: Roles, goals, and complications.

Authors:  Matthew Mobily; Jitesh A Patel
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2015-04-16

2.  Decompressive percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in advanced cancer patients with small-bowel obstruction is feasible and effective: a large prospective study.

Authors:  Elena Zucchi; Mara Fornasarig; Luca Martella; Stefania Maiero; Emilio Lucia; Eugenio Borsatti; Luca Balestreri; Giorgio Giorda; Maria Antonietta Annunziata; Renato Cannizzaro
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2016-02-02       Impact factor: 3.603

3.  Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Prevents Gastroesophageal Reflux in Patients with Nasogastric Tube Feeding: A Prospective Study with 24-Hour pH Monitoring.

Authors:  Sung Hoon Jung; Seok Ho Dong; Jae Yeon Lee; Nam-Hoon Kim; Jae Young Jang; Hyo Jong Kim; Byung-Ho Kim; Young Woon Chang; Rin Chang
Journal:  Gut Liver       Date:  2011-08-18       Impact factor: 4.519

4.  A Successful Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Tube Feeding over Two Decades with No Complication: A Rare Case Report.

Authors:  Amrendra Mandal; Paritosh Kafle; Jasdeep S Sidhu; Muhammad Hassan; Vijay Gayam
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2019-08-07

5.  Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG): retrospective analysis of a 7-year clinical experience.

Authors:  Nenad Vanis; Aida Saray; Srdjan Gornjakovic; Rusmir Mesihovic
Journal:  Acta Inform Med       Date:  2012-12

6.  Outcomes of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in hospitalized patients at a tertiary care center in Turkey.

Authors:  K Gundogan; A Yurci; R Coskun; M Baskol; S Gursoy; G Hebbar; M Sungur; T R Ziegler
Journal:  Eur J Clin Nutr       Date:  2014-02-12       Impact factor: 4.016

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.