Literature DB >> 17488255

Risk factors and risk reduction of malignant seeding of the percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy track from pharyngoesophageal malignancy: a review of all 44 known reported cases.

Mitchell S Cappell1.   

Abstract

AIM: To comprehensively review all known reported cases of stomal metastases after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) to systematically identify risk factors for this complication and to develop strategies for reducing this risk.
METHODS: Reported cases were identified by computerized literature searches. Criteria for risk factors for stomal metastases included: a substantially higher relative rate of this factor in patients with stomal metastases than expected from pharyngoesophageal malignancy in general, and biologic plausibility of this phenomenon. LITERATURE REVIEW: Review of all 44 known stomal metastases revealed the following. The mean patient age was 59.0+/-10.0 (SD) yr, and 79% of patients were male. Pathologically proven stomal metastases were located in the abdominal wall (PEG exit site) in 63%, in the gastric wall (PEG entrance site) in 7%, and in both walls in 30%. Mean survival after diagnosis was only 4.3+/-3.8 months. Pathologic risk factors for stomal metastases included: (a) pharyngoesophageal location of primary cancer (in 100% of cases, 0% other locations); (b) squamous cell histology (in 98%, adenocarcinoma in 2%); (c) poorly or moderately differentiated histology (in 92%, well differentiated in 8%); (d) advanced pathologic stage (in 97%, early stage in 3%); and (e) large primary cancer size at diagnosis (mean diameter 4.2+/-2.3 cm). These risk factors appeared to be quantitatively large (e.g., 98% of cases had squamous histology vs 50% expected rate, odds ratio 40.1, OR CI 6.31-246.4, P<0.0001). Therapeutic risk factors for stomal metastases included: (a) endoscopic PEG placement (in 98%, surgical gastrostomy in 2%); (b) pull-string PEG technique (in 98%, push-guidewire in 2%, direct-introducer in 0%); (c) primary cancer untreated or known local recurrence after treatment before PEG (in 87%); and (d) time>or=3 months after PEG insertion (in 100%, <3 months in 0%; mean interval 7.8+/-5.2 months after PEG). Four of the currently reported risk factors are novel (pathologic factors d,e; therapeutic factors a,d).
CONCLUSIONS: Strong risk factors for stomal metastases include: pharyngoesophageal primary cancer, squamous cell histology, less well-differentiated cancer, large size, and advanced cancer stage. The risk may be reduced in patients with risk factors by radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or cancer surgery before PEG; by substituting the push-guidewire for the pull-string technique for PEG; and possibly by use of a sheath with the pull-string technique.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17488255     DOI: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01227.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 0002-9270            Impact factor:   10.864


  26 in total

1.  [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

Review 2.  Gastroenteric tube feeding: techniques, problems and solutions.

Authors:  Irina Blumenstein; Yogesh M Shastri; Jürgen Stein
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-07-14       Impact factor: 5.742

3.  Comparison of fluoroscopy-guided Pull-type percutaneous radiological gastrostomy (Pull-type-PRG) with conventional percutaneous radiological gastrostomy (Push-type-PRG): clinical results in 253 patients.

Authors:  Yang Yang; J Schneider; C Düber; M B Pitton
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2011-07-09       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Comparison of the pull and introducer percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy techniques in patients with head and neck cancer.

Authors:  Felipe A Retes; Fabio S Kawaguti; Marcelo S de Lima; Bruno da Costa Martins; Ricardo S Uemura; Gustavo A de Paulo; Caterina Mp Pennacchi; Carla Gusmon; Adriana Vs Ribeiro; Elisa R Baba; Sebastian N Geiger; Mauricio P Sorbello; Marco A Kulcsar; Ulysses Ribeiro; Fauze Maluf-Filho
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2016-07-21       Impact factor: 4.623

5.  Comparison of Introducer Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy with Open Gastrostomy in Advanced Esophageal Cancer Patients.

Authors:  Prasit Mahawongkajit; Ajjana Techagumpuch; Palin Limpavitayaporn; Amonpon Kanlerd; Ekkapak Sriussadaporn; Jatupong Juntong; Assanee Tongyoo; Chatchai Mingmalairak
Journal:  Dysphagia       Date:  2019-04-25       Impact factor: 3.438

6.  Prospective experience of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tubes placed by otorhinolaryngologist-head and neck surgeons: safe and efficacious.

Authors:  Johanna Ruohoalho; Katri Aro; Antti A Mäkitie; Timo Atula; Aaro Haapaniemi; Harri Keski-Säntti; Leena Kylänpää; Annika Takala; Leif J Bäck
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2017-09-01       Impact factor: 2.503

7.  Does prior percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy alter post-operative outcome after esophagectomy.

Authors:  Abu Bakar Hafeez Bhatti; Farrukh Hassan Rizvi; Anum Waheed; Syed Hassan Raza; Aamir Ali Syed; Shahid Khattak; M Aasim Yusuf
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 3.352

8.  Incidence of abdominal wall metastases following percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy placement in patients with head and neck cancer.

Authors:  Eleanor Fung; David S Strosberg; Edward L Jones; Rebecca Dettorre; Andrew Suzo; Michael P Meara; Vimal K Narula; Jeffrey W Hazey
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-12-30       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Implantation of esophageal cancer onto post-dissection ulcer after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection.

Authors:  Satoshi Asai; Koutarou Takeshita; Yuki Kano; Eisuke Nakao; Takumi Ichinona; Naoki Fujimoto; Eisuke Akamine; Takuji Mori; Atsuhiro Ogawa
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-03-07       Impact factor: 5.742

10.  Assessment of safety and feasibility of a new technical variant of gastropexy for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: an experience with 435 cases.

Authors:  Paulo M O Campoli; Daniela M M Cardoso; Marília D Turchi; Flávio H Ejima; Orlando M Mota
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-06-26       Impact factor: 3.067

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.