Literature DB >> 17996236

Success rate of direct percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy in patients who are obese.

Scott H Mackenzie1, Derrick Haslem, Kristen Hilden, Kristen L Thomas, John C Fang.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Direct percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy (DPEJ) is increasingly used as a method for obtaining jejunal enteral access. The most cited reason of unsuccessful placement is poor transillumination, which may be related to obesity. Whether obesity affects failure and complication rates has not been previously described.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the success rate and adverse events (AEs) associated with DPEJ placement in patients who were overweight and patients who were obese compared with patients who were normal or underweight defined by body mass index (BMI).
DESIGN: Retrospective database review.
SETTING: A tertiary-referral center. PATIENTS: Eighty DPEJ placements between February 2000 and September 2005. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: DPEJ placement success in patients who were overweight/obese (BMI >or= 25) versus patients who were normal or underweight (BMI <25). Secondary end points included procedure time and AEs.
RESULTS: Eighty DPEJs were placed in 75 patients. Of these DPEJs, 65 (81%) succeeded and 15 (19%) failed. Success rates were 23 of 24 for patients who were underweight (96%), 25 of 31 for patients with normal BMI (81%), 8 of 11 for patients who were overweight (73%), and 6 of 10 for persons who were obese (60%) (odds ratio 3.43, 95% CI 1.03-11.44; P< .05 for BMI >or= 25 vs BMI<25). Overall, AEs were not significantly different for patients with BMI <25 versus BMI >or=25 (24/55 vs 9/21, respectively; P= .64). However, 4 of the 5 severe AEs occurred in patients with a BMI >or= 25 (P= .07). LIMITATIONS: Retrospective single center.
CONCLUSIONS: DPEJ placement in patients who were overweight or obese was feasible, but procedural success was less frequent, and a trend toward more frequent major AEs was seen than in persons with normal or decreased BMI. BMI was an easily assessed preprocedural factor for DPEJ success and complication rates.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17996236     DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2007.06.041

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc        ISSN: 0016-5107            Impact factor:   9.427


  5 in total

1.  Endoscopic placement of enteral feeding tubes.

Authors:  Gerard P Rafferty; Tony Ck Tham
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2010-05-16

Review 2.  Current considerations of direct percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy.

Authors:  Yanfei Zhu; Liping Shi; Hao Tang; Guoqing Tao
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 3.522

3.  Direct Percutaneous Endoscopic Jejunostomy (DPEJ) Tube Placement: A Single Institution Experience and Outcomes to 30 Days and Beyond.

Authors:  Andrew T Strong; Gautam Sharma; Matthew Davis; Michael Mulcahy; Suriya Punchai; Colin P O'Rourke; Stacy A Brethauer; John Rodriguez; Jeffrey L Ponsky; Matthew D Kroh
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2016-12-19       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 4.  Gastroenterologist's Guide to Gastrostomies.

Authors:  Thaer Abdelfattah; Matthew Kaspar
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2022-05-17       Impact factor: 3.487

Review 5.  Direct percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy (DPEJ) and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy with jejunal extension (PEG-J) technical success and outcomes: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Smit S Deliwala; Saurabh Chandan; Anand Kumar; Babu Mohan; Anoosha Ponnapalli; Murtaza S Hussain; Sunil Kaushal; Joshua Novak; Saurabh Chawla
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2022-04-14
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.