Literature DB >> 1903908

Comparison of operative versus percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement in the elderly.

J S Scott1, R A de la Torre, S W Unger.   

Abstract

To compare techniques of gastrostomy in elderly patients, the records of 100 patients age 70 and older who underwent gastrostomy tube placement as a primary procedure were reviewed. Two separate unmatched groups of 50 patients each were identified: those that underwent operative gastrostomy tube (OGT) placement and those that underwent percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube (PEG) placement. The groups were studied for demographic similarities and for differences in morbidity, mortality, and ease of feeding. Comparison showed that PEGs had a lower mortality (0%) and morbidity (10%) than did OGTs where mortality was 4 per cent and morbidity was 22 per cent. PEGs began feeding sooner (1.0 day vs. 2.8 days) than OGTs. In addition, almost 60 per cent of the PEG patients underwent complete upper endoscopy at the time of the PEG, which revealed pathology that either altered the type of tube placed or the eventual medical management. PEG offers a less morbid, safer, and easier to use method of gastrostomy tube placement than OGT in the majority of elderly patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1903908

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am Surg        ISSN: 0003-1348            Impact factor:   0.688


  10 in total

Review 1.  Endoscopic intervention for enteral access.

Authors:  T A Stellato
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  1992 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  Laparoscopic tube gastrostomy.

Authors:  J A Haggie
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 1.891

3.  Complication rate lower after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy than after surgical gastrostomy: a prospective, randomized trial.

Authors:  M Ljungdahl; M Sundbom
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2006-07-24       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  SLiC technique. A novel approach to percutaneous gastrostomy.

Authors:  A Sabnis; R Liu; B Chand; J Ponsky
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2005-12-09       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 5.  A descriptive review of the factors contributing to nutritional compromise in patients with head and neck cancer.

Authors:  Martin R Chasen; Ravi Bhargava
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2009-07-18       Impact factor: 3.603

6.  Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. Initial placement by single endoscopic technique and long-term follow-up.

Authors:  J P Grant
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1993-02       Impact factor: 12.969

7.  Comparison of Clinical Outcomes Between Surgical Gastrostomy and Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy with Introducer Technique in Patients with Upper Aerodigestive Malignancies: A Single-Center Analysis.

Authors:  Arunchai Chang; Chomduan Watcharamon; Attapon Rattanasupa; Kittikarn Thongsonkleeb; Bunlue Chowdok; Araya Khaimook; Bancha Ovartlarnporn; Varayu Prachayakul
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2020-09       Impact factor: 3.352

8.  Comparison of open gastrostomy tube to percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube in lung transplant patients.

Authors:  Sharven Taghavi; Vishnu Ambur; Senthil Jayarajan; John Gaughan; Yoshiya Toyoda; Elizabeth Dauer; Lars Ola Sjoholm; Abhijit Pathak; Thomas Santora; Amy J Goldberg
Journal:  Ann Med Surg (Lond)       Date:  2015-12-23

9.  SURGICAL GASTROSTOMY BASED ON ENDOSCOPIC CONCEPTS.

Authors:  Emmanuel Conrado Souza
Journal:  Arq Bras Cir Dig       Date:  2016-03

Review 10.  Percutaneous endoscopic versus surgical gastrostomy in patients with benign and malignant diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  José Gonçalves Pereira Bravo; Edson Ide; Andre Kondo; Diogo Turiani Hourneaux de Moura; Eduardo Turiani Hourneaux de Moura; Paulo Sakai; Wanderley Marques Bernardo; Eduardo Guimarães Hourneaux de Moura
Journal:  Clinics (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 2.365

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.