Literature DB >> 19413607

Complications following gastrostomy tube insertion in patients with head and neck cancer: a prospective multi-institution study, systematic review and meta-analysis.

D G Grant1, P T Bradley, D D Pothier, D Bailey, S Caldera, D L Baldwin, M A Birchall.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To measure morbidity and mortality rates following insertion of gastrostomy tubes in head and neck cancer patients. To determine evidence for any relationship between gastrostomy insertion technique and complication rates.
DESIGN: A prospective cohort study and qualitative systematic review.
SETTING: Multi-cancer networks in the South West of England, Hampshire and the Isle of White. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred and seventy-two patients with head and neck cancer undergoing gastrostomy tube insertion between 2004 and 2005. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) was performed in 121 patients. Fifty-one patients had radiologically inserted gastrostomy (RIG). Twenty-seven studies reporting outcomes following 2353 gastrostomy procedures for head and neck cancer. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Post-procedure mortality, major and minor complications.
RESULTS: In the present series, mortality rates were 1.0% (1/121) for PEG and 3.9% (2/51) for RIG. Overall major complication rates following PEG and RIG were 3.3% (4/121) and 15.6% (9/51) respectively. In our systematic review and meta-analysis of 2379 head and neck cancer patients, we observed fatality rates of 2.2% (95% CI 0.014-0.034) following PEG and 1.8% (95% CI 0.010-0.032) following RIG. Furthermore, major complication rates following PEG were 7.4% (95% CI 5.9-9.3%) and 8.9% (95% CI 7.0-11.2%) after RIG.
CONCLUSIONS: Procedure related mortality rates following gastrostomy in head and neck cancer patients are higher than those in mixed patient populations. Major complication rates following RIG in head and neck cancer patients are greater than those following PEG. Major complications following PEG in patients with head and neck cancer appear no worse than in mixed pathology groups. We have identified that RIG is associated with increased morbidity and mortality in patients who are ineligible for PEG. The serious nature of the complications associated with gastrostomy particularly in patients with head and neck cancer requires careful consideration by the referring physician.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19413607     DOI: 10.1111/j.1749-4486.2009.01889.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Otolaryngol        ISSN: 1749-4478            Impact factor:   2.597


  49 in total

Review 1.  Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy versus percutaneous radiological gastrostomy for swallowing disturbances.

Authors:  Yong Yuan; Yongfan Zhao; Tianpeng Xie; Yang Hu
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-02-03

2.  Validation of an updated evidence-based protocol for proactive gastrostomy tube insertion in patients with head and neck cancer.

Authors:  T E Brown; V Getliffe; M D Banks; B G M Hughes; C Y Lin; L M Kenny; J D Bauer
Journal:  Eur J Clin Nutr       Date:  2016-02-10       Impact factor: 4.016

Review 3.  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

Review 4.  Impact of weight loss in patients with head and neck carcinoma undergoing radiotherapy: is it an underestimated phenomenon? A radiation oncologist's perspective.

Authors:  J Cacicedo; A Dal Pra; F Alongi; A Navarro
Journal:  Eur J Clin Nutr       Date:  2015-04-29       Impact factor: 4.016

Review 5.  Percutaneous Gastrostomy Tube Placement: Recognizing When Things Go Wrong.

Authors:  Peter T Hoang; Christine O Menias; Matthew M Niemeyer
Journal:  Semin Intervent Radiol       Date:  2019-08-19       Impact factor: 1.513

6.  A novel percutaneous magnetically guided gastrostomy technique without endoscopy or imaging guidance: a feasibility study in a porcine model.

Authors:  Eduardo Aimore Bonin; Paulo Roberto Walter Ferreira; Marcelo de Paula Loureiro; Thais Andrade Costa-Casagrande; Paolo de Oliveira Salvalaggio; Guilherme Francisco Gomes; Rafael William Noda; Christopher John Gostout; Leandro Totti Cavazzola
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-07-18       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  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

8.  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

9.  Novel approach to antibiotic prophylaxis in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG): randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  John Blomberg; Pernilla Lagergren; Lena Martin; Fredrik Mattsson; Jesper Lagergren
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-07-02

10.  Complications of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube insertion in cancer patients: a retrospective study.

Authors:  Hala Mansoor; Muhammad Adnan Masood; Muhammed Aasim Yusuf
Journal:  J Gastrointest Cancer       Date:  2014-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.