Literature DB >> 2107116

Endoscopic versus operative gastrostomy: final results of a prospective randomized trial.

G V Stiegmann1, J S Goff, D Silas, N Pearlman, J Sun, L Norton.   

Abstract

This study compared operative gastrostomy (OG) (by surgeons) with endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) (by physicians) in a prospective randomized fashion to determine whether one technique was superior. PEG (Sachs-Vine) and OG (Stamm) were done using local anesthesia. Patients were assessed for complications, mortality, tube function, and cost. Groups were equally matched for indications and underlying disease. Fifty-seven had OG and 64 had attempted PEG. Complications occurred in 26% of OG patients and 9% died. Complications occurred in 25% of PEG patients and 12% died. Tube feeding was initiated in both groups within a mean of 29 (24 to 72) hours of the gastrostomy placement. OG cost $1675 and PEG $979 to perform. Twenty-one PEG patients required endoscopic tube change which raised their total cost to $1574. We conclude there is no difference between OG (using local anesthesia) and PEG with regard to morbidity, mortality, or tube function. The endoscopic technique does appear to have economic advantage.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2107116     DOI: 10.1016/s0016-5107(90)70911-x

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


  28 in total

1.  Early initiation of post-PEG feeding: do published recommendations affect clinical practice?

Authors:  R Srinivasan; R S Fisher
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 2.  Enteral nutrition access devices.

Authors:  A Habib; D F Kirby
Journal:  Curr Gastroenterol Rep       Date:  1999-08

Review 3.  Endoscopic intervention for enteral access.

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

4.  Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube feeding may improve outcome of late rehabilitation following stroke.

Authors:  M C Allison; A J Morris; R H Park; P R Mills
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 5.344

5.  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

6.  Extrusion of PEG tube from the stomach with fistula formation: an unusual complication of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy.

Authors:  P Goodman; M S Levine; H P Parkman
Journal:  Gastrointest Radiol       Date:  1991

7.  Artificial nutrition: principles and practice of enteral feeding.

Authors:  David A J Lloyd; Jeremy Powell-Tuck
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2004-05

8.  Prevention of aspiration pneumonia during long-term feeding by percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: might cisapride play any role? An open pilot study.

Authors:  S Sartori; L Trevisani; D Tassinari; I Nielsen; G Gilli; D Donati; P Malacarne
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  1994-05       Impact factor: 3.603

9.  Metastatic implantation of an oral squamous-cell carcinoma at a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy site.

Authors:  P Sharma; S M Berry; K Wilson; H Neale; A S Fink
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Laparoscopic gastrostomy: the preferred method of gastrostomy in children.

Authors:  V S Jones; E R La Hei; A Shun
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2007-09-08       Impact factor: 1.827

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.