H-J Richter-Schrag1, A Fischer2. 1. Interdisziplinäre Endoskopie, Kliniken für Innere Medizin II und Allgemein- und Viszeralchirurgie, Universitätsklinik Freiburg, Sir Hans A. Krebs Str., 79106, Freiburg im Breisgau, Deutschland. hans-juergen.schrag@uniklinik-freiburg.de. 2. Interdisziplinäre Endoskopie, Kliniken für Innere Medizin II und Allgemein- und Viszeralchirurgie, Universitätsklinik Freiburg, Sir Hans A. Krebs Str., 79106, Freiburg im Breisgau, Deutschland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Buried bumper syndrome (BBS) is a severe complication of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) based on the overgrowth of gastric mucosa over the inner bumper of a PEG and migration into the gastric or abdominal wall and with a highly variable incidence ranging between 0.9 and > 8 %. However, no classification has yet been described setting the extent of migration of the inner bumper in relation to therapy and the related risk, especially of perforation. OBJECTIVES: In the past 12 years 38 patients presented with BBS. Initially, an attempt was made to treat all BBS patients endoscopically. A structured BBS classification into four types for estimation of the therapy risk was developed. METHOD: BBS classification: IA: inner bumper partially extrakorporeal or subcutaneous with and without fistula; IB: inner bumper completely extrakorporeal, full thickness focal defect; II: partially visible inner bumper inside the stomach, good degree of mobility; IV: deep type., inner bumper not visible, mucosa without mobility. RESULTS: Up to August 2014, examiners with different degrees of experience classified and treated 17 BBS patients according to the algorithm described above (type IA n = 2, type IB n = 2, type II n = 3, type III n = 4 and type IV n = 6). Problem-free endoscopic therapy was possible in all of the patients in whom good mucosa mobilization with or without partial identification of the inner PEG bumper could be previously induced. CONCLUSION: The classification serves as an aid and takes both the therapist's experience and patient safety into consideration. In estimating the risk, it considers the following prevailing circumstances: More stringent obligation for patient information under the Patient Rights Act, with presentation of possibly necessary expansion of therapy; the obligation to cite relative alternative treatments; prior check of the resources available (specialist/surgery available yes/no).
BACKGROUND: Buried bumper syndrome (BBS) is a severe complication of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) based on the overgrowth of gastric mucosa over the inner bumper of a PEG and migration into the gastric or abdominal wall and with a highly variable incidence ranging between 0.9 and > 8 %. However, no classification has yet been described setting the extent of migration of the inner bumper in relation to therapy and the related risk, especially of perforation. OBJECTIVES: In the past 12 years 38 patients presented with BBS. Initially, an attempt was made to treat all BBSpatients endoscopically. A structured BBS classification into four types for estimation of the therapy risk was developed. METHOD:BBS classification: IA: inner bumper partially extrakorporeal or subcutaneous with and without fistula; IB: inner bumper completely extrakorporeal, full thickness focal defect; II: partially visible inner bumper inside the stomach, good degree of mobility; IV: deep type., inner bumper not visible, mucosa without mobility. RESULTS: Up to August 2014, examiners with different degrees of experience classified and treated 17 BBSpatients according to the algorithm described above (type IA n = 2, type IB n = 2, type II n = 3, type III n = 4 and type IV n = 6). Problem-free endoscopic therapy was possible in all of the patients in whom good mucosa mobilization with or without partial identification of the inner PEG bumper could be previously induced. CONCLUSION: The classification serves as an aid and takes both the therapist's experience and patient safety into consideration. In estimating the risk, it considers the following prevailing circumstances: More stringent obligation for patient information under the Patient Rights Act, with presentation of possibly necessary expansion of therapy; the obligation to cite relative alternative treatments; prior check of the resources available (specialist/surgery available yes/no).
Authors: M M Ma; E A Semlacher; R N Fedorak; E A Lalor; D R Duerksen; R W Sherbaniuk; C E Chalpelsky; D C Sadowski Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 1995-05 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Hans Juergen Richter-Schrag; Sabine Richter; Olaf Ruthmann; Manfred Olschewski; Ulrich Theodor Hopt; Andreas Fischer Journal: Can J Gastroenterol Date: 2011-04 Impact factor: 3.522
Authors: A G Gravina; A Tessitore; V M Ormando; F Nagar; M Romeo; M R Amato; M Dallio; C Loguercio; A Federico; M Romano; F Ferraro Journal: BMC Gastroenterol Date: 2021-01-21 Impact factor: 3.067
Authors: Daniela Mueller-Gerbes; Bettina Hartmann; Julio Pereira Lima; Michele de Lemos Bonotto; Christoph Merbach; Arno Dormann; Ralf Jakobs Journal: Endosc Int Open Date: 2017-06-23