| Literature DB >> 28691045 |
Louise Deluiz Verdolin Di Palma1, Gustavo Francisco de Souza E Mello1, Cindy Lis Granados1, Ricardo Dardengo Glória1, Caroline Sauter Dalbem1, Rolantre Lopes da Cruz1, Ana Carolina Maron Ayres1, Renata Sofia Camara Lisboa1, Alexandre Dias Pelosi1, Maria Aparecida Ferreira1, Gilberto Reynaldo Mansur1, Simone Guaraldi da Silva1, Theresa Christina Damian Ribeiro1, Fernando Luiz Dias1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Performing a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients can be challenging because of the presence of trismus, pharyngeal obstruction by tumor, and pharyngoesophageal strictures or fistula. Pharyngocutaneous fistula (PCF) is a major postoperative concern in patients submitted to total laryngectomy (TL). In the medical literature to date, the cervical fistula has been used as an access to PEG in only four reports. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of cervical fistula for insertion of a PEG tube. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective study at a single tertiary referral center, regarding the technical feasibility, safety and outcomes of a PEG tube introduced by a cervical fistula in HNC patients with obstructive lesions of the oropharynx.Entities:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28691045 PMCID: PMC5500110 DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-106581
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Endosc Int Open ISSN: 2196-9736
Patient characteristics.
| HNC patients, no. (%) | 21 (100) |
| Age, median (IQR), y | 59 (34 – 84) |
| Gender, no. (%) | |
Male | 18 (85.7) |
Female | 3 (14.3) |
| Tumor location, no. (%) | |
Larynx | 18 (85.7) |
Oropharynx | 2 (9.5) |
Hypopharynx | 1 (4.8) |
| Tumor treatment, no. (%) | |
Surgery + RXT | 9 (42.7) |
Surgery | 7 (33.3) |
Surgery + RXT + CHT | 4 (19.0) |
| PEG procedure setting, no. (%) | |
Inpatient | 13 (61.9) |
Outpatient (ambulatory) | 8 (38.1) |
|
PEG procedures with complication, no. (%)
| 8 (38.1) |
| 1 (4.8) |
| 8 (38.1) |
|
PEG adverse event, no. (%)
| |
Granulation tissue | 4 (19.0) |
Dermatitis | 2 (9.5) |
PEG tube placement | 2 (9.5) |
Gastric hematoma | 2 (9.5) |
Stomal infection | 1 (4.8) |
Traumatic gastric ulcer | 1 (4.8) |
BBS | 1 (4.8) |
| Follow-up, median (IQR), m | 17.9 (1 – 120) |
| Outcome, no. (%) | |
Death (disease progression) | 12 (57.1) |
PEG removed | 8 (38.1) |
PEG in use | 1 (4.8) |
HNC, head and neck cancer; no, number; %, percent; IQR, interquartile range; y, years; RXT, radiotherapy; CHT, chemotherapy; PEG, percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy; BBS, buried bumper syndrome; m, months;
8 patients with a total of 13 adverse events
Fig. 1Alternative access route for inserting a PEG tube using the ‘‘pull’’ method (Gauderer-Ponsky technique) a External aspect of the anterior cervical wall defect. A nasoenteric tube is seen across the exposed posterior wall of the pharyngeal region. A tracheostomy tube is in place. b Dilation of the narrowed and fibrotic esophageal opening with a Savary bougie. c Endoscope introduced in the esophagus. d The guide-wire is pulled out of the esophagus and connected to the PEG tube. e PEG tube insertion through the cervical opening. f PEG tube internal bumper advancement.