Insertion, efficacy, and removal of a nonendoscopically removable percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube

被引:19
作者
Cass, OW
Rowland, K
Bartram, B
Ross, JR
Choe, Y
Hall, JD
机构
[1] Abbott Labs, Ross Prod Div, Columbus, OH 43215 USA
[2] Hennepin Cty Med Ctr, Dept Med, GI Lab, Minneapolis, MN 55415 USA
来源
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY-ULTRASOUND AND INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES | 1999年 / 13卷 / 05期
关键词
percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy; enteral access;
D O I
10.1007/s004649901025
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Externally removable PEG tubes require an internal bumper that can collapse to a size that is small enough to allow for its removal through the abdominal wall by external traction. Adequate force must be maintained to avoid accidental dislodgement of the tube prior to its desired removal. Methods: A nonendoscopically removable PEG (Inverta-PEG, Ross Products Division, Abbott Laboratories, Columbus, OH, USA) was evaluated in a nonmasked, prospective clinical study involving 131 patients enrolled by 25 physicians. The over-the-wire (Sacks-Vine) technique was used for all placements. After insertion, patients were followed weekly for 8 weeks. During week 9, the PEGs were removed percutaneously (nonendoscopically), Insertion, efficacy, and removal performance were evaluated. Results: Complication rate during insertion was 1.5% and removal was 1.2%. Qualitatively, investigators rated ease of insertion and removal as very easy, easy, average, difficult, or very difficult. Investigators rated. 98.5% of insertions as very easy, easy, or average; 95.4% of removals were rated as very easy, easy, or average. Some patients exited the study prematurely due to leakage around the stoma (2.3%) and inadvertent tube removal (5.3%). These complication rates were consistent with earlier reports of other PEG studies. Conclusions: These results demonstrate that Inverta-PEG is a safe and effective tube that can be removed nonendoscopically with ease in 95% of the cases.
引用
收藏
页码:516 / 519
页数:4
相关论文
共 12 条
[1]  
BERGSTROM LR, 1995, MAYO CLIN PROC, V70, P829
[2]  
CALTON WC, 1992, MIL MED, V157, P358
[3]   COMPLICATIONS OF PERCUTANEOUS ENDOSCOPIC GASTROSTOMY IN HEAD AND NECK-CANCER PATIENTS [J].
GIBSON, SE ;
WENIG, BL ;
WATKINS, JL .
ANNALS OF OTOLOGY RHINOLOGY AND LARYNGOLOGY, 1992, 101 (01) :46-50
[4]   PERCUTANEOUS ENDOSCOPIC GASTROSTOMY - INITIAL PLACEMENT BY SINGLE ENDOSCOPIC TECHNIQUE AND LONG-TERM FOLLOW-UP [J].
GRANT, JP .
ANNALS OF SURGERY, 1993, 217 (02) :168-174
[5]   AUDIT OF OUTCOME OF LONG-TERM ENTERAL NUTRITION BY PERCUTANEOUS ENDOSCOPIC GASTROSTOMY [J].
HULL, MA ;
RAWLINGS, J ;
MURRAY, FE ;
FIELD, J ;
MCINTYRE, AS ;
MAHIDA, YR ;
HAWKEY, CJ ;
ALLISON, SP .
LANCET, 1993, 341 (8849) :869-872
[6]  
KOHLI H, 1995, AM SURGEON, V61, P191
[7]  
LEWIS BS, 1991, ENDOS REV
[8]   PERCUTANEOUS ENDOSCOPIC GASTROSTOMY IN A GENERAL-HOSPITAL - PROSPECTIVE EVALUATION OF INDICATIONS, OUTCOME, AND RANDOMIZED COMPARISON OF 2 TUBE DESIGNS [J].
PANOS, MZ ;
REILLY, H ;
MORAN, A ;
REILLY, T ;
WALLIS, PJW ;
WEARS, R ;
CHESNER, IM .
GUT, 1994, 35 (11) :1551-1556
[9]  
PONSKY JL, 1992, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V2, P215
[10]  
STEFFES C, 1989, AM SURGEON, V55, P273