Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy buttons in children: superior to tubes

被引:28
作者
Novotny, Nathan M. [3 ]
Vegeler, Reid C. [2 ]
Breckler, Francine D. [1 ]
Rescorla, Frederick J. [1 ]
机构
[1] James Whitcomb Riley Hosp Children, Div Pediat Surg, Indianapolis, IN 46202 USA
[2] Indiana Univ, Sch Med, Indianapolis, IN 46202 USA
[3] Dept Surg, Indianapolis, IN 46202 USA
关键词
PEG; Length of stay; Dislodgement; Wound infection; PLACEMENT; COMPLICATIONS;
D O I
10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2009.02.024
中图分类号
R72 [儿科学];
学科分类号
100202 ;
摘要
Background: There is a paucity of literature comparing outcomes of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tubes vs PEG buttons. Primary PEG buttons offer an advantage of being a single-step low-profile enteral access device with potentially fewer complications. Methods: A retrospective review of patients undergoing PEG tubes and buttons (January 2006-August 2007) was performed. Power analysis demonstrated that 105 patients in each group were needed. Patient characteristics were collected in each group and evaluated by chi(2) and t tests. P values of less than .05 were considered significant. Results: A total of 223 children having undergone PEG (110 tubes, 113 buttons) were identified. No differences were found in operative time, intraoperative complications, clogging, breakage, infections, emergency department visits, or hospital readmissions. However, children undergoing PEG button placement were more likely to spend only one night in the hospital vs PEG tube (60% vs 25%, respectively; P < .001). In addition, PEG buttons had fewer dislodgments (4 vs 15; P < .05). Conclusion: The PEG buttons are less likely to become dislodged than PEG tubes. Infection rates were not found to be different between groups. Children with PEG buttons were more likely to be discharged earlier than children with PEG tubes. Primary PEG buttons are clinically comparable to PEG tubes with less concern for dislodgements. (C) 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1193 / 1196
页数:4
相关论文
共 11 条
[1]   HOW TO AVOID COMPLICATIONS DURING PERCUTANEOUS ENDOSCOPIC GASTROSTOMY [J].
BEASLEY, SW ;
CATTOSMITH, AG ;
DAVIDSON, PM .
JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC SURGERY, 1995, 30 (05) :671-673
[2]   A simple adjunct for safer change of PEG [J].
Castagnetti, M ;
Patel, S .
PEDIATRIC SURGERY INTERNATIONAL, 2006, 22 (03) :274-276
[3]   Should single-stage PEG buttons become the procedure of choice for PEG placement in children? [J].
Evans, Jonathan S. ;
Thorne, Margaret ;
Taufiq, Salik ;
George, Donald E. .
GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2006, 64 (03) :320-324
[4]   GASTROSTOMY WITHOUT LAPAROTOMY - A PERCUTANEOUS ENDOSCOPIC TECHNIQUE [J].
GAUDERER, MWL ;
PONSKY, JL ;
IZANT, RJ .
JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC SURGERY, 1980, 15 (06) :872-875
[5]   Prospective randomized trial comparing the direct method using a 24 Fr bumper-button-type device with the pull method for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy [J].
Horiuchi, A. ;
Nakayama, Y. ;
Tanaka, N. ;
Fujii, H. ;
Kajiyama, M. .
ENDOSCOPY, 2008, 40 (09) :722-726
[6]   Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in paediatric practice: Complications and outcome [J].
Khattak, IU ;
Kimber, C ;
Kiely, EM ;
Spitz, L .
JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC SURGERY, 1998, 33 (01) :67-72
[7]   PROSPECTIVE MULTICENTER EVALUATION OF AN INITIALLY PLACED BUTTON GASTROSTOMY [J].
KOZAREK, RA ;
PAYNE, M ;
BARKIN, J ;
GOFF, J ;
GOSTOUT, C .
GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 1995, 41 (02) :105-108
[8]   Preoperative prediction of need for fundoplication before gastrostomy tube placement in children [J].
Novotny, Nathan M. ;
Jester, Andrea L. ;
Ladd, Alan P. .
JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC SURGERY, 2009, 44 (01) :173-177
[9]   GASTROSTOMY WITH ANTIREFLUX PROPERTIES [J].
STRINGEL, G .
JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC SURGERY, 1990, 25 (10) :1019-1021
[10]   PERCUTANEOUS ENDOSCOPIC PLACEMENT OF THE BUTTON GASTROSTOMY TUBE AS THE INITIAL PROCEDURE IN INFANTS AND CHILDREN [J].
TREEM, WR ;
ETIENNE, NL ;
HYAMS, JS .
JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC GASTROENTEROLOGY AND NUTRITION, 1993, 17 (04) :382-386