Volume 26, Issue 117 (9-2018)                   J Adv Med Biomed Res 2018, 26(117): 86-95 | Back to browse issues page

XML Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Jafari S, Jahangiri S, Fallahnezhad M, Jameshorani M, Mazloumzadeh S, Asadi Khiavi M. Study of Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Outcomes. J Adv Med Biomed Res 2018; 26 (117) :86-95
URL: http://journal.zums.ac.ir/article-1-5409-en.html
Study of Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Outcomes
Sattar Jafari1 , Salim Jahangiri1 , Mojtaba Fallahnezhad * 2, Maryam Jameshorani1 , Saideh Mazloumzadeh3 , Masoud Asadi Khiavi4
1- Dept.of Gastroenterolog,Valiasr Hospital, Zanjan University of Medical Sciences, Zanjan, Iran.
2- Razi Science Researchers Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
3- Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Zanjan University of Medical Sciences, Zanjan, Iran.
4- Applied Pharmacology Reaserch Center, Zanjan University of Medical Sciences, Zanjan, Iran.
Abstract:   (149495 Views)

Background and Objective: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is the technique of choice for providing enteral access to patients who require long-term enteral nutrition. This study was performed to evaluate the outcomes and complications of PEG.
Materials and Methods: In this semi-experimental study, 77 patients (45 men, 32 women; age mean: 58.9±19.7 years, Min: 14 years, Max: 89 Years) who underwent initial PEG placement in Vali-e-asr hospital, Zanjan-Iran, from 2014 to 2015 were included. The complications were assessed three weeks and three months after PEG insertion. The quality of life (QoL) was evaluated with Karnofsky questionnaire before PEG placement and three months after that.
Results: The most common indications of PEG placement were cerebrovascular accidents (26.5%), cardio-pulmonary disease (20.6%), and drug and substance abuse toxicities (16.2%). Complications occurred in 26.5% (18 cases) of the patients. The frequencies of the complications at end of the third week and third month were 17.6% and 11.8%, respectively. The most common complication was tube leakage. Also, no significant difference was found between mean of QoL scores pre- and post- PEG placements (p> 0.05).
Conclusion: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy is a safe and minimally invasive endoscopic procedure associated with a low morbidity rate.

Keywords: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG), Outcome, Quality of Life (QoL)
Full-Text [PDF 522 kb]   (158540 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Original Article |
Received: 2018/11/13 | Accepted: 2018/11/13 | Published: 2018/11/13
References
1. Somi MH, Maghbooli L, Antikchi M. A study of indications and complications of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in 100 patients. Tabriz Univ Med J. 2011; 33: 42-6.
2. Nicholson FB, Korman MG, Richardson MA. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: a review of indications, complications and outcome. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2000; 15: 21-5. [DOI:10.1046/j.1440-1746.2000.02004.x] [PMID]
3. Hossein SM, Leili M, Hossein AM. Acceptability and outcomes of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube placement and patient quality of life. Turk J Gastroenterol. 2011; 22: 128-33. [DOI:10.4318/tjg.2011.0180] [PMID]
4. Antanavicius G, Leslie D, Torres-Villalobos G, Kellogg T, Ikramuddin S. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube insertion via gastro-gastric fistula in a gastric bypass patient. Obes Surg. 2010; 20: 957-9. [DOI:10.1007/s11695-008-9695-4] [PMID]
5. Richter-Schrag HJ, Richter S, Ruthmann O, Olschewski M, Hopt UT, Fischer A. Risk factors and complications following percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: a case series of 1041 patients. Can J Gastroenterol. 2011; 25: 201-6. [DOI:10.1155/2011/609601] [PMID] [PMCID]
6. Ermis F, Ozel M, Oncu K, et al. Indications, complications and long-term follow-up of patients undergoing percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: A retrospective study. Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2012; 124: 148-53. [DOI:10.1007/s00508-011-0082-0] [PMID]
7. Birgisson S. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in Iceland over 10 year period: a retrospective study of indications, complications and ethical issues. Laeknabladid. 2012; 98: 97-102.
8. Tabib SM, Mostaghni AA, Valizadeh Tousi SM. Assessment of endoscopic gastrostomy complications and the efficacy of single dose prophylactic antibiotic in 136 patients. Iran South Med J. 2008;10: 143-52.
9. Mirbagheri SA, Ghadimi R, Eshagh Hosseini SM, Esfandbod M, Ghofrani M. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and its sequels; α 3 months follow-up in 30 patients in Amir-Alam hospital. Govaresh J. 2002; 6: 203-38.
10. Barati M, Khaleghi S, Motamed Rastgar H, Talebitaher M, Farhadi N. Evaluation of percutaneous endoscopic gasterostomy in Hazrat Rasoul Akram hospital. Iran Univ Med J. 2013; 20: 49-54.
11. Vanis N, Saray A, Gornjakovic S, Mesihovic R. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG): retrospective analysis of a 7-year clinical experience. Acta Inform Med. 2012; 20: 235-7. [DOI:10.5455/aim.2012.20.235-237] [PMID] [PMCID]
12. Lee C, Im JP, Kim JW, et al. Risk factors for complications and mortality of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: a multicenter, retrospective study. Surg Endosc. 2013; 27: 3806-15. [DOI:10.1007/s00464-013-2979-3] [PMID]
13. Sharifi A, Dolatshahi Sh, Naseri H, Ramim T. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy technique: the outcome and complications. Tehran Univ Med J. 2013; 70: 781-7.
14. Erdil A, Saka M, Ates Y, et al. Enteralnutrition via percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy and nutritionalstatus of patients: five-year prospective study. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2005; 20: 1002-7. [DOI:10.1111/j.1440-1746.2005.03892.x] [PMID]
15. Nakanishi M, Hattori K. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tubes are placed in elderly adults in Japan with advanced dementia regardless of expectation of improvement in quality of life. J Nutr Health Aging. 2014; 18: 503-9. [DOI:10.1007/s12603-014-0011-9] [PMID]
16. Silander E, Nyman J, Bove M, Johansson L, Larsson S, Hammerlid E. Impact of prophylactic percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy on malnutrition and quality of life in patients with head and neck cancer: a randomized study. Head Neck. 2012; 34: 1-9. [DOI:10.1002/hed.21700] [PMID]
Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2024 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Journal of Advances in Medical and Biomedical Research

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb