Premium
Risk factors for early and late procedure‐related adverse events in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: A single center, retrospective study
Author(s) -
PevelingOberhag Jan,
Osman Imad,
Walter Dirk,
Filmann Natalie,
Stratmann Katharina,
Hausmann Johannes,
Knop Viola,
Waidmann Oliver,
Vermehren Johannes,
Herrmann Eva,
Zeuzem Stefan,
FriedrichRust Mireen,
Blumenstein Irina,
Albert Jörg G
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
journal of gastroenterology and hepatology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.214
H-Index - 130
eISSN - 1440-1746
pISSN - 0815-9319
DOI - 10.1111/jgh.14407
Subject(s) - medicine , percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy , adverse effect , gastrostomy , retrospective cohort study , single center , surgery , peg ratio , enteral administration , parenteral nutrition , finance , economics
Background Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) provides the most common method to ensure enteral nutrition for various indications. However, PEG placement may be associated with relevant procedure‐related morbidity and mortality. We aimed to identify clinical parameters predicting an increased risk of PEG‐related adverse events. Methods A retrospective analysis was performed for all patients who had undergone PEG placement in our center between August 2010 and January 2014. PEG‐related adverse events and risk factors were evaluated through review of endoscopic reports and medical charts. All patients were followed until death or study closure (median follow‐up 30 months, range 12–48). Results A total of 576 patients (417 male, mean age 56) were included. Indication for PEG insertion was preemptive or therapeutic in underlying oncological disease ( n = 410), neurological diseases ( n = 114), or others ( n = 151). The pull method was used in 501 patients (87%). Overall, 56 (59%) and 39 (41%) patients had early (< 30 days) and late (> 30 days) adverse events of which 11.8% and 4.7% were classified as minor and major, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that a high number of comorbidities, an oncological indication, and, as a statistical trend, high body mass index were associated with early adverse events. The use of the push method for insertion of PEG was associated with increased late adverse events, which mainly consisted of tube dislocations. Conclusions Clinical parameters that may easily be accessed correlate to an unfavorable outcome of a PEG procedure. This should raise the endoscopist's awareness for patients at high risk for adverse events.