Percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy versus percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: a comparison of indications, complications and outcomes in 370 patients.
OBJECTIVE: Percutaneous access to the stomach can be achieved by endoscopic or fluoroscopic methods. Our objective was to compare indications, complications, efficacy and outcomes of these two techniques. METHODS: Records of 370 patients with feeding tubes placed either endoscopically by gastroenterology, or fluoroscopically by radiology, at our university-based tertiary care center over a 54-month period were reviewed. RESULTS: 177 gastrostomies were placed endoscopically and 193 fluoroscopically. Nutrition was the most common indication in each group (94 and 92%), but the most common underlying diagnosis was neurologic impairment in the endoscopic group (n=89, 50%) and malignancy in the fluoroscopic group (n=134, 69%) (p<0.001). Complications in the first 30 days were more common with fluoroscopic placement (23% versus 11%, p=0.002), with infection most frequent. Correlates of late complications were inpatient status (OR 0.26, 95%CI: 0.13-0.51) and a diagnosis of malignancy (OR 2.2, 95%CI: 1.03-4.84). Average follow-up time was 108 days in the fluoroscopic group and 174 days in the endoscopic group. CONCLUSIONS: Both endoscopic and fluoroscopic gastrostomy tube placement are safe and effective. Outpatient status was associated with greater early and late complication rates; minor complications such as infection were greater in the fluoroscopic group, while malignancy was associated with late complications.