PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 12071092

[Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG)].

K E Grund
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG), although a standard method for long-time enteral nutrition, still leaves uncertainty about details in indication, technique and complications. Based on own experiences (approximately 1000 PEG's and 170 EPJ's in the last 10 years) these topics are discussed. As new indications the PEG for decompression in chronic intestinal obstruction and the questionable relative contraindications ascites, peritoneal carcinosis and Morbus Crohn are discussed. The common thread-pull through-technique is recommended in a slightly modified variation, according to direct puncture techniques of small intestine: the cannulas inserted in the intestine are fixed by an endoscopic alligator forceps, thus facilitating precise puncture and raising safety for the patient due to avoidance of dislocation. As complications local infections, implantation metastases and the buried bumper syndrome have to be mentioned and avoided. Alternative methods for PEG and different exchange systems for more comfort for the patients are discussed finally.

Explore related subjects

Endoscopy, GastrointestinalEnteral NutritionGastrostomyHumansPuncturesSurgical InstrumentsEnglish AbstractJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

K E Grund. 2002-05-15. [Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG)].. https://doi.org/10.1024/0369-8394.91.20.892

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

Sporadic ganglioneuromatosis of esophagogastric junction in a patient with gastro-esophageal reflux disorder and intestinal metaplasia.

A 58-year-old female with a recurrent history of upper abdominal pain and intermittent dysphagia underwent endoscopic evaluation that demonstrated an irregular and nodular esophago-gastric (EG) junction and grade I erosive esophagitis. Biopsies showed prominent intestinal metaplasia of Barrett's type without dysplasia, chronic inflammation and multiple aggregates of large cells within the mucosal lamina propria, some with spindle shaped nuclei. Immunohistochemistry stains for keratins AE-1/AE-3 were negative, while S-100 and NSE were positive. This, together with routine stains, was diagnostic for mucosal ganglioneuromatosis. The background of chronic inflammation with intestinal type metaplasia was consistent with long-term reflux esophagitis. No evidence of achalasia was seen. Biopsies of gastric antrum and fundus were unremarkable, without ganglioneural proliferation. Colonoscopy was unremarkable. No genetic syndromes were identified in the patient including familial adenomatous polyposis and multiple endocrine neoplasia type IIb (MEN IIb). Iansoprazole (Prevacid) was started by oral administration each day with partial relief of symptoms. Subsequent esophagogastroscopy repeated at 4 mo showed normal appearing EG junction. Esophageal manometry revealed a mild non-specific lower esophageal motility disorder. Mild motor dysfunction is seen with gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) and we feel that the demonstration of localized ganglioneuromatosis was not likely related etiologically. In the absence of findings that might suggest neural hypertrophy, such as achalasia, the nodular mucosal irregularity seen with this instance of ganglioneuromatosis may, however, have exacerbated the patient's reflux.

Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal↗
PubMed2006

Impact of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) on surgical decision-making in upper gastrointestinal tract cancer: an international multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is an integrated part of the pretherapeutic evaluation program for patients with upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract cancer. Whether the clinical impact of EUS differs between surgeons from different countries is unknown. The same applies to the potential clinical influence of EUS misinterpretations. The aim of this study was to evaluate the interobserver agreement on predefined treatment strategies between surgeons from four different countries, with and without EUS, and to evaluate the clinical consequences of EUS misinterpretations. METHODS: One hundred patients with upper GI tract cancer were randomly selected from all upper GI tract cancer patients treated at Odense University Hospital between 1997 and 2000. Based on patient records and EUS database results, a case story was created with and without the EUS result for each patient. Four surgeons were asked to select the relevant treatment strategy in each case, at first without knowledge of the EUS and thereafter with the EUS result available. Interobserver agreement and impact of EUS misinterpretations were evaluated using the actual final treatment of each patient as reference. RESULTS: Three of four or all four surgeons agreed on the same treatment strategy for nearly 60% of the patients with and without the EUS results. Treatment decisions were changed in 34% based on the EUS results, and the majority of these changes were toward nonsurgical and palliative treatments (85%). Interobserver agreement was relatively low, but overall EUS increased kappa values from 0.16 ("poor") to 0.33 ("fair"), thus indicating increased overall agreement after the EUS results were available. EUS conclusion regarding stage or resectability was wrong in 17% of the cases, but only one serious event would have been the clinical result of EUS misinterpretations. CONCLUSION: Despite being used in different ways by different surgeons, EUS did change patient management in one third of the cases. The impact of EUS misinterpretations seemed very low, and this study confirmed one of the strongest clinical possibilities of EUS, i.e., the ability to detect nonresectable cases. EUS is an important imaging modality for oncosurgeons from different countries.

Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal↗