Comparison between nasogastric tube feeding and percutaneous fluoroscopic gastrostomy in advanced head and neck cancer patients.

Abstract

Wasting is a major complication of advanced head and neck cancer and the aim of this study was to compare nasogastric tube feeding (NG) and percutaneous fluoroscopic gastrostomy (PFG) in these patients. The goal of these two methods of nutritional support was to improve or maintain the initial nutritional status during treatment. A total of 90 patients, all stage IV oropharynx or hypopharynx tumor, were reviewed from a prospective databank. All these patients were treated by concomitant chemotherapy and twice-daily continuous radiotherapy with no acceleration. Fifty patients were managed by PFG, and the rest by NG. Mechanical failure, duration of feeding, complications, nutritional evaluation and quality of life were analysed. Mechanical failure occurred in 32 of the 40 NG patients and in seven of the gastrostomy group. In the PFG group, 80% of patients conserved their nutritional support after the end of the radiotherapy, none patient in the NG group. In the PFG group, two presented a wound infection and six had aspiration pneumonia while in the NG group, 21 had aspiration pneumonia probably due to the NG tube (gastroesophageal reflux). The feeding methods were found to be equally effective at maintaining body weight and body mass index at time 1 (3 weeks) and at time 2 (6 weeks). Advantages were associated with PFG cosmesis, mobility and quality of life. PFG is a safe and effective method of providing enteral nutrition during treatment to patients with advanced head and neck cancer and offers important advantages over NG.