Percutaneous Radiologic Gastrostomy Research Articles

Comparative Analysis of CT Fluoroscopy Modes and Gastropexy Techniques in CT-Guided Percutaneous Radiologic Gastrostomy.

This study was conducted to compare two modes of computed tomography fluoroscopy (CTF) and two gastropexy techniques used in CT-guided percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (CT-PRG) aiming to identify the optimal techniques for image guidance and gastropexy and, thus, to overcome the current lack of consensus on the preferred modalities. We retrospectively identified 186 successful CT-PRG procedures conducted evenly across two university hospitals from January 2019 to December 2023. Patients were divided into two groups (intermittent multislice CT biopsy mode-guided technique (MS-CT BM) and retention anchor suture (T-fastener) versus real-time (RT-)CTF and gastropexy device) for descriptive analysis of demographics, indication for PRG, radiation exposure (DLP), procedural time, number of CT scans, gastropexy time, and complications. Differences were assessed for statistical significance using Fisher's exact test and the Mann-Whitney U-test. Our final study population comprised 100 patients (50 from each center; 62.52 ± 12.36 years, 73 men). There was a significant difference in radiation exposure between MS-CT BM (group 1) and RT-CTF (group 2), with an average dose-length product (DLP) of 56.28 mGycm×m ± 67.89 and 30.91 ± 27.53 mGycm×cm, respectively (p < 0.001). PRG with RT-CTF guidance was significantly faster than PRG with MS-CT BM, with an average difference of 10.28 min (p < 0.001). No significant difference in duration was found between the two gastropexy methods compared (retention anchor suture, 11.50 ± 5.239 s vs. gastropexy device, 11.17 ± 6.015 s; p = 0.463). Complication rates did not differ significantly either (p = 0.458). Our findings indicate comparable efficacy and safety of the two gastropexy methods and underscore that the choice of CTF mode for image guidance has only a small role in reducing radiation exposure in patients undergoing CT-PRG. Instead, it is essential to avoid control scans.

Fluoroscopic-Guided vs. Multislice Computed Tomography (CT) Biopsy Mode-Guided Percutaneous Radiologic Gastrostomy (PRG)-Comparison of Interventional Parameters and Billing.

This study investigated and compared the efficacy, safety, radiation exposure, and financial compensation of two modalities for percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PRG): multislice computed tomography biopsy mode (MS-CT BM)-guided and fluoroscopy-guided (FPRG). The aim was to provide insights into optimizing radiologically assisted gastrostomy procedures. We conducted a retrospective analysis of PRG procedures performed at a single center from January 2018 to January 2024. The procedures were divided into two groups based on the imaging modality used. We compared patient demographics, intervention parameters, complication rates, and procedural times. Financial compensation was evaluated based on the tariff structure for outpatient medical services in Switzerland (TARMED). Statistical differences were determined using Fisher's exact test and the Mann-Whitney U test. The study cohort included 133 patients: 55 with MS-CT BM-PRG and 78 with FPRG. The cohort comprised 35 women and 98 men, with a mean age of 64.59 years (±11.91). Significant differences were observed between the modalities in effective dose (MS-CT BM-PRG: 10.95 mSv ± 11.43 vs. FPRG: 0.169 mSv ± 0.21, p < 0.001) and procedural times (MS-CT BM-PRG: 41.15 min ± 16.14 vs. FPRG: 28.71 min ± 16.03, p < 0.001). Major complications were significantly more frequent with FPRG (10% vs. 0% in MS-CT BM-PRG, p = 0.039, φ = 0.214). A higher single-digit number of MS-CT BM-guided PRG was required initially to reduce procedure duration by 10 min. Financial comparison revealed that only 4% of MS-CT BM-guided PRGs achieved reimbursement equivalent to the most frequent comparable examination, according to TARMED. Based on our experience from a retrospective, single-center study, the execution of a PRG using MS-CT BM, as opposed to FPRG, is currently justified in challenging cases despite a lower incidence of major complications. However, further well-designed prospective multicenter studies are needed to determine the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of these two modalities.

Iatrogenic vascular complications of non-vascular percutaneous abdominal procedures.

The purpose of this paper is to compile and present all of the reported vascular complications that resulted from common non-vascular abdominal procedures in the literature. Non-vascular procedures include, though are not limited to, percutaneous abscess/fluid collection drainage (PAD), percutaneous nephrostomy (PN), paracentesis, percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography (PTC)/percutaneous biliary drainage (PBD), percutaneous biliary stone removal, and percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PG)/percutaneous radiologic gastrojejunostomy (PG-J). By gathering this information, radiologists performing these procedures can be aware of the associated vascular injuries, as well astake steps to minimize risks. A literature review was conducted using the PubMed database to catalog relevant articles, published in the year 2000 onward, in which an iatrogenic vascular complication occurred from the following non-vascular abdominal procedures: PAD, PN, paracentesis, PTC/PBD, percutaneous biliary stone removal, and PG/PG-J.Biopsy and tumorablation were deferred from this article. 214 studies met criteria for analysis. 28 patients died as a result of vascular complications from the analyzed non-vascular abdominal procedures. Vascular complications from paracentesis were responsible for 19 patient deaths, followed by four deaths from PTC/PBD, three from biliary stone removal, and two from PG. Despite non-vascular percutaneous abdominal procedures being minimally invasive, vascular complications still canarise and be quite serious, even resulting in death. Through the presentation of vascular complications associated with these procedures, interventionalists can improve patient care by understanding the steps that can be taken to minimize these risks and to reduce complication rates.

Percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy versus percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy for enteral feeding: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Percutaneous radiological gastrostomy (PRG) and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) are minimally invasive gastrostomy techniques for individuals requiring prolonged enteral feeding. Recent meta-analyses concerning their efficacy and safety mainly included retrospective studies and yielded conflicting results. This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aimed to compare efficacy, safety, and procedure time between PRG and PEG for enteral feeding. MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for eligible RCTs comparing PRG and PEG for enteral feeding through February 23, 2024. The primary outcome was technical success. The secondary outcomes were (1) adverse events (AEs), (2) mortality, and (3) procedure time. We used the random-effects model to calculate pooled risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) with corresponding 95% CIs for dichotomous and continuous outcomes, respectively. Five RCTs with 544 patients (268 PRG and 276 PEG) were included. There was similar technical success (RR = 1.02; 95% CI = 0.98-1.05; I² = 35%; moderate certainty of evidence because of inconsistency), overall mortality (RR = 1.25; 95% CI = 0.63-2.47; I² = 47%; very low certainty of evidence because of inconsistency, indirectness, and imprecision), and overall AEs risk (RR = 1.06; 95% CI = 0.63-1.76; I² = 81%; low certainty of evidence because of inconsistency and imprecision) between the two groups. However, compared with PEG, the procedure time was longer in the PRG group (MD = 19.35 min; 95% CI = 0.95-37.75 min; I² = 98%; very low certainty of evidence because of inconsistency and imprecision). PRG and PEG demonstrate similar efficacy and safety; however, the endoscopic technique may boast a shorter procedure time.

Percutaneous radiological gastrostomy in our hospital: the key to improving nutritional status without complications

Percutaneous radiological gastrostomy in our hospital: the key to improving nutritional status without complications

Percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy with single gastropexy using balloon-assisted tract dilatation: comparison with peel-away sheath.

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PRG) with balloon-assisted tract dilatation (BATD) using a single gastropexy. This retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board. From August 2018 to October 2022, 61 patients (53 male and 8 female, mean age 67 years, age range 27-90 years) underwent PRG with balloon-retained tubes for enteral nutrition. Single gastropexy was performed in all cases. Patients were divided into two groups based on the tract dilatation technique used. In the first group, BATD (n = 48) was performed. In the second group, a 24-Fr peel-away sheath (PAS) was used for tract dilatation (n = 13). Patient demographics, technical success rate, clinical success rate, fluoroscopy time, cumulative radiation dose, and complications were retrospectively evaluated. The Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables and Fisher's exact test for categorical variables were performed to compare the two groups. All procedures were successfully performed with 100% technical and clinical success rates in both groups. The mean fluoroscopy time for the BATD group vs. the PAS group (1.68 ± 0.93 min vs. 3.56 ± 2.41 min, P < 0.001) and mean cumulative radiation dose (12.98 ± 9.28 mGy vs. 33.01 ± 15.14 mGy, P < 0.001) were significantly lower in the BATD group compared with the PAS group. There was one major complication of peritonitis that led to death in the PAS group (1/13, 7.7%) and no major complications in the BATD group. Minor complications such as pneumoperitoneum, abdominal pain, leakage, and balloon deflation occurred in 16 patients: 12 (12/48, 25.0%) patients in the BATD group and 4 (4/13, 38.5%) patients in the PAS group. The overall rate of major and minor complications was higher in the PAS group but did not show statistically significant differences (odds ratio: 1.875, 95%; confidence interval: 0.514-6.841, P = 0.486). BATD using a single gastropexy is a safe and effective technique for PRG.

Enteric Access: IR Perspective

AbstractGastrostomy tube placement may be needed for nutritional support, as in the setting of neurogenic dysphagia or head and neck malignancy, or for gastric decompression, as in the setting of malignant small bowel obstruction. Additionally, gastrojejunostomy or direct jejunostomy tubes may be needed in the setting of gastric outlet obstruction among other indications. Surgical, endoscopic, and percutaneous approaches are all well-described with generally similar outcomes. In this article, the standard radiologic percutaneous gastrostomy technique is reviewed including both the “push” and “pull” methods. Then, the special indications and techniques of advanced percutaneous enteral access such as percutaneous transesophageal gastrostomy and direct jejunostomy are discussed with examples shown.

12Fr-Pigtail Versus 14Fr-Balloon Percutaneous Radiologic Gastrostomy (PRG), Retrospective Evaluation of Outcomes and Complications; A Maastricht University Medical Centre Study

PurposeTo retrospectively compare tube and placement related results of a 12Fr-pigtail and a 14Fr-balloon gastrostomy tube.Materials and MethodsAll consecutive patients who underwent percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PRG) between January 2016 and June 2020 were enrolled in this retrospective single-center analysis. Follow-up for all patients was 180 days. Mortality after 30 days, technical success, days to first complication within 180 days, reason of unexpected visit (tube, anchor or pain related), and tube specific complications (obstruction, pain, luxation, leakage) were taken as outcome measures. Data were obtained from both PACS software and electronic health records.ResultsA total of 247 patients were enrolled (12Fr-pigtail: n = 139 patients and 14Fr-balloon: n = 108 patients). 30-day mortality was very low in both groups and never procedure related. Technical success was 99% in both groups. The average number of complications within 180 days after initial PRG placement was significantly higher in the 12Fr-pigtail group (12Fr-pigtail: 0.93 vs. 14Fr-balloon: 0.64, p = 0.028). Time to first complication within 180 days was significantly longer in the 14Fr-balloon group (12Fr-pigtail: 29 days vs. 14Fr-balloon: 53 days, p = 0.005). In the 14Fr-balloon group, the rate of tube-related complications (luxation and obstruction) was significantly lower compared to 12Fr-pigtail (29% vs. 45%, p = 0.011).Conclusion14Fr-balloon gastrostomy tubes have significantly lower (tube-related) complications rates and longer time to first complication compared to 12Fr-pigtail tubes. No procedure-related mortality was observed in either group. Technical success was very high in both groups.Level of Evidence Level 3, non-controlled retrospective cohort study.

Complications of Percutaneous Radiologic Gastrostomy Among Patients in a Tertiary Care Hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PRG) is the method of choice for patients incapable of ingesting nutrition orally. The complications related to PRG are classified into major and minor complications. This article presents the prevalence of major and minor complications of PRG among adult patients admitted to King Abdulaziz Medical City (KAMC) in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia between 2017 and 2018. This was a retrospective cross-sectional study, which included adult patients who underwent a new PRG intubation between 2017 and 2018 in KAMC in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The variables reviewed were the demographics, comorbidities, indications of tube insertion, major and minor complications, and mortality rates. A total of 105 patients who underwent PRG were covered in this study with a mean age of 69.2 + 20.4 years. The most common indications were neurogenic pharyngeal dysphagia (31%) and dementia (29%). Most of the complications reported were minor (40%)and major complications were found in 2%. The percentage of patients with both minor and major complications was 37%. The patients who had no complications made up 21%. Major skin complication was reported in 19 patients (18%), while leakage was the most occurring minor complication found in 49 patients (47%). The 30-day mortality was observed in five patients (5%) and one-year mortality was observed in 21 patients (20%), and none of them were related to the PRG tube. This study found that the PRG procedure had low rates of complications in KAMC. The majority wereminor complications, and the mortality rate was low with none being related to the tube itself. So PRG may be considered to be a relatively safe procedure.

Cone-beam computed tomography-assisted percutaneous gastrostomy tube insertion in children with challenging anatomy.

Percutaneous radiological gastrostomy tube insertion is a common procedure in children. An approach using ultrasound and fluoroscopy may not be feasible in patients with challenging anatomy; therefore, advanced techniques or other imaging modalities may be required. To describe our experience using cone-beam computed tomography (CT)-assisted percutaneous gastrostomy insertion in pediatric patients with challenging anatomy. A retrospective review was performed in children who underwent cone-beam CT-assisted percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy between January 2015 and July 2019. Indications, technique, outcomes, complications, and radiation dose (reference-point air kerma, air kerma area product) were assessed through chart and imaging review. Descriptive statistics only were used. Twenty-seven procedures were attempted in 26 patients. Reasons for utilizing cone-beam CT guidance were high-positioned stomach (n = 10), interposing bowel loops and liver (n = 19), omphalocele (n = 1), severe scoliosis (n = 1), and ventriculoperitoneal shunt (n = 1). Technical success was 85% (23/27). Mean procedure time was 96min (range 50-131min). No safe access route into the stomach was encountered in four patients; three were referred for surgical gastrostomy and one had a successful re-attempt. Radiation dose data was obtained from 19 procedures (17 successful) with a total dose in successful procedures ranging from 8.1 to 63.6mGy (average 26.2mGy, median 24.9mGy). The number of cone-beam CT acquisitions per procedure ranged from 1 to 4. Major complication frequency was 11% (3/27) (bleeding, peritonitis, and aspiration pneumonia); minor complication frequency was 3.7% (1/27). This study shows that cone-beam CT guidance can be useful for assisting percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy in children with challenging anatomy.

Feasibility of percutaneous radiological gastrostomy using the trocar technique and 14-fr pigtail catheter without gastropexy

Feasibility of percutaneous radiological gastrostomy using the trocar technique and 14-fr pigtail catheter without gastropexy

Efficacy and Safety of Percutaneous Radiological Gastrostomy (PRG) as a Rescue Measure for Enteral Feeding in Patients with Advanced Head, Neck, and Upper Digestive Malignancies.

Background Percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy is an established mode of enteral feeding for nutritional support for patients with dysphagia from upper digestive tract malignancy. Its role as a rescue measure in patients with advanced malignancy, presenting with absolute dysphagia and failure of nasogastric tube insertion has not been well established. Purpose This study was performed to assess technical success and long-term outcomes of percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (push type) for nutritional support for patients with absolute dysphagia as a last ditch nonsurgical rescue effort for enteral access. Materials and Methods This was a prospective observational study of 31 patients who underwent push-type percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy over a period of 2 years (March 2017-March 2019). The study was a part of a larger trial approved by the institutional ethics committee. Patients were followed till the removal of tube, death, or 1 year, whichever was earlier. Gastrostomy tube-related problems and complications were documented. Descriptive summary statistics were employed to analyze the success rate and complications. Results Thirty-one patients with mean age 56 years (26-78 years) including 18 males and 13 females with head and neck squamous cell cancer and esophageal cancer presenting with absolute dysphagia or significant dysphagia with failed nasogastric or endoscopic enteral access were included. Overall technical success was 93.5% (29/31), achieved in 26/31 patients with just fluoroscopy guidance and 3/5 patients with computed tomography guidance. One major (3.3%) and two minor (6.5%) complications were encountered. Five out of 29 gastrostomy tubes had to be exchanged, after a mean of 44 days (1-128 days) after insertion. Conclusion Percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy is a safe and effective intervention even as a rescue measure in patients with absolute dysphagia from advanced upper digestive tract malignancies.

Percutaneous Radiologic Gastrostomy in Patients After Partial Gastrectomy: A Retrospective Study to Assess the Technical Feasibility of Postsurgical Remnant Stomach Access.

To evaluate the technical feasibility of percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy in patients after partial gastrectomy. This retrospective study included 15 consecutive gastrectomized patients with attempted percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy at our institution between April 2014 and March 2021. When the stomach was sufficiently insufflated to distend below the left anterior subcostal margin, percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy with gastropexy was conventionally performed by the Seldinger technique. When the stomach was still highly positioned and/or overlaid by the other organs, some adjunctive maneuvers, such as hydro-displacement, intragastric balloon support, or cephalad oblique puncture or left intercostal puncture, were employed as modified gastrostomy. Ultrasonography or x-ray or computed tomography fluoroscopy was used for imaging guidance during the gastric puncture. Adequate tube placement was defined as technical success. Technical details, clinical outcomes, and complications were reviewed. One patient underwent percutaneous radiologic jejunostomy instead of gastrostomy because safe gastric access could not be ensured. Seven patients underwent conventional gastrostomy; the other seven underwent modified gastrostomy with no gastropexy. The technical success rate was 100% (7/7) in the conventional group and 85.7% (6/7) in the modified group. The stomach was punctured under x-ray or computed tomography fluoroscopy for conventional gastrostomy. In contrast, the combination of various modalities was used for modified gastrostomy except for one failed case with unintentional transhepatic access. During a median follow-up of 108days, no major complications occurred. The adequate combination of multimodal imaging guidance and technical modifications could secure radiological creation of gastrostomy for the postsurgical stomach. Level 4, Case Series.

Comparative outcomes of endoscopic and radiological gastrostomy tube placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis with GRADE analysis.

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and percutaneous radiological gastrostomy (PRG) are invasive interventions used for enteral access. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis with assessment of certainty of evidence to compare the risk of adverse outcomes and technical failure between PEG and PRG. We queried PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane from inception through January 2022 to identify studies comparing outcomes of PEG and PRG. The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality; secondary outcomes included the risk of colon perforation, peritonitis, bleeding, technical failure, peristomal infections, and tube-related complications. We performed GRADE assessment to assess the certainty of evidence and leave-one-out analysis for sensitivity analysis. In the final analysis, 33 studies, including 26 high-quality studies, provided data on 275,117 patients undergoing PEG and 192,691 patients undergoing PRG. Data from high quality studies demonstrated that, compared to PRG, PEG had significantly lower odds of selected outcomes, including 30-day all-cause mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.60-0.95; P=0.02), colon perforation (OR 0.61, 95%CI 0.49-0.75; P<0.001), and peritonitis (OR 0.71, 95%CI 0.63-0.81; P<0.001). There was no significant difference between PEG and PRG in terms of technical failure, bleeding, peristomal infections or mechanical complications. The certainty of the evidence was rated moderate for colon perforation and low for all other outcomes. PEG is associated with a significantly lower risk of 30-day all-cause mortality, colon perforation, and peritonitis compared to PRG, while having a comparable technical failure rate. PEG should be considered as the first-line technique for enteral access.

Is percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy safer than percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy?

Objectives: The objectives of the study were to compare the indications, adverse events, removal rates, and mortality of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PRG) techniques at our tertiary care institution from 2014 to 2019. Material and Methods: We undertook a 5-year retrospective review of patients who underwent either PEG or PRG at our institution from 2014 to 2019. Common adverse events include tube clogs, leaks, minor bleeds, and wound infections, while more rare major complications include peritonitis, intra-abdominal infection, and major hemorrhage. The procedures were all performed with either conscious sedation or general anesthesia. A total of 789 patients were reviewed, of whom 519 (65.8%) had a PRG and 270 (34.2%) had a PEG. PRGs were more likely to be placed for head-and-neck cancer (P &lt; 0.0001) and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (P &lt; 0.0001), while PEGs were more likely to be placed for gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) (P &lt;.0001) and malnutrition (P &lt; 0.0001). Results: The rate of major adverse events was similar between the two groups (P = 0.938). GI placed gastrostomy tubes were more likely to have a minor adverse event (P &lt; 0.0001), however, this was secondary to a significant increase in tube clog in the PEG/J group as compared to PEG (P &lt; 0.0001). Conclusion: The decision to place a PEG or PRG should be individualized to the patient’s specific condition and indication. Both procedures have favorable safety profiles, and it is likely that institutional expertise and procedural access will be the primary determinants of the procedural technique chosen for minimally invasive gastrostomy.

Radiology guided antegrade GASTROSTOMY deployment of mushroom (pull type) catheters with classical and modified methods in patients with oropharyngeal, laryngeal carcinoma, and anesthesia risk.

The aim of study is to evaluate the results of deployment of Percutaneous Radiological Gastrostomy (PRG), which is a good alternative to Surgical Gastrostomy (SG), with transoral approach in cases where Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (PEG) is contraindicated, difficult or unsuccessful, in patients with high risk of American Society of Anesthesiologists with four scores. In addition, we aimed to demonstrate the advantages of mushroom pull type catheters over push type gastrostomy catheters. This retrospective study included a total of 40 patients (18 females and 22 males) aged 21-92 years who underwent PRG with the antegrade transoral approach. PRG was performed by retrograde passing through the esophagus or snaring the guidewire from the stomach and taking out of the anterior abdominal wall. Patients' demographic data, indications for PRG, procedural outcomes and complications were screened and recorded. PRG was performed in 39 of 40 patients included in the study. Technical success rate was 97.5%. Procedure-dependent major complications such as death, aspiration, colon perforation, and deep abscess were not observed. Aspiration occurred in the first patient during the first feeding on the day after the procedure. Major complication rate was 2.5%. The total minor complication rate was 17.5% in 7 patients; parastomal leakage in 2 patients (5%), skin rash and infection in 3 (7.5%) patients, minor bleeding in 2 (5%) patients with oropharynx cancer, minimal bleeding from the gastrostomy catheter 1 week after the procedure in 1 (2.5%) patient. None of the cases had buried buffer. Tube functionality was preserved in all patients without any damage. Mushroom tip (pull type) gastrostomy catheter is a safe treatment method for patients requiring prolonged feeding because of wide diameter, endurance, long staying opening duration, less excessive dilatation and parastomal leakage, and no need for gastropexy. Lower cost and easier access are advantageous for mushroom tip pull type catheters compared to push type gastrostomy catheters in our country. The less invasive PRG is an alternative option in patients who are difficult to administer PEG, are at high anesthesia risk and cannot be sedated. This article is valuable in terms of its contribution to develop an alternative radiological method for the deployment of gastrostomy tubes in medical difficult patients. This method has shortened the duration of the procedure and increased the success rate in patients with difficulty in transition from the stomach to the esophagus or with difficulty in the upper gastrointestinal tract. Mushroom tip catheters can be placed successfully by radiological methods.

Percutaneous ultrasound gastrostomy (PUG): first prospective clinical trial

Graphical abstarctPurposeTo report the results of the first-in-human trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of the percutaneous ultrasound gastrostomy (PUG) technique.MethodsA prospective, industry-sponsored single-arm clinical trial of PUG insertion was performed in 25 adult patients under investigational device exemption (mean age 64 ± 15 years, 92% men, 80% inpatients, mean BMI 24.5 ± 2.7 kg/m2). A propensity score-matched retrospective cohort of 25 patients who received percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PRG) was generated as an institutional control (mean age 66 ± 14 years, 92% men, 80% inpatients, mean BMI 24.0 ± 2.7 kg/m2). Primary outcomes included successful insertion and 30-day procedure-related adverse events (AE’s). Secondary outcomes included procedural duration, sedation requirements, and hospital length of stay.ResultsAll PUG procedures were successful, including 3/25 [12%] performed bedside within the ICU. There was no significant difference between PUG and PRG in rates of mild AE’s (3/25 [12%] for PUG and 7/25 [28%] for PRG, p = 0.16) or moderate AE’s (1/25 [4%] for PUG and 0/25 for PRG, p = 0.31). There were no severe AE’s or 30-day procedure-related mortality in either group. Procedural room time was longer for PUG (56.5 ± 14.1 min) than PRG (39.3 ± 15.0 min, p < 0.001). PUG procedure time was significantly shorter after a procedural enhancement, the incorporation of a Gauss meter to facilitate successful magnetic gastropexy. Length of stay for outpatients did not significantly differ (2.4 ± 0.5 days for PUG and 2.6 ± 1.0 days for PRG, p = 0.70).ConclusionPUG appears effective with a safety profile similar to PRG. Bedside point-of-care gastrostomy tube insertion using the PUG technique shows promise.Trial Registration Number: ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT03575754.Graphical abstract

Percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: A safe and effective technique

Percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: A safe and effective technique

Retrospective Analysis of the Safety and Outcomes of Percutaneous Radiologic Gastrostomy in Obese vs Nonobese Patients.

The purpose of this study is to compare the safety and outcomes of percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PRG) in obese vs nonobese patients. This is an institutional review board-approved retrospective study of 109 patients (male:female, 68:41; mean age, 64.7 years; range, 21-94 years) who underwent PRG with or without gastropexy at a single academic medical center between 2015 and 2018. Body mass index (BMI) of ≥30 kg/m2 was defined as obese. Patient demographics, indications, technical success, intraoperative variables, and major/minor complications were analyzed. Major and minor complications occurring within 30 days of the procedure were recorded and categorized based on the Society of Interventional Radiology Quality Improvement guidelines. Of 109 patients included in the study, 22.9% (n = 25) of patients were obese (average BMI, 34.6 kg/m2 ; range, 30-50). Overall technical success in the obese and nonobese groups was 100% each. In the obese vs nonobese group, major and minor complications were not significantly different. There were also no significant differences in procedure time, fluoroscopy time, or contrast volume. However, mean peak skin dose was significantly increased in the obese group vs nonobese group (190.3 ± 224.2 vs 59.1 ± 71.1 mGy; P < .0001). PRG is a safe procedure in obese patients with similar technical success, major and minor complication rates, procedure time, fluoroscopy time, and contrast volume. However, PRG is associated with increased radiation dose with obese patients; therefore, optimal methods of radiation protection should be utilized.

Randomized Controlled Trial of Percutaneous Radiologic Gastrostomy Performed With and Without Gastropexy: Technical Success, Patient-Reported Outcomes and Safety.

The aim of this study is to compare balloon-retention percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PRG) tube insertion performed with and without gastropexy, primarily focusing on pain and patient-reported outcomes. Research ethics board approved a dual-arm, single-centre, randomized trial of 60 patients undergoing primary 14-French PRG tube insertion (NCT04107974). Patients were randomized to receive either PRG with gastropexy or without gastropexy. Data were collected for technical outcomes, patient-reported outcomes pre-procedure, post-procedure and at 1-month, as well as quality of life parameters at 1-month post-procedure (EQ5D-5L, Visual Analogue Scale and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Enteral Feeding questionnaires). Complications occurring up to 6-months post-procedure were recorded. Sixty patients were randomized to the gastropexy group (n = 30) or non-gastropexy (n = 30) group. One non-gastropexy patient was withdrawn from the study due to failed insertion. PRG procedural time was significantly longer when using gastropexy (mean 11.4 ± 7.19min) compared with non-gastropexy (mean 6.79 ± 4.63min; p < 0.05). Pain scores did not differ between the two groups pre-procedure, post-procedure and at 1-month follow-up, nor did 1-month quality of life parameters. Six (20%) minor complications occurred in the gastropexy group and nine (31%) minor complications in the non-gastropexy group (p = 0.330). Two (6.9%) major complications occurred in the non-gastropexy group (p = 0.458). There is comparable patient tolerability when balloon-retention PRG insertion is performed with or without gastropexy sutures. This study also demonstrated a trend towards fewer complications when gastropexy is utilized. However, further larger trials are required to compare complications of the two approaches for PRG insertion. Level 2, randomized trial.