National Multicenter and Multiyear Review of Complications Following Fluoroscopic Gastrostomy in Patients Covered by Medicare and Medicaid

Abstract

Objective This study aims to assess the postoperative complication rates associated with fluoroscopically placed gastrostomy tubes.

Background Fluoroscopically placed gastrostomy tubes are a relatively common procedure performed by interventional radiologists. Few studies have been performed in the United States to access the complication profile of fluoroscopically placed gastrostomy tubes.

Methods Total 51 million Medicare Standard Analytic Patient Records derived from Medicare parts A and B records from 2007 to 2012 were retrospectively analyzed. Only the patients undergoing fluoroscopic gastrostomy were included in this study. Patient demographics were stratified by age, sex, comorbidities, and peri- and postoperative complications as defined by International Classification of Diseases (ICD) 9 codes.

Results Total 30,327 patients undergoing fluoroscopic gastrostomy were analyzed. Perioperative complications following these procedures were low, with 61 (0.02%) patients experiencing pneumoperitoneum, 130 (0.43%) experiencing ileus, 16 (0.05%) experiencing esophageal/gastric perforation, and 30 (0.09%) patients experiencing intra-abdominal injury. Most common postoperative complications included abdominal wall pain (n = 2,808, 9.25%), bleeding (n = 1,353, 4.46%), and mechanical complications (n = 1,435, 4.73%).

Conclusion Fluoroscopic guidance is a safe method for gastrostomy placement, with exceedingly low rates of peri- and postoperative complications.

Keywords

gastrostomy - G-tube - percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy - endoscopic - fluoroscopic

• References

• 1 O'Brien B, Davis S, Erwin-Toth P. G-tube site care: a practical guide. RN 1999; 62 (02) 52-56
• 2 Eisenberg PG. Gastrostomy and jejunostomy tubes. RN 1994; 57 (11) 54-59 quiz 60. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7984882 Accessed December 22, 2018
• 3 Preshaw RM. A percutaneous method for inserting a feeding gastrostomy tube. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1981; 152 (05) 658-660
• 4 Gibson SE, Wenig BL, Watkins JL. Complications of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in head and neck cancer patients. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1992; 101 (01) 46-50
• 5 Larson DE, Burton DD, Schroeder KW, DiMagno EP. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. Indications, success, complications, and mortality in 314 consecutive patients. Gastroenterology 1987; 93 (01) 48-52
• 6 Hicks ME, Surratt RS, Picus D, Marx MV, Lang EV. Fluoroscopically guided percutaneous gastrostomy and gastroenterostomy: analysis of 158 consecutive cases. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1990; 154 (04) 725-728
• 7 Cosentini EP, Sautner T, Gnant M, Winkelbauer F, Teleky B, Jakesz R. Outcomes of surgical, percutaneous endoscopic, and percutaneous radiologic gastrostomies. Arch Surg 1998; 133 (10) 1076-1083
• 8 Hoffer EK, Cosgrove JM, Levin DQ, Herskowitz MM, Sclafani SJA. Radiologic gastrojejunostomy and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: a prospective, randomized comparison. J Vasc Interv Radiol 1999; 10 (04) 413-420
• 9 Richter-Schrag HJ, Richter S, Ruthmann O, Olschewski M, Hopt UT, Fischer A. Risk factors and complications following percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: a case series of 1041 patients. Can J Gastroenterol 2011; 25 (04) 201-206
• 10 Lewis S, Jackson S, Latchford A. Randomized study of radiologic vs endoscopic placement of gastrojejunostomies in patients at risk of aspiration pneumonia. Nutr Clin Pract 2014; 29 (04) 498-503
• 11 McDermott CJ. ProGas Study Group. Gastrostomy in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ProGas): a prospective cohort study. Lancet Neurol 2015; 14 (07) 702-709
• 12 Barkmeier JM, Trerotola SO, Wiebke EA. et al. Percutaneous radiologic, surgical endoscopic, and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy/gastrojejunostomy: comparative study and cost analysis. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 1998; 21 (04) 324-328
• 13 Neeff M, Crowder VL, McIvor NP, Chaplin JM, Morton RP. Comparison of the use of endoscopic and radiologic gastrostomy in a single head and neck cancer unit. ANZ J Surg 2003; 73 (08) 590-593
• 14 Desport JC, Mabrouk T, Bouillet P, Perna A, Preux PMCP, Couratier P. Complications and survival following radiologically and endoscopically-guided gastrostomy in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Amyotroph Lateral Scler Other Motor Neuron Disord 2005; 6 (02) 88-93
• 15 Galaski A, Peng WW, Ellis M, Darling P, Common A, Tucker E. Gastrostomy tube placement by radiological versus endoscopic methods in an acute care setting: a retrospective review of frequency, indications, complications and outcomes. Can J Gastroenterol 2009; 23 (02) 109-114
• 16 La Nauze RJ, Collins K, Lyon S. et al. Outcomes of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy versus radiologically inserted gastrostomy tube insertion at a tertiary hospital. ESPEN J 2012; 7 (04) 144-148
• 17 Laskaratos FM, Walker M, Walker M. et al. Predictive factors for early mortality after percutaneous endoscopic and radiologically-inserted gastrostomy. Dig Dis Sci 2013; 58 (12) 3558-3565
• 18 Lim JH, Choi SH, Lee C. et al. Thirty-day mortality after percutaneous gastrostomy by endoscopic versus radiologic placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Intest Res 2016; 14 (04) 333-342
• 19 Strijbos D, Keszthelyi D, Bogie RMM. et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis on outcomes and complications of percutaneous endoscopic versus radiologic gastrostomy for enteral feeding. J Clin Gastroenterol 2018; 52 (09) 753-764
• 20 Silas AM, Pearce LF, Lestina LS. et al. Percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy versus percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: a comparison of indications, complications and outcomes in 370 patients. Eur J Radiol 2005; 56 (01) 84-90
• 21 Wollman B, D'Agostino HB. Percutaneous radiologic and endoscopic gastrostomy: a 3-year institutional analysis of procedure performance. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997; 169 (06) 1551-1553
• 22 Eze N, Jefford JM, Wolf D, Williamson P, Neild P. PEG and RIG tube feeding in Head and Neck patients: a retrospective review of complications and outcome. J Eval Clin Pract 2007; 13 (05) 817-819