A comparison of laparoscopic gastrostomy tubes and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in infants: results from a single institution

2019 ◽  
Vol 54 (11) ◽  
pp. 2453-2456 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shefali Thaker ◽  
Meghna V. Misra
Keyword(s):  
Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy ◽  
Single Institution ◽  
Endoscopic Gastrostomy ◽  
Laparoscopic Gastrostomy ◽  
Gastrostomy Tubes

Laparoscopic-Assisted Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy: Its Role in Providing Enteric Access when Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy is not Possible

2006 ◽  
Vol 72 (12) ◽  
pp. 1222-1224 ◽  
Author(s):  
Randal L. Croshaw ◽  
James M. Nottingham
Keyword(s):  
General Anesthesia ◽  
Patient Care ◽  
Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy ◽  
Wound Complications ◽  
Unsuccessful Attempt ◽  
Endoscopic Gastrostomy ◽  
Laparoscopic Gastrostomy ◽  
Laparoscopic Assisted ◽  
Surgical Gastrostomy ◽  
Percutaneous Radiologic Gastrostomy

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) replaced open surgical gastrostomy (OSG) as the preferred method for enteric access soon after its introduction in 1980.1 Since that time, laparoscopic gastrostomy (LG), percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PRG), and laparoscopic-assisted PEG (LAPEG) have been introduced. PEG and PRG have been found to be over 95 per cent successful, convenient, economical, and associated with less morbidity than OSG.2, 3 However, there are patients that are not appropriate candidates for, or have failed attempts at, PEG or PRG placement. At one time, OSG was the only option left for these patients, but they may be better served by LAPEG or, in some cases, LG. LAPEG offers less morbidity than OSG by having less pain and wound complications, and potentially may avoid the use of general anesthesia.4–6 We present a series of patients that underwent successful LAPEG placement after an unsuccessful attempt at PEG placement, and we describe its role in patient care.

Laparoscopic gastrostomy versus percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy

1994 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-49 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. S. Edelman ◽  
P. J. Arroyo ◽  
S. W. Unger
Keyword(s):  
Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy ◽  
Endoscopic Gastrostomy ◽  
Laparoscopic Gastrostomy

Comparison of Complications of Percutaneous Endoscopic Versus Surgically Placed Gastrostomy Tubes in 42 Dogs and 52 Cats

2006 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brenda Jo Salinardi ◽  
Kenneth R. Harkin ◽  
Barret J. Bulmer ◽  
James K. Roush
Keyword(s):  
Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy ◽  
Complication Rate ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Endoscopic Gastrostomy ◽  
Severity Scores ◽  
Gastrostomy Tubes ◽  
Peg Tube

Dogs and cats that had a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube or surgically placed gastrostomy (SPG) tube inserted were retrospectively analyzed to compare complication rates and the severity of complications. Complication rates and severity scores were not significantly different when the PEG tube group was compared to the SPG tube group in either dogs or cats. Only when data from dogs and cats were combined did PEG tubes have a significantly higher complication rate and significantly greater complication severity scores.

Mo1215 Does Poor Abdominal Wall Transillumination Predict Failed Placement of Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Tubes?

2017 ◽  
Vol 85 (5) ◽  
pp. AB465
Author(s):  
Tomas DaVee ◽  
Aman Deep ◽  
Samreen Khuwaja ◽  
Selvi Thirumurthi ◽  
Graciela M. Nogueras-González ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Abdominal Wall ◽  
Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy ◽  
Endoscopic Gastrostomy ◽  
Gastrostomy Tubes
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document