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

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.

2015 ◽  
Vol 58 (4) ◽  
pp. 264-268 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Livingston ◽  
Daniel Pepe ◽  
Sarah Jones ◽  
Andreana Bütter ◽  
Neil Merritt

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

2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Misbah Khan ◽  
Namra Urooj ◽  
Aamir A Syed ◽  
Shahid Khattak ◽  
Anam Muzzafar ◽  
...  

Purpose: Purpose of the present study is to report our technique of the use of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) site excision biopsy wound, for specimen retrieval and gastric conduit formation, in minimally invasive oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer.Methods: It is a retrospective comparative study where we present data of our 100 resectable oesophageal cancer patients who underwent postneoadjuvant minimally invasive oesophagectomy from January 2012 to September 2015. All of the patients had an initial staging endoscopic ultrasound with PEG placement. The prestudy (conventional) approach, i.e., laparoscopic gastric conduit formation along with specimen pull up from the cervical/thoracic wound is compared to the present (Study) group.Results: The two groups were similar for basic demographic variables, tumour stage, morphology and nutritional status. The primary endpoints were an operative time in minutes and any additional procedure-speci c complications. The rate of procedure speci c complications (Abdominal excision wound complications or conduit failure) was low 11%. PEG site excision biopsy was positive in two cases; one adenocarcinoma and one squamous carcinoma, both were mid to lower oesophageal tumours not involving gastroesophageal junction.Conclusions: Bene ts of the approach are ease of gastric conduit formation along with an additional second layer with less operative time through the small wound, avoidance of tumour specimen removal all the way through mediastinum from the cervical incision, and excision of a potential site of oesophageal cancer metastasis, without any added morbidity.Key words: Extracorporeal gastric conduit, minimally invasive oesophagectomy, percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document