scholarly journals Laparoscopic Gastrostomy for Far-advanced Esophageal Cancer That Was Difficult to Treat with Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy

2010 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 190-192
Author(s):  
Takeshi Matsutani ◽  
Eiji Uchida ◽  
Hiroshi Maruyama ◽  
Hideyuki Wakabayashi ◽  
Hiroshi Yoshida ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy ◽  
Advanced Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Endoscopic Gastrostomy ◽  
Laparoscopic Gastrostomy

Comparison of Introducer Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy with Open Gastrostomy in Advanced Esophageal Cancer Patients

Dysphagia ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 117-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Prasit Mahawongkajit ◽  
Ajjana Techagumpuch ◽  
Palin Limpavitayaporn ◽  
Amonpon Kanlerd ◽  
Ekkapak Sriussadaporn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy ◽  
Advanced Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Endoscopic Gastrostomy

scholarly journals Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy for nutritional palliation of upper esophageal cancer unsuitable for esophageal stenting

2012 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. 227-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Grilo ◽  
Carla Adriana Santos ◽  
Jorge Fonseca
Keyword(s):  
Body Mass Index ◽  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Body Mass ◽  
Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy ◽  
Nutritional Support ◽  
Oral Intake ◽  
Upper Esophageal Sphincter ◽  
Advanced Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Endoscopic Gastrostomy ◽  
Esophageal Stenting

CONTEXT: Esophageal cancer is often diagnosed at an advanced stage and has a poor prognosis. Most patients with advanced esophageal cancer have significant dysphagia that contributes to weight loss and malnutrition. Esophageal stenting is a widespread palliation approach, but unsuitable for cancers near the upper esophageal sphincter, were stents are poorly tolerated. Generally, guidelines do not support endoscopic gastrostomy in this clinical setting, but it may be the best option for nutritional support. OBJECTIVE: Retrospective evaluation of patients with dysphagia caused advanced esophageal cancer, no expectation of resuming oral intake and with percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy for comfort palliative nutrition. METHOD: We selected adult patients with unresecable esophageal cancer histological confirmed, in whom stenting was impossible due to proximal location, and chemotherapy or radiotherapy were palliative, using gastrostomy for enteral nutrition. Clinical and nutritional data were evaluated, including success of gastrostomy, procedure complications and survival after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy, and evolution of body mass index, albumin, transferrin and cholesterol. RESULTS: Seventeen males with stage III or IV squamous cell carcinoma fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Mean age was 60.9 years. Most of the patients had toxic habits. All underwent palliative chemotherapy or radiotherapy. Gastrostomy was successfully performed in all, but nine required prior dilatation. Most had the gastrostomy within 2 months after diagnosis. There was a buried bumper syndrome treated with tube replacement and four minor complications. There were no cases of implantation metastases or procedure related mortality. Two patients were lost and 12 died. Mean survival of deceased patients was 5.9 months. Three patients are alive 6, 14 and 17 months after the gastrostomy procedure, still increasing the mean survival. Mean body mass index and laboratory parameters were roughly stable 1 and 3 months after the gastrostomy procedure. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with advanced upper esophageal cancer where only palliative treatment is possible, nutritional support is easily achieved with percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy, allowing patients to be at homes, surviving a significant period of time. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy feeding should be considered as standard definitive nutritional palliation in patients with upper esophageal cancer, unsuitable for esophageal stenting.

PS02.134: COMPARISON OF PUSH PERCUTANEOUS ENDOSCOPIC GASTROSTOMY WITH OPEN GASTROSTOMY IN ADVANCED ESOPHAGEAL CANCER PATIENTS

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 159-159
Author(s):  
Prasit Mahawongkajit
Keyword(s):  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Invasive Procedure ◽  
Feeding Tube ◽  
Treatment Quality ◽  
Advanced Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Endoscopic Gastrostomy ◽  
Improve Patient

Abstract Background In esophageal cancer treatment, nutrition by feeding tube has been demonstrated to improve patient tolerance of treatment, quality of life, and long term outcomes. The open gastrostomy and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) push technique are procedures that avoid cancer cells seeding and also improve patient nutritional status. The aim of this study is to compare the results of the push PEG and open gastrostomy in patients with advanced esophageal cancer. Methods A retrospective study was analyzed in the advanced esophageal cancer patients who indicated and received feeding support between January 2016 and December 2017. Results 28 patients in push PEG and 36 patients in open gastrostomy presented the following comparative data: mean operative duration time shorter in push PEG (11.9 min) than open gastrostomy (35.1 min), less blood loss in push PEG (0.8 mL) than open gastrostomy (5.6 mL), less pain score in push PEG (2.4) than open gastrostomy (5.9) and shorter hospitalization in push PEG (1.8 days) than open gastrostomy (2.6 days). Both groups showed no readmission or 30 day mortality. The adverse events of open gastrostomy demonstrated higher than push PEG group. Conclusion Both push PEG and open gastrostomy were the safe options for advanced esophageal cancer patients indicating for enteral nutrition and to avoid cancer cell seeding. The push PEG demonstrated the effective minimally invasive procedure, was safe and with fewer complications. Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Metastatic hypopharyngeal and esophageal cancer to a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy site

Esophagus ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 155-156 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naruo Kawasaki ◽  
Yutaka Suzuki ◽  
Takakuni Kato ◽  
Kazuto Tsuboi ◽  
Akira Matsumoto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy ◽  
Endoscopic Gastrostomy

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.

scholarly journals Mo1208 Laparoscopic Gastrostomy Is Safer Than Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy in Children: Results of a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2013 ◽  
Vol 144 (5) ◽  
pp. S-607
Author(s):  
Nutnicha Suksamanapun ◽  
Femke A. Mauritz ◽  
David C. van der Zee ◽  
Maud Y. van Herwaarden-Lindeboom
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Endoscopic Gastrostomy ◽  
Laparoscopic Gastrostomy ◽  
Gastrostomy In Children

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
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document