Busch J D, Herrmann J, Adam G, Habermann C R
a Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Nuclear Medicine , University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf , Hamburg , Germany.
b Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Nuclear Medicine , Section of Pediatric Radiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf , Hamburg , Germany.
Scand J Gastroenterol. 2016 Dec;51(12):1423-1428. doi: 10.1080/00365521.2016.1216590. Epub 2016 Aug 10.
To compare outcome and associated complications of ballon- vs. loop-retained devices for radiologically inserted gastrostomy (RIG).
From 2007 to 2011 233 patients (age 63.7 ± 10.6 years) were referred for a RIG because of pharyngeal stricture Intervention was performed with four different devices: balloon-retained - Freka GastroTube, Fresenius Kabi (n = 121); MIC Gastrostomy Feeding Tube, Kimberly-Clark (n = 34); Russell Gastrostomy Tray, Cook Medical Inc. (n = 17); and loop-retained - Tilma Gastrostomy Set, Cook Medical Inc. (n = 50). Follow-up was performed with regard to RIG-related complications, cause of removal and fatalities. Revision-free survival times after RIG were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier analysis and group differences by log-rank tests. For analysis of demographic and methodical variables multivariate Cox regression models were used.
With a primary technical success rate of 95.3% (222/233) a total of 92 instances of revisions were necessary in 66 patients (66/233, 28.3%) during follow-up (mean 182.8 ± 86.6 days). The most common complication was tube dislodgement (14.3%). There were no significant differences between the distinct devices (p = 0.098), but analyzing the data in subgroups of balloon-compared to loop-retained gastrostomy tubes we observed a significantly higher probability of minor complications for the latter (p = 0.023).
As it is significantly less prone to minor complications we recommend the use of balloon-retained gastrostomy tubes to improve the practicability and maintenance of RIG.
比较用于放射介入胃造口术(RIG)的球囊固定装置与襻式固定装置的治疗效果及相关并发症。
2007年至2011年期间,233例患者(年龄63.7±10.6岁)因咽部狭窄接受RIG治疗。使用四种不同的装置进行干预:球囊固定的Freka胃管,费森尤斯卡比公司(n = 121);MIC胃造口喂养管,金佰利公司(n = 34);拉塞尔胃造口托盘,库克医疗公司(n = 17);以及襻式固定的蒂尔马胃造口套件,库克医疗公司(n = 50)。对RIG相关并发症、移除原因和死亡情况进行随访。采用Kaplan-Meier分析评估RIG术后无翻修生存期,并通过对数秩检验比较组间差异。使用多变量Cox回归模型分析人口统计学和方法学变量。
初次技术成功率为95.3%(222/233),随访期间66例患者(66/233,28.3%)共进行了92次翻修(平均182.8±86.6天)。最常见的并发症是导管移位(14.3%)。不同装置之间无显著差异(p = 0.098),但在将球囊固定胃造口管与襻式固定胃造口管的亚组数据进行分析时,我们观察到后者发生轻微并发症的概率显著更高(p = 0.023)。
由于球囊固定胃造口管发生轻微并发症的可能性显著较低,我们建议使用该装置以提高RIG的实用性和维护性。