Retes Felipe A, Kawaguti Fabio S, de Lima Marcelo S, da Costa Martins Bruno, Uemura Ricardo S, de Paulo Gustavo A, Pennacchi Caterina Mp, Gusmon Carla, Ribeiro Adriana Vs, Baba Elisa R, Geiger Sebastian N, Sorbello Mauricio P, Kulcsar Marco A, Ribeiro Ulysses, Maluf-Filho Fauze
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil.
Department of Head and Neck Surgery, University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil.
United European Gastroenterol J. 2017 Apr;5(3):365-373. doi: 10.1177/2050640616662160. Epub 2016 Jul 21.
Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients is associated with higher complication and mortality rates when compared to a general patient population. The pull technique is still the preferred technique worldwide but it has some limitations. The aim of this study is to compare the pull and introducer PEG techniques in patients with HNC.
This study is based on a retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database of 309 patients with HNC who underwent PEG in the Cancer Institute of São Paulo.
The procedure was performed with the standard endoscope in 205 patients and the introducer technique was used in 137 patients. There was one procedure-related mortality. Age, sex and albumin level were similar in both groups. However in the introducer technique group, patients had a higher tumor stage, a lower Karnofsky status, and presented more frequently with tracheostomy and trismus. Overall, major, minor, immediate and late complications and 30-day mortality rates were similar but the introducer technique group presented more minor bleeding and tube dysfunctions.
The push and introducer PEG techniques seem to be both safe and effective but present different complication profiles. The choice of PEG technique in patients with HNC should be made individually.
与普通患者群体相比,头颈部癌(HNC)患者行经皮内镜下胃造口术(PEG)时并发症和死亡率更高。牵拉技术仍是全球首选技术,但存在一些局限性。本研究旨在比较HNC患者中牵拉式和导入器式PEG技术。
本研究基于对圣保罗癌症研究所309例行PEG的HNC患者前瞻性收集的数据库进行回顾性分析。
205例患者采用标准内镜进行该操作,137例患者采用导入器技术。有1例与操作相关的死亡。两组患者的年龄、性别和白蛋白水平相似。然而,在导入器技术组中,患者肿瘤分期更高,卡诺夫斯基状态更低,气管切开术和牙关紧闭的发生率更高。总体而言,主要、次要、即刻和晚期并发症及30天死亡率相似,但导入器技术组出现更多轻微出血和管道功能障碍。
推送式和导入器式PEG技术似乎都安全有效,但并发症情况不同。HNC患者PEG技术的选择应个体化。