Suppr超能文献

使用拉出式或推进式技术进行经皮内镜下胃造口术:胃镜的第二次插入有必要吗?

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy placement using the pull-through or push-through techniques: is the second pass of the gastroscope necessary?

作者信息

Sartori S, Trevisani L, Nielsen I, Tassinari D, Abbasciano V

机构信息

Second Medical Division, St. Anna Hospital, Ferrara, Italy.

出版信息

Endoscopy. 1996 Oct;28(8):686-8. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-1005577.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

The pull-through and push-through techniques widely used for placing a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) require two passes of the gastroscope. The second pass is considered necessary to assess the correct positioning of the internal bumper. The aim of the present study was to verify whether the second pass is in fact necessary, or whether it could be omitted in most cases.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eighty patients undergoing pull-through or push-through PEG placement were included in this prospective study, and were randomly assigned to two groups. In the first group, two passes of the gastroscope were carried out, while in the second group the second pass was omitted and the position of the internal bumper was manually assessed by finger palpation of the abdominal wall after the feeding tube had been pulled out through the abdomen. If finger palpation was not considered satisfactory, a control gastroscopy was carried out. In the other cases, plain radiographs of the abdomen were carried out within six hours of the procedure.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients underwent two-pass PEG placement, and 41 received one-pass PEG placement. In one patient who had a one-pass procedure, the finger palpation was not considered satisfactory; however, a control gastroscopy showed that the internal bumper was correctly placed. In all other one-pass PEG patients, plain radiography of the abdomen showed that the internal bumper was at an adequate distance from the abdominal wall. No major or minor complications associated with the procedure were observed in either group. Bowel sounds reappeared within 24 hours of the procedure in all patients except for one in the two-pass group, in whom they reappeared after 36 hours. One wound infection, treated with systemic antibiotics, occurred in each group within 30 days of the PEG placement. The procedure time saved in the one-pass PEG group averaged 1.5 minutes.

CONCLUSIONS

One-pass PEG placement appears to be as safe as the classic pull-through and push-through PEG methods, and can be used routinely to make the procedure quicker and reduce the discomfort for the patient, as well as reducing the risks and costs associated with the second pass of the gastroscope. A control gastroscopy can be reserved for patients with morbid obesity, or for cases in which finger palpation is not considered satisfactory.

摘要

背景与研究目的

广泛用于经皮内镜下胃造口术(PEG)置管的拖出法和推进法需要胃镜操作两次。第二次操作被认为对于评估内部缓冲器的正确位置是必要的。本研究的目的是验证第二次操作是否真的必要,或者在大多数情况下是否可以省略。

患者与方法

本前瞻性研究纳入了80例行拖出法或推进法PEG置管的患者,并将其随机分为两组。第一组进行两次胃镜操作,而第二组省略第二次操作,在喂养管经腹部拔出后,通过手指触诊腹壁手动评估内部缓冲器的位置。如果手指触诊不满意,则进行对照胃镜检查。在其他情况下,术后6小时内进行腹部平片检查。

结果

39例患者接受了两次操作的PEG置管,41例接受了一次操作的PEG置管。在1例接受一次操作的患者中,手指触诊不满意;然而,对照胃镜检查显示内部缓冲器位置正确。在所有其他接受一次操作的PEG患者中,腹部平片显示内部缓冲器与腹壁距离合适。两组均未观察到与该操作相关的严重或轻微并发症。除了两次操作组中的1例患者在术后36小时肠鸣音恢复外,所有患者的肠鸣音在术后24小时内恢复。PEG置管后30天内,每组均发生1例伤口感染,经全身抗生素治疗。一次操作的PEG组节省的操作时间平均为1.5分钟。

结论

一次操作的PEG置管似乎与经典的拖出法和推进法PEG一样安全,并且可以常规使用,以使操作更快,减轻患者不适,同时降低与胃镜第二次操作相关的风险和成本。对于病态肥胖患者或手指触诊不满意的情况,可以保留对照胃镜检查。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验