The introducer technique is the optimal method for placing percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tubes in head and neck cancer patients

Jason M. Foster, Peter Filocamo, Hector Nava, Michael Schiff, Wesley Hicks, Nestor Rigual, Judy Smith, Thom Loree, John F. Gibbs

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

28 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tubes are often placed in head and neck cancer patients to provide nutritional support, but studies have found the complication rates to be higher than other subsets of patients who undergo PEG placement. Complication rates as high as 50% have been reported, with the bulk of these complications being PEG site issues (i.e., cellulitis, abscess, fascitis, and tumor implantation). Because the pull technique has been the primary technique used, the theory is that the transoral tube passage is the source of the complications in these patients. Alternatively, the introducer technique uses a transabdominal approach to place the device, avoiding any tube contamination by upper aerodigestive organisms or tumor cells. At our institution, this technique has been used exclusively for head and neck cancer patients and this article reports our experience. Methods: One hundred forty-nine head and neck cancer patients who had a prophylactic PEG tube placed were reviewed from January 1, 1999 to December 31, 2003. The rates of placement success, morbidity, and complications were determined. Results: Successful placement was achieved in 148 (99%) patients without any PEG-related deaths. Overall, 17 complications (11%) occurred, with only one major complication (0.7%) identified. PEG site infections were uncommon with only five cases (3.4%) and all were mild cellulitis. Conclusions: The introducer technique is the safest method for PEG tube placement in head and neck cancer patients. The overall rate of complications is low and PEG site infectious complications are rare. The introducer technique should be the method of choice for PEG tubes in head and neck cancer patients.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)897-901
Number of pages5
JournalSurgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques
Volume21
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1 2007

Fingerprint

Gastrostomy
Head and Neck Neoplasms
Cellulitis
Fasciitis
Nutritional Support
Abscess
Neoplasms
Morbidity
Equipment and Supplies

Keywords

  • Complications
  • Head and neck cancer
  • Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

The introducer technique is the optimal method for placing percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tubes in head and neck cancer patients. / Foster, Jason M.; Filocamo, Peter; Nava, Hector; Schiff, Michael; Hicks, Wesley; Rigual, Nestor; Smith, Judy; Loree, Thom; Gibbs, John F.

In: Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques, Vol. 21, No. 6, 01.06.2007, p. 897-901.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Foster, Jason M. ; Filocamo, Peter ; Nava, Hector ; Schiff, Michael ; Hicks, Wesley ; Rigual, Nestor ; Smith, Judy ; Loree, Thom ; Gibbs, John F. / The introducer technique is the optimal method for placing percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tubes in head and neck cancer patients. In: Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques. 2007 ; Vol. 21, No. 6. pp. 897-901.
@article{d287e2628cba4f94bdfdc10513012a28,
title = "The introducer technique is the optimal method for placing percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tubes in head and neck cancer patients",
abstract = "Background: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tubes are often placed in head and neck cancer patients to provide nutritional support, but studies have found the complication rates to be higher than other subsets of patients who undergo PEG placement. Complication rates as high as 50{\%} have been reported, with the bulk of these complications being PEG site issues (i.e., cellulitis, abscess, fascitis, and tumor implantation). Because the pull technique has been the primary technique used, the theory is that the transoral tube passage is the source of the complications in these patients. Alternatively, the introducer technique uses a transabdominal approach to place the device, avoiding any tube contamination by upper aerodigestive organisms or tumor cells. At our institution, this technique has been used exclusively for head and neck cancer patients and this article reports our experience. Methods: One hundred forty-nine head and neck cancer patients who had a prophylactic PEG tube placed were reviewed from January 1, 1999 to December 31, 2003. The rates of placement success, morbidity, and complications were determined. Results: Successful placement was achieved in 148 (99{\%}) patients without any PEG-related deaths. Overall, 17 complications (11{\%}) occurred, with only one major complication (0.7{\%}) identified. PEG site infections were uncommon with only five cases (3.4{\%}) and all were mild cellulitis. Conclusions: The introducer technique is the safest method for PEG tube placement in head and neck cancer patients. The overall rate of complications is low and PEG site infectious complications are rare. The introducer technique should be the method of choice for PEG tubes in head and neck cancer patients.",
keywords = "Complications, Head and neck cancer, Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy",
author = "Foster, {Jason M.} and Peter Filocamo and Hector Nava and Michael Schiff and Wesley Hicks and Nestor Rigual and Judy Smith and Thom Loree and Gibbs, {John F.}",
year = "2007",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s00464-006-9068-9",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "21",
pages = "897--901",
journal = "Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques",
issn = "0930-2794",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The introducer technique is the optimal method for placing percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tubes in head and neck cancer patients

AU - Foster, Jason M.

AU - Filocamo, Peter

AU - Nava, Hector

AU - Schiff, Michael

AU - Hicks, Wesley

AU - Rigual, Nestor

AU - Smith, Judy

AU - Loree, Thom

AU - Gibbs, John F.

PY - 2007/6/1

Y1 - 2007/6/1

N2 - Background: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tubes are often placed in head and neck cancer patients to provide nutritional support, but studies have found the complication rates to be higher than other subsets of patients who undergo PEG placement. Complication rates as high as 50% have been reported, with the bulk of these complications being PEG site issues (i.e., cellulitis, abscess, fascitis, and tumor implantation). Because the pull technique has been the primary technique used, the theory is that the transoral tube passage is the source of the complications in these patients. Alternatively, the introducer technique uses a transabdominal approach to place the device, avoiding any tube contamination by upper aerodigestive organisms or tumor cells. At our institution, this technique has been used exclusively for head and neck cancer patients and this article reports our experience. Methods: One hundred forty-nine head and neck cancer patients who had a prophylactic PEG tube placed were reviewed from January 1, 1999 to December 31, 2003. The rates of placement success, morbidity, and complications were determined. Results: Successful placement was achieved in 148 (99%) patients without any PEG-related deaths. Overall, 17 complications (11%) occurred, with only one major complication (0.7%) identified. PEG site infections were uncommon with only five cases (3.4%) and all were mild cellulitis. Conclusions: The introducer technique is the safest method for PEG tube placement in head and neck cancer patients. The overall rate of complications is low and PEG site infectious complications are rare. The introducer technique should be the method of choice for PEG tubes in head and neck cancer patients.

AB - Background: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tubes are often placed in head and neck cancer patients to provide nutritional support, but studies have found the complication rates to be higher than other subsets of patients who undergo PEG placement. Complication rates as high as 50% have been reported, with the bulk of these complications being PEG site issues (i.e., cellulitis, abscess, fascitis, and tumor implantation). Because the pull technique has been the primary technique used, the theory is that the transoral tube passage is the source of the complications in these patients. Alternatively, the introducer technique uses a transabdominal approach to place the device, avoiding any tube contamination by upper aerodigestive organisms or tumor cells. At our institution, this technique has been used exclusively for head and neck cancer patients and this article reports our experience. Methods: One hundred forty-nine head and neck cancer patients who had a prophylactic PEG tube placed were reviewed from January 1, 1999 to December 31, 2003. The rates of placement success, morbidity, and complications were determined. Results: Successful placement was achieved in 148 (99%) patients without any PEG-related deaths. Overall, 17 complications (11%) occurred, with only one major complication (0.7%) identified. PEG site infections were uncommon with only five cases (3.4%) and all were mild cellulitis. Conclusions: The introducer technique is the safest method for PEG tube placement in head and neck cancer patients. The overall rate of complications is low and PEG site infectious complications are rare. The introducer technique should be the method of choice for PEG tubes in head and neck cancer patients.

KW - Complications

KW - Head and neck cancer

KW - Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34447316178&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34447316178&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00464-006-9068-9

DO - 10.1007/s00464-006-9068-9

M3 - Article

C2 - 17180272

AN - SCOPUS:34447316178

VL - 21

SP - 897

EP - 901

JO - Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques

JF - Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques

SN - 0930-2794

IS - 6

ER -