Is repeat endoscopy necessary after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy?

Olajide O Odelowo, Lakshmi Dasaree, Yolanda Hamilton, Khondker Islam, Hemant Joglekar, Kyung Kim, Joseph Nidiry, Victor F Scott, Sadye B Curry, Duane T Smoot
{"title":"Is repeat endoscopy necessary after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy?","authors":"Olajide O Odelowo,&nbsp;Lakshmi Dasaree,&nbsp;Yolanda Hamilton,&nbsp;Khondker Islam,&nbsp;Hemant Joglekar,&nbsp;Kyung Kim,&nbsp;Joseph Nidiry,&nbsp;Victor F Scott,&nbsp;Sadye B Curry,&nbsp;Duane T Smoot","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG), a safe and effective procedure, is an alternative to open gastrostomy. There are two techniques of placing PEG tubes. One technique consists of a pull-string Ponsky-Gauderer type gastrostomy and the other a push-over-wire Sachs-Vine type gastrostomy. After the gastrostomy tube is positioned, a repeat endoscopy is performed to determine optimal placement of the PEG tube. The purpose of this study was to determine the necessity of a repeat endoscopy to determine the optimal positioning of the PEG tube. Charts of 132 patients who underwent a PEG procedure between July 1, 1994 and September 30, 1996 were reviewed. Specifically, we assessed whether the endoscopist changed the position of the bumper during repeat endoscopy after PEG placement. PEG was performed successfully in 125 of 132 adult patients. Of 125 patients, the endoscope was reintroduced after PEG in 110 patients. A minor adjustment was defined as repositioning of the bumper by < or = 1.0 cm and a major adjustment as > 1.0 cm. The endoscopist made no adjustment in initial placement of the gastrostomy tube bumpers in 102 of 110 patients (93%). A minor adjustment was made in 5 patients (4%), and a major adjustment was made in 3 patients (3%). Therefore, in 102 of 110 patients (93%), initial placement of the gastrostomy tube bumpers was felt to be adequate, and repeat endoscopy was not necessary. Thus, repeat endoscopy is not routinely required to assess the proper positioning of the internal bumper. Repeat endoscopy should be at the discretion of the endoscopist if there is suspicion of improper positioning of the bumper along the gastric mucosa.</p>","PeriodicalId":77227,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Association for Academic Minority Physicians : the official publication of the Association for Academic Minority Physicians","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Association for Academic Minority Physicians : the official publication of the Association for Academic Minority Physicians","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG), a safe and effective procedure, is an alternative to open gastrostomy. There are two techniques of placing PEG tubes. One technique consists of a pull-string Ponsky-Gauderer type gastrostomy and the other a push-over-wire Sachs-Vine type gastrostomy. After the gastrostomy tube is positioned, a repeat endoscopy is performed to determine optimal placement of the PEG tube. The purpose of this study was to determine the necessity of a repeat endoscopy to determine the optimal positioning of the PEG tube. Charts of 132 patients who underwent a PEG procedure between July 1, 1994 and September 30, 1996 were reviewed. Specifically, we assessed whether the endoscopist changed the position of the bumper during repeat endoscopy after PEG placement. PEG was performed successfully in 125 of 132 adult patients. Of 125 patients, the endoscope was reintroduced after PEG in 110 patients. A minor adjustment was defined as repositioning of the bumper by < or = 1.0 cm and a major adjustment as > 1.0 cm. The endoscopist made no adjustment in initial placement of the gastrostomy tube bumpers in 102 of 110 patients (93%). A minor adjustment was made in 5 patients (4%), and a major adjustment was made in 3 patients (3%). Therefore, in 102 of 110 patients (93%), initial placement of the gastrostomy tube bumpers was felt to be adequate, and repeat endoscopy was not necessary. Thus, repeat endoscopy is not routinely required to assess the proper positioning of the internal bumper. Repeat endoscopy should be at the discretion of the endoscopist if there is suspicion of improper positioning of the bumper along the gastric mucosa.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
经皮内镜胃造口术后需要重复内镜检查吗?
经皮内镜胃造口术(PEG)是一种安全有效的手术,是开放式胃造口术的替代方法。有两种放置PEG管的技术。一种技术包括拉绳式Ponsky-Gauderer型胃造口术和另一种推线式Sachs-Vine型胃造口术。胃造口管定位后,重复内镜检查以确定PEG管的最佳放置位置。本研究的目的是确定重复内镜检查的必要性,以确定PEG管的最佳位置。我们回顾了1994年7月1日至1996年9月30日期间接受PEG手术的132例患者的图表。具体来说,我们评估了内镜医师在PEG放置后的重复内镜检查中是否改变了缓冲器的位置。132例成人患者中有125例成功行PEG。在125例患者中,110例患者在PEG后再次引入内窥镜。小调整定义为将保险杠重新定位<或= 1.0 cm,大调整定义为> 1.0 cm。110例患者中有102例(93%)内镜医师未调整胃造口管缓冲器的初始位置。5例患者(4%)进行了轻微调整,3例患者(3%)进行了重大调整。因此,110例患者中有102例(93%)认为初次放置胃造口管缓冲器是足够的,无需重复内镜检查。因此,不需要常规重复内窥镜检查来评估内保险杠的正确位置。如果怀疑缓冲器沿胃粘膜放置不当,应由内镜医师自行决定是否重复内镜检查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Return on investment analysis for a computer-based patient record in the outpatient clinic setting. Colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening in African Americans. Early detection and screening for ovarian cancer: does physician specialty matter? Adiposity changes in youth with a family history of cardiovascular disease: impact of ethnicity, gender and socioeconomic status. Health disparities research--a model for conducting research on cancer disparities: characterization and reduction.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1