A randomized trial comparing percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and radiologically inserted percutaneous gastrostomy (RIG).

Abstract

Background and objective: At present, percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is the procedure of choice in establishing a permanent feeding tube in patients with chronic severe dysphagia. This is the first prospective randomized study in adults comparing PEG with radiologically inserted gastrostomy (RIG).

Methods: Randomization of 106 patients, eligible for both techniques, to PEG (pull method) or RIG. The groups were comparable in terms of age, body mass index, and underlying diseases. Adverse events were reported 10 and 30 days after the operative procedure, and mortality was up until 6 months. The validated European Quality of life 5 Dimensions 3 level version (EQ-5D) questionnaire was used for health status measurements.

Results: The procedures were successfully completed in all patients. The median operative time was 10 min for PEG and 20 min for RIG (p < 0.001). The overall rate of adverse events was lower for PEG (22%) than for RIG (51%, p = 0.002), mostly due to less local self-limiting stoma reactions and tube problems. The 30-day mortality was lower after PEG (2% versus 14%, p = 0.020). Patient-scored health status remained low for the entire cohort, with an EQ-5D utility index of 0.164. Self-rated health was low but improved in the RIG group (52.5 from 41.1, out of 100).

Conclusion: PEG can be recommended as the primary procedure in patients in need of a feeding gastrostomy, mainly due to a lower frequency of tube complications. However, as the two techniques complement each other, RIG is also a valid alternative method.

Clinical trial registration: International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number ISRCTN17642761. https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN17642761.