按还是不按?初级胃造口管与纽扣相比没有明显优势

Hector Osei, A. S. Munoz-Abraham, Alice Martino, Kaveer Chatoorgoon, J. Greenspon, Colleen Fitzpatrick, Gustavo A. Villalona
{"title":"按还是不按?初级胃造口管与纽扣相比没有明显优势","authors":"Hector Osei, A. S. Munoz-Abraham, Alice Martino, Kaveer Chatoorgoon, J. Greenspon, Colleen Fitzpatrick, Gustavo A. Villalona","doi":"10.5223/pghn.2022.25.3.211","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose Outcomes between primary gastrostomy tubes and buttons (G-tube and G-button) have not been established in pediatric patients. We hypothesized that primary G-tube have decreased complications when compared to G-button. Methods A retrospective review of surgically placed gastrostomy devices from 2010 to 2017 was performed. Data collected included demographics, outcomes and 90-day complications. We divided the patients into primary G-tube and primary G-button. Results Of 265 patients, 142 (53.6%) were male. Median age and weight at the time of surgery were 7 months (interquartile range [IQR], 2–44 months) and 6.70 kg (IQR, 3.98–14.15 kg), respectively. Among the groups, G-tube had 80 patients (30.2%) while G-button 185 patients (69.8%). There were 153 patients with at least one overall complication within 90 days postoperative. There was no significant difference in overall complications between groups (G-tube 63.8% vs. G-button 55.7%, p=0.192). More importantly, there were no significant differences in major complications among the groups, G-tube vs. G-button (5% vs. 4%; p=0.455). Conclusion Primary G-tube offers no significant advantage in overall, minor or major complications when compared to primary G-button.","PeriodicalId":19989,"journal":{"name":"Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology & Nutrition","volume":"19 1","pages":"211 - 217"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"To Button or Not to Button? Primary Gastrostomy Tubes Offer No Significant Advantage Over Buttons\",\"authors\":\"Hector Osei, A. S. Munoz-Abraham, Alice Martino, Kaveer Chatoorgoon, J. Greenspon, Colleen Fitzpatrick, Gustavo A. Villalona\",\"doi\":\"10.5223/pghn.2022.25.3.211\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose Outcomes between primary gastrostomy tubes and buttons (G-tube and G-button) have not been established in pediatric patients. We hypothesized that primary G-tube have decreased complications when compared to G-button. Methods A retrospective review of surgically placed gastrostomy devices from 2010 to 2017 was performed. Data collected included demographics, outcomes and 90-day complications. We divided the patients into primary G-tube and primary G-button. Results Of 265 patients, 142 (53.6%) were male. Median age and weight at the time of surgery were 7 months (interquartile range [IQR], 2–44 months) and 6.70 kg (IQR, 3.98–14.15 kg), respectively. Among the groups, G-tube had 80 patients (30.2%) while G-button 185 patients (69.8%). There were 153 patients with at least one overall complication within 90 days postoperative. There was no significant difference in overall complications between groups (G-tube 63.8% vs. G-button 55.7%, p=0.192). More importantly, there were no significant differences in major complications among the groups, G-tube vs. G-button (5% vs. 4%; p=0.455). Conclusion Primary G-tube offers no significant advantage in overall, minor or major complications when compared to primary G-button.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19989,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology & Nutrition\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"211 - 217\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology & Nutrition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5223/pghn.2022.25.3.211\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PEDIATRICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology & Nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5223/pghn.2022.25.3.211","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目的:在儿科患者中,初级胃造口管和按钮(g管和g按钮)之间的结果尚未确定。我们假设与G-button相比,primary G-tube有更少的并发症。方法回顾性分析2010年至2017年手术放置胃造口装置的情况。收集的数据包括人口统计学、结局和90天并发症。我们将患者分为初级g管和初级g扣。结果265例患者中,男性142例,占53.6%。手术时的中位年龄和体重分别为7个月(四分位间距[IQR], 2-44个月)和6.70 kg (IQR, 3.98-14.15 kg)。其中g管组80例(30.2%),g扣组185例(69.8%)。153例患者在术后90天内至少出现一次并发症。两组总并发症发生率无显著差异(g管63.8% vs g扣55.7%,p=0.192)。更重要的是,g管组与g扣组在主要并发症方面无显著差异(5% vs. 4%;p = 0.455)。结论初级g管与初级g扣相比,在总体、轻微或严重并发症方面均无明显优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
To Button or Not to Button? Primary Gastrostomy Tubes Offer No Significant Advantage Over Buttons
Purpose Outcomes between primary gastrostomy tubes and buttons (G-tube and G-button) have not been established in pediatric patients. We hypothesized that primary G-tube have decreased complications when compared to G-button. Methods A retrospective review of surgically placed gastrostomy devices from 2010 to 2017 was performed. Data collected included demographics, outcomes and 90-day complications. We divided the patients into primary G-tube and primary G-button. Results Of 265 patients, 142 (53.6%) were male. Median age and weight at the time of surgery were 7 months (interquartile range [IQR], 2–44 months) and 6.70 kg (IQR, 3.98–14.15 kg), respectively. Among the groups, G-tube had 80 patients (30.2%) while G-button 185 patients (69.8%). There were 153 patients with at least one overall complication within 90 days postoperative. There was no significant difference in overall complications between groups (G-tube 63.8% vs. G-button 55.7%, p=0.192). More importantly, there were no significant differences in major complications among the groups, G-tube vs. G-button (5% vs. 4%; p=0.455). Conclusion Primary G-tube offers no significant advantage in overall, minor or major complications when compared to primary G-button.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
43
期刊介绍: Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (Pediatr Gastroenterol Hepatol Nutr), an official journal of The Korean Society of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, is issued bimonthly and published in English. The aim of Pediatr Gastroenterol Hepatol Nutr is to advance scientific knowledge and promote child healthcare by publishing high-quality empirical and theoretical studies and providing a recently updated knowledge to those practitioners and scholars in the field of pediatric gastroenterology, hepatology and nutrition. Pediatr Gastroenterol Hepatol Nutr publishes review articles, original articles, and case reports. All of the submitted papers are peer-reviewed. The journal covers basic and clinical researches on molecular and cellular biology, pathophysiology, epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment of all aspects of pediatric gastrointestinal diseases and nutritional health problems.
期刊最新文献
Correction: Efficacy and Safety of Long-Term Administration of Esomeprazole in Japanese Pediatric Patients Aged 1-14 Years with Chronic Gastric Acid-Related Disease. Establishment and Characterization of Patient-Derived Intestinal Organoids from Pediatric Crohn's Disease Patients. Expression of IL-7RαlowCX3CR1+ CD8+ T Cells and α4β7 Integrin Tagged T Cells Related to Mucosal Immunity in Children with Inflammatory Bowel Disease. Is a Training Program in Pediatric Abdominal Ultrasonography Necessary for Pediatricians? Oral Nutrition During Continuous Albuterol for Pediatric Critical Asthma: A Matched Cohort Study.
×
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