Percutaneous Gastrostomy in Necrotizing Pancreatitis: Friend or Foe?
- 31 Downloads
Enteral nutrition plays a central role in managing necrotizing pancreatitis (NP). Although the nasojejunal (NJ) route is widely used, percutaneous gastrostomy (PEG-J) is an alternative technique that is also applied commonly. We hypothesized that NJ and PEG-J had similar morbidity in the setting of NP.
All patients receiving preoperative enteral nutrition before surgical debridement for NP (2005–2015) were segregated into NJ or PEG-J.
A total of 242 patients had complete data for analysis (155 men/87 women; median age 54 years; 47% biliary and 16% alcohol-related pancreatitis). NJ was used exclusively in 187 patients (77%); 25 patients (10%) were fed exclusively by PEG-J; the remaining 30 patients (13%) had NJ first, followed by PEG-J. Equal proportions of NJ and PEG-J patients reached enteral feeding goal (67% vs. 68%, p ≈ 1) and increased serum albumin (39% vs. 36%, p = 0.87). No difference was seen in rate of pancreatic necrosis infection (NJ 53% vs. PEG-J 49%, p = 0.64). NJ patients had significantly more complications compared to PEG-J (51%vs.27%,p = 0.0015). However, NJ patients had more grade I/II complication, compared to PEG-J patients, who had more grade III/IV complication (Grade I/II: NJ 51%vs. PEG-J 16%; Grade III/IV NJ 0%vs. PEG-J 11%, p < 0.0001).
In necrotizing pancreatitis, NJ and PEG-J both delivered enteral nutrition effectively. Patients with NJ feeding had significantly more complications than those with PEG-J; however, NJ complications were less severe.
KeywordsGastrostomy Necrotizing pancreatitis PEG Nasojejunal feeding Enteral feeding
Conception or design of the work: Zyromski, Roch
Acquisition of data: Roch, Carr
Analysis of data: Roch, Carr, Zyromski
Interpretation of data: Roch, Carr, Watkins, Lehman, House, Nakeeb, Schmidt, Ceppa, Zyromski
Drafting or revising of the work for important intellectual content: Roch, Carr, Watkins, Lehman, House, Nakeeb, Schmidt, Ceppa, Zyromski
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 10.Gupta R, Patel K, Calder PC et al. A randomized clinical trial to assess the effect of total enteral and total parenteral nutrition support on metabolic, inflammatory and oxidative markers in patients with predicted severe acute pancreatitis II (APACHE ≥6). Pancreatology 2003;3:406-13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Yi F, Ge L, Zhao J et al. Meta-analysis: total parenteral nutrition versus total enteral nutrition in patients with severe acute pancreatitis. Rev Esp Enferm Dig 2007;99:264-9.Google Scholar
- 24.Schrag SP, Sharma R, Jaik NP,et al. Complications related to percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tubes: a comprehensive clinical review. Gastrointest Liver Dis. 2007;16(4):407-418.Google Scholar
- 28.Hucl T, Spicak J. Complications of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. Best Practice & Research Clinical Gastroenterology 2016Google Scholar
- 33.Lipp A, Lusardi G. Systemic antimicrobial prophylaxis for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;(4)Google Scholar
- 35.Seidner DL, Walsh RM, Vogten A, et al. Home discharge following outpatient percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy is safe. Dig Dis Wkly 1998;3535.Google Scholar
- 40.Zyromski N, Nakeeb A, House M, Jester AL. Transgastric Pancreatic Necrosectomy: How I Do It. JOGS 2016;20(2):445-449.Google Scholar