Outcomes of PEG placement by acute care surgeons compared to those placed by gastroenterology

Link to article at PubMed

Surg Endosc. 2022 Apr 27. doi: 10.1007/s00464-022-09262-2. Online ahead of print.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tubes are placed by gastroenterologists (GI) and surgeons throughout the country. At Rhode Island Hospital, before July of 2017, all PEGs were placed by GI. In July of 2017, in response to a growing need for PEGs, acute care surgeons (ACS) also began performing PEGs at the bedside in ICUs. The purpose of this study was to review and compare outcomes of PEG tubes placed by ACS and GI.

METHODS: Retrospective chart review of patients who received a PEG placed by ACS or GI at the bedside in any ICU from December 2016 to September 2019. Charts were reviewed for the following outcomes: Success rates of placing PEG, duration of procedure, major complications, and death. Secondary outcomes included discharge disposition, and rates of comfort measures only after PEG.

RESULTS: In 2017, 75% of PEGs were placed by GI and 25% surgery. In 2018, 47% were placed by GI and 53% by surgery. In 2019, 33% were placed by GI and 67% by surgery. There was no significant difference in success rates between surgery (146/156 93.6%) and GI (173/185 93.5%) (p 0.97). On average, GI performed the procedure faster than surgery [Median 10 (7-16) min vs 16 (13-21) mins, respectively, p < 0.001]. There were no significant differences between groups in any of the PEG outcomes or complications investigated.

CONCLUSION: Bedside PEG tube placement appears to be a safe procedure in the ICU population. GI and Surgery had nearly identical success rates in placing PEGs. GI performed the procedure faster than surgery. There were no significant differences in the reviewed patient outcomes or complications between PEGs placed by ACS or GI. Of note, when a complication occurred, ACS PEG patients typically were managed in the OR while GI tended to re-PEG patients highlighting a potential difference in management that should be further investigated.

PMID:35477805 | DOI:10.1007/s00464-022-09262-2

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *