Loading…

What to do When Decompressive Gastrostomies and Jejunostomies are not Options? A Scoping Review of Transesophageal Gastrostomy Tubes for Advanced Malignancies

Background In advanced malignant bowel obstruction, decompressive gastrostomy tubes (GTs) may not be feasible due to ascites, peritoneal carcinomatosis, and altered gastric anatomy. Whereas nasogastric tubes (NGTs) allow temporary decompression, percutaneous transesophageal gastrostomy tubes (PTEGs)...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Annals of surgical oncology 2022, Vol.29 (1), p.262-271
Main Authors: Zhu, Clara, Platoff, Rebecca, Ghobrial, Gaby, Saddemi, Jackson, Evangelisti, Taylor, Bucher, Emily, Saracco, Benjamin, Adams, Amanda, Kripalani, Simran, Atabek, Umur, Spitz, Francis R., Hong, Young K.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-4688fe04866be8c690c9838ed9ce8d8db1f253090a79cedff406011cf27dbf493
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-4688fe04866be8c690c9838ed9ce8d8db1f253090a79cedff406011cf27dbf493
container_end_page 271
container_issue 1
container_start_page 262
container_title Annals of surgical oncology
container_volume 29
creator Zhu, Clara
Platoff, Rebecca
Ghobrial, Gaby
Saddemi, Jackson
Evangelisti, Taylor
Bucher, Emily
Saracco, Benjamin
Adams, Amanda
Kripalani, Simran
Atabek, Umur
Spitz, Francis R.
Hong, Young K.
description Background In advanced malignant bowel obstruction, decompressive gastrostomy tubes (GTs) may not be feasible due to ascites, peritoneal carcinomatosis, and altered gastric anatomy. Whereas nasogastric tubes (NGTs) allow temporary decompression, percutaneous transesophageal gastrostomy tubes (PTEGs) are an alternative method for long-term palliative decompression. This study performed a scoping review to determine outcomes with PTEG in advanced malignancies. Methods A systematic literature search was performed to include all studies that reported the clinical results of PTEGs for malignancy. No language, national, or publication status restrictions were used. Results The analysis included 14 relevant studies with a total of 340 patients. In 11 studies, standard PTEGs were inserted with a rupture-free balloon’s placement into the mouth or nose and esophageal puncture under fluoroscopy or ultrasound, followed by a guidewire into the stomach with placement of a single-lumen tube. Of 340 patients, 65 (19.1%) had minor complications, and 5 (2.1%) had significant complications, including bleeding and severe aspiration pneumonia. Of 171 patients, 169 with PTEGs (98.8%) reported relief of nasal discomfort from NGT and alleviation of obstructive symptoms. The one randomized controlled trial reported a significantly higher quality of life with PTEGs than with NGTs. Conclusions When decompression for advanced malignancy is technically not feasible with a gastrostomy tube, the PTEG is a viable, safe option for palliation. The PTEG is associated with lower significant complication rates than the gastrostomy tube and significantly higher patient-derived outcomes than the NGT.
doi_str_mv 10.1245/s10434-021-10667-x
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2575070678</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2575070678</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-4688fe04866be8c690c9838ed9ce8d8db1f253090a79cedff406011cf27dbf493</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kcFu1DAQhi1ERUvhBTggS1y4BOzYcZwTWhVaQEWVYFGPlmOPd7NK7GAn2_ZleFa83dJWHDh59Puff2b0IfSKkne05NX7RAlnvCAlLSgRoi6un6AjWmWJC0mf5poIWTSlqA7R85Q2hNCakeoZOmS84oJLcoR-X671hKeAbcCXa_D4I5gwjBFS6raAz3SaYkhTGDpIWHuLv8Jm9g9KBOzDhC_GqQs-fcAL_MOEsfMr_B22HVzh4PAyap8ghXGtV6D7R6E3eDm3OcaFiBd2q70Bi7_pvlv5XOcBL9CB032Cl3fvMfp5-ml58rk4vzj7crI4Lwyrq2l3r3RAuBSiBWlEQ0wjmQTbGJBW2pa6smKkIbrOinWOE0EoNa6sbet4w47R233uGMOvGdKkhi4Z6HvtIcxJlVVdkZqIWmbrm3-smzBHn7dTpdhxYEKy7Cr3LpMvTRGcGmM36HijKFE7empPT2V66paeus5Nr--i53YAe9_yF1c2sL0h5S-_gvgw-z-xfwDaZqh1</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2610663683</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>What to do When Decompressive Gastrostomies and Jejunostomies are not Options? A Scoping Review of Transesophageal Gastrostomy Tubes for Advanced Malignancies</title><source>Springer Nature</source><creator>Zhu, Clara ; Platoff, Rebecca ; Ghobrial, Gaby ; Saddemi, Jackson ; Evangelisti, Taylor ; Bucher, Emily ; Saracco, Benjamin ; Adams, Amanda ; Kripalani, Simran ; Atabek, Umur ; Spitz, Francis R. ; Hong, Young K.</creator><creatorcontrib>Zhu, Clara ; Platoff, Rebecca ; Ghobrial, Gaby ; Saddemi, Jackson ; Evangelisti, Taylor ; Bucher, Emily ; Saracco, Benjamin ; Adams, Amanda ; Kripalani, Simran ; Atabek, Umur ; Spitz, Francis R. ; Hong, Young K.</creatorcontrib><description>Background In advanced malignant bowel obstruction, decompressive gastrostomy tubes (GTs) may not be feasible due to ascites, peritoneal carcinomatosis, and altered gastric anatomy. Whereas nasogastric tubes (NGTs) allow temporary decompression, percutaneous transesophageal gastrostomy tubes (PTEGs) are an alternative method for long-term palliative decompression. This study performed a scoping review to determine outcomes with PTEG in advanced malignancies. Methods A systematic literature search was performed to include all studies that reported the clinical results of PTEGs for malignancy. No language, national, or publication status restrictions were used. Results The analysis included 14 relevant studies with a total of 340 patients. In 11 studies, standard PTEGs were inserted with a rupture-free balloon’s placement into the mouth or nose and esophageal puncture under fluoroscopy or ultrasound, followed by a guidewire into the stomach with placement of a single-lumen tube. Of 340 patients, 65 (19.1%) had minor complications, and 5 (2.1%) had significant complications, including bleeding and severe aspiration pneumonia. Of 171 patients, 169 with PTEGs (98.8%) reported relief of nasal discomfort from NGT and alleviation of obstructive symptoms. The one randomized controlled trial reported a significantly higher quality of life with PTEGs than with NGTs. Conclusions When decompression for advanced malignancy is technically not feasible with a gastrostomy tube, the PTEG is a viable, safe option for palliation. The PTEG is associated with lower significant complication rates than the gastrostomy tube and significantly higher patient-derived outcomes than the NGT.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1068-9265</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1534-4681</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1245/s10434-021-10667-x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 34546480</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cham: Springer International Publishing</publisher><subject>Ascites ; Balloon treatment ; Decompression ; Esophagus ; Fluoroscopy ; Gastric cancer ; Gastrointestinal Oncology ; Gastrostomy ; Humans ; Intubation, Gastrointestinal ; Jejunostomy ; Malignancy ; Medicine ; Medicine &amp; Public Health ; Oncology ; Ostomy ; Palliation ; Patients ; Peritoneal Neoplasms ; Quality of Life ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic ; Surgery ; Surgical Oncology</subject><ispartof>Annals of surgical oncology, 2022, Vol.29 (1), p.262-271</ispartof><rights>Society of Surgical Oncology 2021</rights><rights>2021. Society of Surgical Oncology.</rights><rights>Society of Surgical Oncology 2021.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-4688fe04866be8c690c9838ed9ce8d8db1f253090a79cedff406011cf27dbf493</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-4688fe04866be8c690c9838ed9ce8d8db1f253090a79cedff406011cf27dbf493</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34546480$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Zhu, Clara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Platoff, Rebecca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ghobrial, Gaby</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saddemi, Jackson</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Evangelisti, Taylor</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bucher, Emily</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saracco, Benjamin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Adams, Amanda</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kripalani, Simran</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Atabek, Umur</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spitz, Francis R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hong, Young K.</creatorcontrib><title>What to do When Decompressive Gastrostomies and Jejunostomies are not Options? A Scoping Review of Transesophageal Gastrostomy Tubes for Advanced Malignancies</title><title>Annals of surgical oncology</title><addtitle>Ann Surg Oncol</addtitle><addtitle>Ann Surg Oncol</addtitle><description>Background In advanced malignant bowel obstruction, decompressive gastrostomy tubes (GTs) may not be feasible due to ascites, peritoneal carcinomatosis, and altered gastric anatomy. Whereas nasogastric tubes (NGTs) allow temporary decompression, percutaneous transesophageal gastrostomy tubes (PTEGs) are an alternative method for long-term palliative decompression. This study performed a scoping review to determine outcomes with PTEG in advanced malignancies. Methods A systematic literature search was performed to include all studies that reported the clinical results of PTEGs for malignancy. No language, national, or publication status restrictions were used. Results The analysis included 14 relevant studies with a total of 340 patients. In 11 studies, standard PTEGs were inserted with a rupture-free balloon’s placement into the mouth or nose and esophageal puncture under fluoroscopy or ultrasound, followed by a guidewire into the stomach with placement of a single-lumen tube. Of 340 patients, 65 (19.1%) had minor complications, and 5 (2.1%) had significant complications, including bleeding and severe aspiration pneumonia. Of 171 patients, 169 with PTEGs (98.8%) reported relief of nasal discomfort from NGT and alleviation of obstructive symptoms. The one randomized controlled trial reported a significantly higher quality of life with PTEGs than with NGTs. Conclusions When decompression for advanced malignancy is technically not feasible with a gastrostomy tube, the PTEG is a viable, safe option for palliation. The PTEG is associated with lower significant complication rates than the gastrostomy tube and significantly higher patient-derived outcomes than the NGT.</description><subject>Ascites</subject><subject>Balloon treatment</subject><subject>Decompression</subject><subject>Esophagus</subject><subject>Fluoroscopy</subject><subject>Gastric cancer</subject><subject>Gastrointestinal Oncology</subject><subject>Gastrostomy</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Intubation, Gastrointestinal</subject><subject>Jejunostomy</subject><subject>Malignancy</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine &amp; Public Health</subject><subject>Oncology</subject><subject>Ostomy</subject><subject>Palliation</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Peritoneal Neoplasms</subject><subject>Quality of Life</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Surgical Oncology</subject><issn>1068-9265</issn><issn>1534-4681</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kcFu1DAQhi1ERUvhBTggS1y4BOzYcZwTWhVaQEWVYFGPlmOPd7NK7GAn2_ZleFa83dJWHDh59Puff2b0IfSKkne05NX7RAlnvCAlLSgRoi6un6AjWmWJC0mf5poIWTSlqA7R85Q2hNCakeoZOmS84oJLcoR-X671hKeAbcCXa_D4I5gwjBFS6raAz3SaYkhTGDpIWHuLv8Jm9g9KBOzDhC_GqQs-fcAL_MOEsfMr_B22HVzh4PAyap8ghXGtV6D7R6E3eDm3OcaFiBd2q70Bi7_pvlv5XOcBL9CB032Cl3fvMfp5-ml58rk4vzj7crI4Lwyrq2l3r3RAuBSiBWlEQ0wjmQTbGJBW2pa6smKkIbrOinWOE0EoNa6sbet4w47R233uGMOvGdKkhi4Z6HvtIcxJlVVdkZqIWmbrm3-smzBHn7dTpdhxYEKy7Cr3LpMvTRGcGmM36HijKFE7empPT2V66paeus5Nr--i53YAe9_yF1c2sL0h5S-_gvgw-z-xfwDaZqh1</recordid><startdate>2022</startdate><enddate>2022</enddate><creator>Zhu, Clara</creator><creator>Platoff, Rebecca</creator><creator>Ghobrial, Gaby</creator><creator>Saddemi, Jackson</creator><creator>Evangelisti, Taylor</creator><creator>Bucher, Emily</creator><creator>Saracco, Benjamin</creator><creator>Adams, Amanda</creator><creator>Kripalani, Simran</creator><creator>Atabek, Umur</creator><creator>Spitz, Francis R.</creator><creator>Hong, Young K.</creator><general>Springer International Publishing</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7TO</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2022</creationdate><title>What to do When Decompressive Gastrostomies and Jejunostomies are not Options? A Scoping Review of Transesophageal Gastrostomy Tubes for Advanced Malignancies</title><author>Zhu, Clara ; Platoff, Rebecca ; Ghobrial, Gaby ; Saddemi, Jackson ; Evangelisti, Taylor ; Bucher, Emily ; Saracco, Benjamin ; Adams, Amanda ; Kripalani, Simran ; Atabek, Umur ; Spitz, Francis R. ; Hong, Young K.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-4688fe04866be8c690c9838ed9ce8d8db1f253090a79cedff406011cf27dbf493</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Ascites</topic><topic>Balloon treatment</topic><topic>Decompression</topic><topic>Esophagus</topic><topic>Fluoroscopy</topic><topic>Gastric cancer</topic><topic>Gastrointestinal Oncology</topic><topic>Gastrostomy</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Intubation, Gastrointestinal</topic><topic>Jejunostomy</topic><topic>Malignancy</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine &amp; Public Health</topic><topic>Oncology</topic><topic>Ostomy</topic><topic>Palliation</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Peritoneal Neoplasms</topic><topic>Quality of Life</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Surgical Oncology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Zhu, Clara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Platoff, Rebecca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ghobrial, Gaby</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saddemi, Jackson</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Evangelisti, Taylor</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bucher, Emily</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saracco, Benjamin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Adams, Amanda</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kripalani, Simran</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Atabek, Umur</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spitz, Francis R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hong, Young K.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Oncogenes and Growth Factors Abstracts</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Annals of surgical oncology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Zhu, Clara</au><au>Platoff, Rebecca</au><au>Ghobrial, Gaby</au><au>Saddemi, Jackson</au><au>Evangelisti, Taylor</au><au>Bucher, Emily</au><au>Saracco, Benjamin</au><au>Adams, Amanda</au><au>Kripalani, Simran</au><au>Atabek, Umur</au><au>Spitz, Francis R.</au><au>Hong, Young K.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>What to do When Decompressive Gastrostomies and Jejunostomies are not Options? A Scoping Review of Transesophageal Gastrostomy Tubes for Advanced Malignancies</atitle><jtitle>Annals of surgical oncology</jtitle><stitle>Ann Surg Oncol</stitle><addtitle>Ann Surg Oncol</addtitle><date>2022</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>29</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>262</spage><epage>271</epage><pages>262-271</pages><issn>1068-9265</issn><eissn>1534-4681</eissn><abstract>Background In advanced malignant bowel obstruction, decompressive gastrostomy tubes (GTs) may not be feasible due to ascites, peritoneal carcinomatosis, and altered gastric anatomy. Whereas nasogastric tubes (NGTs) allow temporary decompression, percutaneous transesophageal gastrostomy tubes (PTEGs) are an alternative method for long-term palliative decompression. This study performed a scoping review to determine outcomes with PTEG in advanced malignancies. Methods A systematic literature search was performed to include all studies that reported the clinical results of PTEGs for malignancy. No language, national, or publication status restrictions were used. Results The analysis included 14 relevant studies with a total of 340 patients. In 11 studies, standard PTEGs were inserted with a rupture-free balloon’s placement into the mouth or nose and esophageal puncture under fluoroscopy or ultrasound, followed by a guidewire into the stomach with placement of a single-lumen tube. Of 340 patients, 65 (19.1%) had minor complications, and 5 (2.1%) had significant complications, including bleeding and severe aspiration pneumonia. Of 171 patients, 169 with PTEGs (98.8%) reported relief of nasal discomfort from NGT and alleviation of obstructive symptoms. The one randomized controlled trial reported a significantly higher quality of life with PTEGs than with NGTs. Conclusions When decompression for advanced malignancy is technically not feasible with a gastrostomy tube, the PTEG is a viable, safe option for palliation. The PTEG is associated with lower significant complication rates than the gastrostomy tube and significantly higher patient-derived outcomes than the NGT.</abstract><cop>Cham</cop><pub>Springer International Publishing</pub><pmid>34546480</pmid><doi>10.1245/s10434-021-10667-x</doi><tpages>10</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1068-9265
ispartof Annals of surgical oncology, 2022, Vol.29 (1), p.262-271
issn 1068-9265
1534-4681
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2575070678
source Springer Nature
subjects Ascites
Balloon treatment
Decompression
Esophagus
Fluoroscopy
Gastric cancer
Gastrointestinal Oncology
Gastrostomy
Humans
Intubation, Gastrointestinal
Jejunostomy
Malignancy
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Oncology
Ostomy
Palliation
Patients
Peritoneal Neoplasms
Quality of Life
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Surgery
Surgical Oncology
title What to do When Decompressive Gastrostomies and Jejunostomies are not Options? A Scoping Review of Transesophageal Gastrostomy Tubes for Advanced Malignancies
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T13%3A50%3A41IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=What%20to%20do%20When%20Decompressive%20Gastrostomies%20and%20Jejunostomies%20are%20not%20Options?%20A%20Scoping%20Review%20of%20Transesophageal%20Gastrostomy%20Tubes%20for%20Advanced%20Malignancies&rft.jtitle=Annals%20of%20surgical%20oncology&rft.au=Zhu,%20Clara&rft.date=2022&rft.volume=29&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=262&rft.epage=271&rft.pages=262-271&rft.issn=1068-9265&rft.eissn=1534-4681&rft_id=info:doi/10.1245/s10434-021-10667-x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2575070678%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-4688fe04866be8c690c9838ed9ce8d8db1f253090a79cedff406011cf27dbf493%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2610663683&rft_id=info:pmid/34546480&rfr_iscdi=true