When Should the Appropriateness of PEG be Questioned?

Purpose of Review This review aims to analyze the evidence regarding the appropriateness of PEG placement in the following clinical situations: short bowel syndrome, head and neck cancer, dementia and palliative use in malignant bowel obstruction. Recent Findings Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Current gastroenterology reports 2023, Vol.25 (1), p.13-19
Main Authors: Roche, Keelin Flannery, Bower, Katie L., Collier, Bryan, Neel, Dustin, Esry, Laura
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Abdomen
Dementia
Diarrhea
Dysphagia
Endoscopy
Enteral nutrition
Enteral Nutrition - methods
Gastroenterology
Gastrostomy - adverse effects
Gastrostomy - methods
Head & neck cancer
Humans
Intestinal Obstruction - etiology
Medical ethics
Medical futility
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Moral injury
Mortality
Nutrition
Nutrition and Obesity (S McClave and E Omer
Ostomy
Parenteral nutrition
Patients
Proteins
Retrospective Studies
Section Editors
Short Bowel Syndrome
Surgeons
Topical Collection on Nutrition and Obesity
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!
Description
Summary:Purpose of Review This review aims to analyze the evidence regarding the appropriateness of PEG placement in the following clinical situations: short bowel syndrome, head and neck cancer, dementia and palliative use in malignant bowel obstruction. Recent Findings Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tubes are placed for a variety of clinical indications by numerous different specialties. First described in 1980, PEG tubes are now the dominant method of enteral access. Typically, PEG tubes are technically feasible procedures that can come with significant risk for both minor and major complications. Therefore, it is important to perform an in-depth, patient specific risk-benefit analysis when considering insertion. Summary By analyzing the current evidence regarding benefits in these situations, superimposed by the lens of biomedical ethics, we make recommendations that are accessible to any provider who may be a consultant or proceduralist, helping to provide informed care that is in the patient’s best interest.
ISSN:1522-8037
1534-312X
DOI:10.1007/s11894-022-00857-2