Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy in XXXX .

@entity1 @entity1576 @entity1282 @entity746 @entity158 @entity204 @entity1173
BACKGROUND: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube placement is recommended in @entity746 ( @entity746 ) @entity1 with @entity1282 to provide reliable access for medications and nutrition. It is preferably done while forced vital capacity (FVC) is greater than 50% of predicted to reduce risk of postprocedural @entity1576 . Percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy has been shown to have higher success rates and lower complication rates compared with PEG. The authors sought to investigate the safety of PEG placement in @entity746 @entity1 with varying respiratory compromise. METHODS: The records of 21 @entity1 with @entity746 who underwent PEG tube placement from October 2010 to October 2013 were retrospectively reviewed to determine rates of successful placement, complication, mortality and survival. RESULTS: PEG was placed successfully in 95.2% of @entity1 . There was 1 major complication, procedure-related @entity204 , and failed placement in a @entity1 with FVC 15% predicted who developed procedure-related @entity1173 and @entity1576 and @entity204 8 days after failed PEG attempt. Minor complications included 3 @entity1 with minor @entity158 at insertion site, 1 @entity1 with minor bleeding requiring cauterization and 2 @entity1 requiring PEG tube replacement within 6 months of procedure for accidental dislodgement. After PEG placement, median survival was 327 days (95% confidence interval: 180-687). CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, PEG tube placement in @entity1 with @entity746 seems to be a safe procedure in @entity1 without significant respiratory compromise. In @entity1 with FVC <50%, based on literature review and the results of this study, the authors recommend percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy over PEG placement.
