PurposeA meta-analysis was performed to compare the rates of the major complications associated with two gastrostomy tube placement techniques in a pediatric population: laparoscopy-assisted gastrostomy (LAG) and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG).MethodsThe PubMed electronic database was queried for comparative studies of the two insertion techniques. The Newcastle–Ottawa scale (NOS) was used for the assessment of the quality and risk of bias in the included studies. The main outcome measure was the frequency of major complications defined as the need for reoperation within 30 days or death. RevMan 5.3, was used, with a p < 0.05 indicating statistical significance.ResultsEight studies including 1550 patients met the inclusion criteria. The risk for major complications was higher in PEG than in LAG 3.86 (95% confidence interval 1.90–7.81; p < 0.0002). The number needed to treat to reduce one major complication by performing LAG instead of PEG was 23. There were no randomized-controlled trials. Overall, the quality of the included studies was determined to be unsatisfactory.ConclusionsPEG placement was associated with a significantly higher risk of major complications compared to LAG placement. Therefore, LAG should be the preferred method for gastrostomy tube placement in children.
PEG is a safe technique with a high complication rate, but the majority of complications are minor and easily treatable. Gastrostomy is sometimes temporary. Enteral feeding results in significant weight gain in 1 year.
Background Gastrostomy placement in children is one of the most frequently performed pediatric surgical procedures and laparoscopic-assisted gastrostomy (LAG) is the preferred technique. Wound infection after LAG has become a significant concern due to the emergence of antibiotic resistance. The aim of this study was to describe the frequency of wound infection after LAG in children younger than 2 years of age and to identify the associated risk factors and the bacterial species involved. Methods Information about wound infection, results from bacterial cultures, and type of antibiotic treatment used within 30 postoperative days after LAG were compiled for infants who underwent LAG from 2010 to 2017. A retrospective chart review was performed. Data was compiled from charts and from an electronic database containing prospectively collected data. A multivariate logistic analysis was used to explore potential risk factors. Preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis and postoperative local wound care were conducted according to standard procedures. Results The 141 included infants underwent surgery at a median age of 10 months (range: 1–24). Thirty-eight (27%) patients had a clinically determined wound infection, bacteria were cultured from 26/38 (69%), and 30/38 (79%) received antibiotic treatment. The median interval from surgery to detection of a clinical wound infection was 14 days (range: 4–30). The most common microbes discovered were skin bacteria Staphylococcus aureus or Streptococcus pyogenes, but respiratory and intestinal bacteria were also found. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed no independent risk factors for infection such as age, gender, or underlying diagnosis. Conclusion Infants have a high rate of postoperative clinical wound infection after LAG despite the use of preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis and intense local wound care. Gender, age at operation, and previous diagnoses were not found to be independent risk factors for wound infection.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.