4.1 Article

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) in children is not a minor procedure: risk factors for major complications

期刊

SEMINARS IN PEDIATRIC SURGERY
卷 18, 期 2, 页码 93-97

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1053/j.sempedsurg.2009.02.006

关键词

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG); Laparoscopic assisted PEG; Laparoscopy; Children; Complications; Ventriculoperitoneal shunt

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Percutaneous, endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) provides for enteral nutrition in children with feeding problems. PEG, however, is not without complications. The present study has a twofold aim: (1) comparing our incidence of major complications after PEG with the incidence in other centers, and (2) identifying risk factors for major complications. All patients receiving a PEG or laparoscopic-assisted PEG (lap PEG) in the period 1992-2008 were reviewed. Primary outcome was the occurrence of major complications, defined as the need for surgery, nonprophylactic antibiotics, or blood transfusion, and procedure-related death. Potential risk factors, eg, age under 1 year, mental retardation, scoliosis, constipation, hepatomegaly, upper abdominal surgery, ventriculoperitoneal shunt, peritoneal dialysis, esophageal stenosis, and coagulopathy, were analyzed. Of the 467 patients (448 PEG, 19 lap PEG), 12.6% developed major complications. The complication rate significantly decreased (P = 0.003) over the years. A significantly higher complication rate of 32% (P = 0.02) occurred in children with a ventriculoperitoneal shunt. None of the lap PEG procedures was associated with a major complication, but the difference was not significant, perhaps because of the small numbers in the latter group. The major complication rate after PEG in children is high. Preexisting ventriculoperitoneal shunt is a significant risk factor. Laparoscopically assisted PEG procedures seem to be associated with a lesser major complication rate. (C) 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据