» Articles » PMID: 29254240

Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Versus Fluoroscopic Gastrostomy in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) Sufferers with Nutritional Impairment: A Meta-analysis of Current Studies

Overview
Journal Oncotarget
Specialty Oncology
Date 2017 Dec 20
PMID 29254240
Citations 9
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Gastrostomy is recommended for Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) patients with malnutrition. There are two main methods of gastrostomy insertion: Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (PEG) and Fluoroscopic Gastrostomy (FG). The latter included Radiologically Inserted Gastrostomy (RIG) and Per-oral Image-Guided Gastrostomy (PRG). A meta-analysis was conducted to compare these approaches in terms of survival outcomes, pain occurrence and success rate, through the literature search in PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane Library. A total of 7 studies with 701 cases (322 in PEG, 264 in RIG and 115 in PRG) were enrolled in the final analysis. The lack of differences between the comparisons (PEG vs. PRG, PEG vs. RIG and PEG vs. PRG+RIG) on 30-day mortality and survival length was confirmed. For the pooling analysis of peri- and post-procedural complications, patients with PEG had a lower incidence of pain than cases with PRG and RIG together ( < 0.001). The same trends could be found when compared with PRG and RIG, separately ( < 0.05 and < 0.001, respectively). And PEG showed a lower rate of successful attempts than PEG and RIG ( < 0.05). For other complications, we didn't find any differences. This meta-analysis demonstrates that PEG, PRG and RIG had their intrinsic advantages. The current evidences could not determine the preference of them. Further investigations should be done to reveal the most appropriate method for ALS patients.

Citing Articles

Outcomes and Complications of Radiological Gastrostomy vs. Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy for Enteral Feeding: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Ahmed Z, Iqbal U, Aziz M, Arif S, Badal J, Farooq U Gastroenterology Res. 2023; 16(2):79-91.

PMID: 37187550 PMC: 10181338. DOI: 10.14740/gr1593.


Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: outcomes of a dedicated anesthesia and surgery protocol.

Morrell D, Chau M, Winder J, Stredny E, Alli V, Sinz E Surg Endosc. 2023; 37(6):4338-4344.

PMID: 36735049 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-023-09896-w.


Percutaneous Radiology Gastrostomy (PRG)-Associated Complications at a Tertiary Hospital over the Last 25 Years.

Pinar-Gutierrez A, Serrano-Aguayo P, Garcia-Rey S, Vazquez-Gutierrez R, Gonzalez-Navarro I, Tatay-Dominguez D Nutrients. 2022; 14(22).

PMID: 36432521 PMC: 9694556. DOI: 10.3390/nu14224838.


Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy and jejunostomy: Indications and techniques.

Fugazza A, Capogreco A, Cappello A, Nicoletti R, Da Rio L, Galtieri P World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2022; 14(5):250-266.

PMID: 35719902 PMC: 9157691. DOI: 10.4253/wjge.v14.i5.250.


Gastrostomy tubes: Fundamentals, periprocedural considerations, and best practices.

Rajan A, Wangrattanapranee P, Kessler J, Kidambi T, Tabibian J World J Gastrointest Surg. 2022; 14(4):286-303.

PMID: 35664365 PMC: 9131834. DOI: 10.4240/wjgs.v14.i4.286.


References
1.
Desport J, Mabrouk T, Bouillet P, Perna A, Preux P, Couratier P . Complications and survival following radiologically and endoscopically-guided gastrostomy in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Amyotroph Lateral Scler Other Motor Neuron Disord. 2005; 6(2):88-93. DOI: 10.1080/14660820410021258. View

2.
Knibb J, Keren N, Kulka A, Leigh P, Martin S, Shaw C . A clinical tool for predicting survival in ALS. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2016; 87(12):1361-1367. PMC: 5136716. DOI: 10.1136/jnnp-2015-312908. View

3.
Miller R, Jackson C, Kasarskis E, England J, Forshew D, Johnston W . Practice parameter update: the care of the patient with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: drug, nutritional, and respiratory therapies (an evidence-based review): report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology. 2009; 73(15):1218-26. PMC: 2764727. DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e3181bc0141. View

4.
Panic N, Leoncini E, De Belvis G, Ricciardi W, Boccia S . Evaluation of the endorsement of the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement on the quality of published systematic review and meta-analyses. PLoS One. 2014; 8(12):e83138. PMC: 3873291. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0083138. View

5.
Hartling L, Ospina M, Liang Y, Dryden D, Hooton N, Krebs Seida J . Risk of bias versus quality assessment of randomised controlled trials: cross sectional study. BMJ. 2009; 339:b4012. PMC: 2764034. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.b4012. View