Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of percutaneous endoscopic, laparoscopic and open gastrostomy insertion in children

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Pediatric Surgery International Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the outcomes and complications between percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG), laparoscopic gastrostomy (LAPG) and open gastrostomy (OG) in children.

Methods

Retrospective review of 369 patients from July 1998 to December 2010 who had their gastrostomies inserted at a single tertiary paediatric institution. Patients who were lost in follow-up (59) and had insufficient data (23) were excluded from this study. Results were analysed using descriptive statistics.

Results

Of the 369 included in our study, 260 patients underwent LAPG, 86 PEG and 23 open gastrostomy (OG) procedures. The early complication rate for PEGs was 10.5 %, and for LAPGS 2.7 % (p = 0.006). The late complication rate was 41.9 % for PEGs and 43.1 % for LAPGs (p = NS). The overall complication rate for PEG was 54.7 % and it was 44.6 % for LAPG (p = NS). Major complications occurred only in the PEG group: gastro-colonic fistula (1), peritonitis (1), and “buried bumper syndrome” (1). The overall complication rate for OG was 78.3 % (p = 0.01, when this was compared to LAPGs and PEGs together), although there were no early complications in the OG group.

Conclusion

PEGs had a significantly higher early complication rate than LAPGs and the only major complications occurred in the PEG group. PEGs also had a higher overall complication rate than LAPGs, although the difference was not statistically significant. Both PEGs and LAPGs were significantly superior to OG in terms of overall complication rates.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Braegger C et al (2010) Practical approach to paediatric enteral nutrition: a comment by the ESPGHAN committee on nutrition. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 51(1):110–122

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Gauderer MW, Ponsky JL, Izant RJ Jr (1980) Gastrostomy without laparotomy: a percutaneous endoscopic technique. J Pediatr Surg 15(6):872–875

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Fortunato J, Cuffari C (2011) Outcomes of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in children. Curr Gastroenterol Rep 13(3):293–299

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Frohlich T et al (2010) Review article: percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in infants and children. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 31(8):788–801

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Consensus Statement (2005) ESPEN guidelines on Artificial enteral nutrition—percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG). Clin Nutr 24(5):848–861

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bankhead RR, Fisher CA, Rolandelli RH (2005) Gastrostomy tube placement outcomes: comparison of surgical, endoscopic, and laparoscopic methods. Nutr Clin Pract 20(6):607–612

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Peters RT, Balduyck B, Nour S (2010) Gastrostomy complications in infants and children: a comparative study. Pediatr Surg Int 26(7):707–709

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Zamakhshary M et al (2005) Laparoscopic vs percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube insertion: a new pediatric gold standard? J Pediatr Surg 40(5):859–862

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Jones VS, La Hei ER, Shun A (2007) Laparoscopic gastrostomy: the preferred method of gastrostomy in children. Pediatr Surg Int 23(11):1085–1089

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Smitherman S, Pimpalwar A (2009) Laparoendoscopic gastrostomy tube placement: our all-in-one technique. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech Part A 19(1):119–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ackroyd R et al (2011) Gastrostomy tube insertion in children: the Edmonton experience. Can J Gastroenterol 25(5):265–268

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Gauderer MW (1991) Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: a 10-year experience with 220 children. J Pediatr Surg 26(3):288–292 discussion 292-4

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Vervloessem D et al (2009) Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) in children is not a minor procedure: risk factors for major complications. Semin Pediatr Surg 18(2):93–97

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Fox VL et al (1997) Complications following percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy and subsequent catheter replacement in children and young adults. Gastrointest Endosc 45(1):64–71

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Wragg RC et al (2012) Gastrostomy insertion in the 21st century: PEG or laparoscopic? Report from a large single-centre series. Pediatr Surg Int 28(5):443–448

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Edelman DS, Arroyo PJ, Unger SW (1994) Laparoscopic gastrostomy versus percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. A comparison. Surg Endosc 8(1):47–49

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Akay B et al (2010) Gastrostomy tube placement in infants and children: is there a preferred technique? J Pediatr Surg 45(6):1147–1152

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Vernon-Roberts A, Sullivan PB (2007) Fundoplication versus post-operative medication for gastro-oesophageal reflux in children with neurological impairment undergoing gastrostomy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 1:CD006151

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia

    Ruiwen Liu

  2. Department of Paediatric Surgery, Sydney Children’s Hospital, Randwick, Sydney, Australia

    A. Jiwane, A. Varjavandi, A. Kennedy, G. Henry, A. Dilley, B. Currie & S. Adams

  3. Department of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Sydney Children’s Hospital, Randwick, Sydney, Australia

    U. Krishnan

Authors
  1. Ruiwen Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. Jiwane
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. Varjavandi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. A. Kennedy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. G. Henry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. A. Dilley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. B. Currie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. S. Adams
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. U. Krishnan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ruiwen Liu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Liu, R., Jiwane, A., Varjavandi, A. et al. Comparison of percutaneous endoscopic, laparoscopic and open gastrostomy insertion in children. Pediatr Surg Int 29, 613–621 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00383-013-3313-9

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00383-013-3313-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation