A Multicenter Survey of Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy in 2019 at Korean Medical Institutions.

Enteral nutrition Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy Surveys and questionnaires

Journal

Gut and liver
ISSN: 2005-1212
Titre abrégé: Gut Liver
Pays: Korea (South)
ID NLM: 101316452

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
28 Nov 2023
Historique:
received: 14 05 2023
revised: 27 07 2023
accepted: 01 08 2023
medline: 28 11 2023
pubmed: 28 11 2023
entrez: 28 11 2023
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

: This study aimed to review the indications, methods, cooperation, complications, and outcomes of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG). : Questionnaires were sent to 200 hospitals, of which 62 returned their questionnaires, with a response rate of approximately 30%. Descriptive statistics were calculated to analyze the responses to the questionnaires. : In 2019, a total of 1,052 PEGs were performed in 1,017 patients at 62 hospitals. The main group who underwent PEG was older adult patients with brain disease, particularly stroke. Nutritional supply was an important purpose of the PEG procedure. "The pull method" was the most commonly used for initial PEG insertion. The complications related to PEG were mostly mild, with leakage being the most common. Patients who underwent PEG procedures were primarily educated regarding the post-procedure management and complications related to PEG. Preoperative meetings were skipped at >50% of the institutions. Regarding the cooperation between the nutrition support team (NST) and the physician performing PEG, few endoscopists answered that they cooperated with NST before and after PEG. Moreover, the rate of NST certification obtained by physicians performing PEG and the frequency of attendance at NST-related conferences were relatively low. : This study shows a similar trend to that found in the previous PEG guidelines. However, it covers new aspects, including team-based work for PEG procedure, nutrition support, and education for patients and guardians. Therefore, each medical institution needs to select an appropriate method considering the medical environment and doctor's abilities.

Sections du résumé

Background/Aims UNASSIGNED
: This study aimed to review the indications, methods, cooperation, complications, and outcomes of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG).
Methods UNASSIGNED
: Questionnaires were sent to 200 hospitals, of which 62 returned their questionnaires, with a response rate of approximately 30%. Descriptive statistics were calculated to analyze the responses to the questionnaires.
Results UNASSIGNED
: In 2019, a total of 1,052 PEGs were performed in 1,017 patients at 62 hospitals. The main group who underwent PEG was older adult patients with brain disease, particularly stroke. Nutritional supply was an important purpose of the PEG procedure. "The pull method" was the most commonly used for initial PEG insertion. The complications related to PEG were mostly mild, with leakage being the most common. Patients who underwent PEG procedures were primarily educated regarding the post-procedure management and complications related to PEG. Preoperative meetings were skipped at >50% of the institutions. Regarding the cooperation between the nutrition support team (NST) and the physician performing PEG, few endoscopists answered that they cooperated with NST before and after PEG. Moreover, the rate of NST certification obtained by physicians performing PEG and the frequency of attendance at NST-related conferences were relatively low.
Conclusions UNASSIGNED
: This study shows a similar trend to that found in the previous PEG guidelines. However, it covers new aspects, including team-based work for PEG procedure, nutrition support, and education for patients and guardians. Therefore, each medical institution needs to select an appropriate method considering the medical environment and doctor's abilities.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38013476
pii: gnl230174
doi: 10.5009/gnl230174
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Auteurs

Jun Woo Park (JW)

Department of Internal Medicine, Kyungpook National University Hospital, Daegu, Korea.

Tae Gyun Kim (TG)

Department of Internal Medicine, Kyungpook National University Hospital, Daegu, Korea.

Kwang Bum Cho (KB)

Department of Internal Medicine, Keimyung University School of Medicine, Daegu, Korea.

Jeong Seok Kim (JS)

Department of Internal Medicine, Keimyung University School of Medicine, Daegu, Korea.

Jin Woong Cho (JW)

Department of Internal Medicine, Presbyterian Medical Center, Jeonju, Korea.

Jung Won Jeon (JW)

Department of Internal Medicine, Kyung Hee University Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.

Sun Gyo Lim (SG)

Department of Gastroenterology, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea.

Chan Gyoo Kim (CG)

Center for Gastric Cancer, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea.

Hong Jun Park (HJ)

Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine, Wonju, Korea.

Tae Jun Kim (TJ)

Department of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

Eun Sun Kim (ES)

Department of Gastroenterology, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

Su Jin Jeong (SJ)

Department of Pediatric Gastroenterology, CHA Bundang Medical Center, CHA University, Seongnam, Korea.

Yong Hwan Kwon (YH)

Department of Internal Medicine, Kyungpook National University Hospital, Daegu, Korea.
Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Korea.

Classifications MeSH