Journal of Surgery Concepts & Practice ›› 2020, Vol. 25 ›› Issue (02): 120-123.doi: 10.16139/j.1007-9610.2020.02.007

• Original article • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Application study of percutaneous gastrostomy in patients with esophageal obstruction

JIA Zhenyia, CHEN Niweib, ZHU Yueqic, FAN Youbena, GAO Qia, WANG Zhiganga()   

  1. a. Department of General Surgery, Shanghai Sixth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200233, China
    b. Department of Digestive Endoscopy Center, Shanghai Sixth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200233, China
    c. Department of Interventional Radiology, Shanghai Sixth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200233, China
  • Received:2020-01-08 Online:2020-03-25 Published:2020-04-25

RichHTML

1

PDF (PC)

78

Abstract:

Objective: To analyze the application of percutaneous gastrostomy(PG) in patients with esophageal obstruction. Methods: The clinical data of patients undergoing gastrostomy for esophageal obstruction in our hospital from September 2016 to September 2019 were collected. Operative time, intraoperative blood loss, 2-day and 60-day postoperative pain test scores, beginning time of postoperative nutrition support, postoperative length of stay, 60-day morbidity, 60-day postoperative both body weight and serum albumin were compared between PG group and open gastrostomy (OG) group. Results: A total of 39 patients were studied including 12 cases with PG and 27 cases with OG. There was no signi-ficant difference in baseline data between two groups (P>0.05). The operative time and blood loss were (24.6±9.9) min and (8.8±3.0) mL in PG group respectively, which were significantly lower than those [(61.9±9.1) min and (26.0 ±7.8) mL] in OG group (P<0.001, P<0.001). The 2-day and 60-day postoperative pain scores were 1.60±0.50 and 0.75 ±0.50 in PG group respectively, lower significantly than those [(2.3±0.8) and (2.0 ±0.5)] in OG group (P=0.008, P<0.001). Beginning time of postoperative nutrition support [(18.8±4.6) h] and length of stay [(2.8±1.0) d] in PG group were significantly less than those [(64.3±15.7) h and (4.4±1.2) d] in OG group (P<0.001, P<0.001). Two cases lost follow-up in OG group. There was morbidity 8.3% (1/12) in PG group and 24.0% (6/25) in OG group respectively with no significant difference (P=0.389). The increase in 60-day postoperative body weight was (0.6±0.8) kg in PG group and (0.3 ±0.7) kg in OS group. There was significant difference of increase in 60-day postoperative serum albumin between PG group [(1.3±0.9) g/L] and OG group [(-0.1±1.3) g/L] (P<0.001). Conclusions: PG is minimally invasive and safe and effective with perioperative advantage when compared with OG and could be widely applied in patients with esophageal obstruction.

Key words: Percutaneous gastrostomy, Open gastrostomy, Esophageal obstruction

CLC Number: