Immediate‐use strategy is as safe and effective as delayed‐use strategy following percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement: A retrospective cohort study

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundPercutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube placement is the most common enteral access for long‐term feeding. The aim of our study is to assess the feasibility and safety of immediate PEG tube use after initial placement.MethodsWe conducted a single‐center retrospective cohort study between August 2006 and August 2016. Prior to August 2011, tube feedings were delayed for ≥4 h after initial PEG placement, compared with immediate use (<1 h) after August 2011. Primary outcomes were complication rates within 30 days of placement. Secondary outcomes were impact of morbidity, mortality, length of stay, and need for repeat PEG placement.ResultsOur study included 1296 patients during the 10‐year period, of which 704 underwent delayed use and 592 underwent immediate use (744 inpatient and 552 outpatient). There were no significant differences between the delayed‐use and immediate‐use PEG with regard to complications (3.4% vs 4.4%; P = 0.76). Subgroup analysis also reflected no significant differences in complications between inpatient and outpatient groups. For inpatients, there were no substantial differences in inpatient mortality (3.9% vs 3.3%; P = 0.70), mortality within 30 days of discharge (13.8% vs 13.1%; P = 0.15), readmissions (38.2% vs 34.3%; P = 0.23), repeat PEG placement (0.7% vs 1.5%; P = 0.46), and length of stay (13.3 vs 13.9 days; P = 0.99).ConclusionPatients who received immediate enteral nutrition after PEG tube placement did not have any increased complications, morbidity, or mortality; and it is just as safe when compared with patients who received delayed feeding.