Gastrostomy Tube Use in Pediatrics: A Systematic Review

Author:

Berman Loren12,Baird Robert3,Sant’Anna Ana4,Rosen Rachel5,Petrini Maria62,Cellucci Michael62,Fuchs Lynn72,Costa Joanna72,Lester Jennifer82,Stevens Jenny9,Morrow Michele102,Jaszczyszyn Danielle1,Amaral Joao11,Goldin Adam9

Affiliation:

1. aDepartments of Surgery

2. jSidney Kimmel Medical School at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

3. bDepartment of Pediatric General and Thoracic Surgery, British Columbia Children’s Hospital, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

4. cDepartment of Pediatrics, Division of Gastroenterology and Nutrition, McGill University Health Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada

5. dAerodigestive Center, Division of Gastroenterology, Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts

6. ePediatrics

7. fNeonatology

8. gNutrition

9. hDepartment of Surgery, Seattle Children’s Hospital, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington

10. iTherapy Services, Nemours Children’s Health, Wilmington, Delaware

11. kDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging, Division of Interventional Radiology, The Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Abstract

CONTEXT Despite frequency of gastrostomy placement procedures in children, there remains considerable variability in preoperative work-up and procedural technique of gastrostomy placement and a paucity of literature regarding patient-centric outcomes. OBJECTIVES This review summarizes existing literature and provides consensus-driven guidelines for patients throughout the enteral access decision-making process. DATA SOURCES PubMed, Google Scholar, Medline, and Scopus. STUDY SELECTION Included studies were identified through a combination of the search terms “gastrostomy,” “g-tube,” and “tube feeding” in children. DATA EXTRACTION Relevant data, level of evidence, and risk of bias were extracted from included articles to guide formulation of consensus summaries of the evidence. Meta-analysis was conducted when data afforded a quantitative analysis. EVIDENCE REVIEW Four themes were explored: preoperative nasogastric feeding tube trials, decision-making surrounding enteral access, the role of preoperative imaging, and gastrostomy insertion techniques. Guidelines were generated after evidence review with multidisciplinary stakeholder involvement adhering to GRADE methodology. RESULTS Nearly 900 publications were reviewed, with 58 influencing final recommendations. In total, 17 recommendations are provided, including: (1) tTrial of home nasogastric feeding is safe and should be strongly considered before gastrostomy placement, especially for patients who are likely to learn to eat by mouth; (2) rRoutine contrast studies are not indicated before gastrostomy placement; and (3) lLaparoscopic placement is associated with the best safety profile. LIMITATIONS Recommendations were generated almost exclusively from observational studies and expert opinion, with few studies describing direct comparisons between GT placement and prolonged nasogastric feeding tube trial. CONCLUSIONS Additional patient- and family-centric evidence is needed to understand critical aspects of decision-making surrounding surgically placed enteral access devices for children.

Publisher

American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)

Subject

Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health

Reference70 articles.

1. An exploration of the use of simple statistics to measure consensus and stability in Delphi studies;Holey;BMC Med Res Methodol,2007

2. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration;Liberati;J Clin Epidemiol,2009

3. Howick J , ChalmersI, GlasziouP, . Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. The 2011 Oxford CEBM Levels of Evidence. Available at: https://www.cebm.ox.ac.uk/resources/levels-of- evidence/ocebm-levels-of-evidence. Accessed June 8, 2021

4. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions;Sterne;BMJ,2016

5. GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables;Guyatt;J Clin Epidemiol,2011

Cited by 5 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3