Published online Sep 18, 2023. doi: 10.13105/wjma.v11.i6.277
Peer-review started: February 28, 2023
First decision: March 24, 2023
Revised: May 17, 2023
Accepted: June 16, 2023
Article in press: June 16, 2023
Published online: September 18, 2023
Processing time: 196 Days and 14.8 Hours
Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and percutaneous radiological gastrostomy (PRG) are minimally invasive techniques commonly used for prolonged enteral nutrition. Despite safe, both techniques may lead to complications, such as bleeding, infection, pain, peritonitis, and tube-related complications. The literature is unclear on which technique is the safest.
To establish which approach has the lowest complication rate.
A database search was performed from inception through November 2022, and comparative studies of PEG and PRG were selected following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. All included studies compared the two techniques directly and provided absolute values of the number of complications. Studies with pediatric populations were excluded. The primary outcome of this study was infection and bleeding. Pneumonia, peritonitis, pain, and mechanical complications were secondary outcomes. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB2) and we used The Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies (ROBINS-I) to analyze the retrospective studies. We also performed GRADE analysis to assess the quality of evidence. Data on risk differences and 95% confidence intervals were obtained using the Mantel-Haenszel test.
Seventeen studies were included, including two randomized controlled trials and fifteen retrospective cohort studies. The total population was 465218 individuals, with 273493 having undergone PEG and 191725 PRG. The only outcome that showed a significant difference was tube related complications in retrospective studies favoring PEG (95%CI: 0.03 to 0.08; P < 0.00001), although this outcome did not show significant difference in randomized studies (95%CI: -0.07 to 0.04; P = 0.13). There was no difference in the analyses of the following outcomes: infection in retrospective (95%CI: -0.01 to 0.00; P < 0.00001) or randomized (95%CI: -0.06 to 0.04; P = 0.44) studies; bleeding in retrospective (95%CI: -0.00 to 0.00; P < 0.00001) or randomized (95%CI: -0.06 to 0.02; P = 0.43) studies; pneumonia in retrospective (95%CI: -0.04 to 0.00; P = 0.28) or randomized (95%CI: -0.09 to 0.11; P = 0.39) studies; pain in retrospective (95%CI: -0.05 to 0.02; P < 0.00001) studies; peritonitis in retrospective (95%CI: -0.02 to 0.01; P < 0.0001) studies.
PEG has lower levels of tube-related complications (such as dislocation, leak, obstruction, or breakdown) when compared to PRG.
Core Tip: Gastrostomy is a routine and preferred feeding route in patients who require enteral nutrition for prolonged period. This metanalysis compared percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy and percutaneous radiological gastrostomy multiple outcomes, such as bleeding, infection, pneumonia, pain, and tube-related complications. Based on this meta-analysis, gastrostomy technique is related to a lower complication rate of tube-related complications and thus, should be preferred. Costs, devices availability, personal and local experience as well as patients preference should be considered when choose the best technique.