Background and study aims: Feeding-related adverse events after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) such as aspiration pneumonia may result in prolonged hospitalization and postoperative mortality. This study evaluated the efficacy of using semi-solid feeds to reduce feeding-related adverse events and improve clinical outcomes. Patients and methods: Patients who received PEG for enteral nutrition at our hospital between January 2014 and December 2015 were allocated to a postoperative feeding protocol that used either liquid feed or semi-solid feed. Baseline characteristics, postoperative feeding-related adverse events and clinical outcomes in the 2 groups were prospectively analysed and compared. Results: One hundred and seventeen PEG patients (age range: 59 – 97 years, male: 53) were enrolled with 72 patients given liquid feed and 45 patients receiving semi-solid feed. Baseline characteristics were similar in both groups. The semi-solid feed group experienced fewer incidence of feeding-related aspiration pneumonia (2.2 % vs. 22.2 %, P < 0.005) and shorter postoperative hospital length of stay (12.7 days vs. 18.8 days, P < 0.01). Significant differences were not observed in the frequency of peristomal infection (11.1 % vs. 12.5 %, P = 0.82), feeding-related diarrhea (2.2 % vs. 12.5 %, P = 0.09) and 30-day mortality rates (2.2 % vs. 8.3 %, P = 0.25). Conclusions: Semi-solid feeding may reduce the risk of aspiration pneumonia and shorten postoperative hospital length of stay after PEG. Semi-solid feeds are safe to use and can be employed either as a first line feeding protocol or an alternative when liquid feeding is unsuccessful.

Background:Percutaneous transesophageal gastro-tubing (PTEG) is a minimally invasive technique to access the gut via an esophagostomy. However, this procedure is not well known and the literature available is still fairly limited. This observational study was conducted to evaluate our experience using this method as an alternative long-term tube feeding procedure when gastrostomy is not suitable.Methods:A total of 15 patients (10 males and 5 females) who underwent PTEG at our institution from 2012 to 2016 were observed and analyzed in this study.Results:The average age was 80.1 (71–93) years. Underlying conditions that required PTEG were previous gastric resection in 11 patients, left diaphragm disorder in 2 patients, interposing transverse colon between the abdominal wall and anterior gastric wall in 1 patient, and severe gastrostomy site leakage in 1 patient. Tube placement was successful in all patients by approaching the left side of the neck, using a 15 Fr size tube. The mean postoperative length of stay was 22 (8–48) days. Postoperative adverse events included accidental tube dislodgement in three patients, tracheoesophageal fistula in one patient, inferior thyroid artery injury in one patient and thyroid gland mispuncture in one patient. There was no procedure-related mortality nor mortality at 30 days. Eight patients were discharged with some oral intake.Conclusions:PTEG is feasible in patients requiring long-term tube feeding for whom gastrostomy is unsuitable. It is an effective long-term tube feeding procedure and should be offered as a more comfortable alternative to nasogastric tubing.

Key Clinical MessageRecurrent aspiration pneumonia can impede the continuation of enteral nutrition. Semi‐solid feeds have been demonstrated to reduce the incidence of aspiration pneumonia but are difficult to administer via the nasogastric tube. A novel semi‐solidifying enteral formula may be used instead to avoid the occurrence of severe gastroesophageal reflux.

Background and study aims: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) using the introducer technique is not only useful in patients with upper digestive tract stenosis but has been shown to reduce peristomal infection. In this study, we evaluated the safety and utility of a novel large-caliber introducer PEG kit (using 20 Fr size tube) compared with a push kit of similar size. Patients and methods: One hundred and thirty-six patients who received PEG at our hospital between January 2014 and December 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. Baseline characteristics, laboratory biomarkers, hemodynamic changes, postoperative adverse events and clinical outcomes with both kits were compared. Results: The new introducer PEG kit was used in 61 patients while the remaining 75 patients received tube placement using a push technique PEG kit. Except for the prevalence of dementia, which was lower in the introducer PEG kit group, baseline characteristics were similar in both groups. Tube placements were 100 % successful with both PEG kits and there were no significant differences in the change of postoperative hemodynamic or laboratory biomarkers. The Introducer PEG kit group experienced fewer incidence of feeding-related aspiration pneumonia (8.2 % vs. 24 %, P = 0.02), lower peristomal infection scores (1.2 vs. 1.6, P < 0.01), shorter postoperative length of stay (16 days vs. 23.7 days, P = 0.01) and fewer deaths at day 60 (3.3 % vs. 16 %, P = 0.02). Conclusions: Gastrostomy using the new large-caliber introducer PEG kit is safe and produced non-inferior (with some favourable) results when compared to the push technique using similar size tubes.

Background/aimsAlthough percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is the method of choice for long-term enteral nutrition, feeding-related adverse events such as aspiration pneumonia and peristomal leakage can impede the use of PEG. Percutaneous endoscopic transgastric jejunostomy (PEG-J) using large-bore jejunal tubes may help by circumventing gastric passage during enteral nutrition and improving drainage of gastric secretions.Methods20 patients (12 males and 8 females) who received PEG-J after unsuccessful PEG feeding during a 6-year period in our institution were analysed retrospectively to evaluate the efficacy of large-bore jejunal feeding tubes in maintaining enteral nutrition.ResultsThe median age was 83.5 (71–96) years. The median period between PEG and PEG-J was 33 (14–280) days. Indications were aspiration due to gastro-oesophageal reflux in 18 patients and severe peristomal leakage in 2 patients. Tube placements were successful in all patients. There were 6 (30%) in-hospital mortalities, with 3 (15%) occurring within 30 days after procedure.ConclusionsPEG-J can be performed safely in patients with PEG and may facilitate the maintenance of enteral nutrition in most of the patients. Patients with unsuccessful PEG feeding can be offered the option of jejunal feeding before considering termination of enteral nutrition.