Effect of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy prior to oesophageal cancer surgery on postoperative wound complications in patients: A meta‐analysis

Abstract

It is still a matter of controversy whether percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy(PEG) should be used prior to the operation for the purpose of feeding the patient with resectable oesophageal carcinoma (EC). Comparison was made between EC and preoperatively treated PEG and non‐preoperative PEG. An extensive literature review has been conducted to determine the results about PEG and No‐PEG trials. In this paper, we chose 4 papers out of 407 of them through a strict selection process. In this trial, there were 1027 surgical cases of oesophagus carcinoma, 152 with PEG pre‐surgery and 875 without PEG. The total sample size ranged from 14 to 657. Two studies showed that there was no statistically significant difference in the occurrence of postoperative wound infection among PEG and No‐PEG(OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.38, 2.80 p = 0.96), there was no statistical significance in the likelihood of anastomotic leak among PEG after surgery compared to No‐PEG in 4 trials (OR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.62–2.07 p = 0.69), and there were no statistical differences between PEG and No‐PEG before operation on anastomotic stricture for esophagectomy(OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.31–1.56 p = 0.38). No wound or anastomosis complications were observed in the PEG group. Thus, PEG preoperatively is an effective and safe procedure without any harmful influence on gastrointestinal structure or anastomosing. It can be applied to patients with oesophagus carcinoma who have a high risk of undernutrition. Nevertheless, because of the limited number of randomized controlled trials in this meta‐analysis, caution should be exercised in their treatment. More high‐quality research involving a large sample is required to confirm the findings.