Gastrostomy tube placement is a procedure that achieves enteral access for nutrition, decompression, and medication administration. Preprocedural evaluation and selection of patients is necessary to provide optimal benefit and reduce the risk of adverse events (AEs). Appropriate indications, contraindications, ethical considerations, and comorbidities of patients referred for gastrostomy placement should be weighed and balanced. Additionally, endoscopist should consider either a transoral or transabdominal approach is appropriate, and radiologic or surgical gastrostomy tube placement is needed. However, medical history, physical examination, and imaging prior to the procedure should be considered to tailor the appropriate approach and reduce the risk of AEs.

Metastasis to the gastrostomy site in patients with upper aerodigestive tract (UADT) malignancies is a rare but devastating adverse event that has been poorly described. Our aim was to determine the overall incidence and clinicopathologic characteristics observed with development of gastrostomy site metastasis in patients with UADT cancers.

This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of 6138 studies retrieved from Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Register after being queried for studies including gastrostomy site metastasis in patients with UADT malignancies.

The final analysis included 121 studies. Pooled analysis showed an overall event rate gastrostomy site metastasis of .5% (95% confidence interval [CI], .4%-.7%). Subgroup analysis showed an event rate of .56% (95% CI, .40%-.79%) with the pull technique and .29% (95% CI, .15%-.55%) with the push technique. Clinicopathologic characteristics observed with gastrostomy site metastasis were late-stage disease (T3/T4) (57.8%), positive lymph node status (51.2%), and no evidence of systemic disease (M0) (62.8%) at initial presentation. The average time from gastrostomy placement to diagnosis of metastasis was 7.78 ± 4.9 months, average tumor size on detection was 4.65 cm (standard deviation, 2.02), and average length of survival was 7.26 months (standard deviation, 6.23).

Gastrostomy site metastasis is a rare but serious adverse event that occurs at an overall rate of .5%, particularly in patients with advanced-stage disease, and is observed with a very poor prognosis. These findings emphasize a need for clinical practice guidelines to include a regular assessment of the PEG site and highlight the importance of detection and management of gastrostomy site metastasis by the multidisciplinary care oncology team.

Because of publication bias, there is uncertainty about the true incidence of tumor seeding or implantation in patients with head and neck or oesophageal cancer undergoing percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) insertion.

In order to obtain a more reliable estimate of risk, a systematic review was undertaken. Randomized or non-randomized studies and case reports were identified by electronic searching. A risk of bias assessment was carried out for each study.

Ninety-eight cases from 74 published case reports and 1 unpublished case were identified. Synchronous distant metastases were present in 37%. Analysis of case series (6192 patients) considered to carry a moderate risk of bias suggests an incidence of seeding after PEG insertion of 0.32%. Studies carrying a lower risk of bias indicate a risk of seeding closer to 1 in 2000.

The true risk of seeding after PEG insertion is probably less than 1 in 1000.

Proximally located oesophageal cancer poses an especially difficult problem in terms of restoration of patency and the stenting procedure. Supplementary percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) may be useful in these patients.

To assess the safety of the stenting procedure in the proximal oesophagus in patients with unresectable upper oesophageal cancer, performed simultaneously with PEG insertion.

Patients with obstructing upper oesophageal tumours were scheduled for an oesophageal stenting procedure and simultaneous PEG insertion. Degree of dysphagia, body weight loss, daily energy requirement, body mass index and performance status before and after the stenting procedure as well as complications were assessed.

Forty-five patients aged 19-88 years were included in the study. Six of them had a fistula to the trachea and underwent stenting of the oesophagus or both the oesophagus and the airway. The technical success rate was 100%. Following the procedure all patients were able to swallow fluids and semi-liquids, and PEG was used as the primary feeding route. Body mass index increased from 20.4 to 21.1 (p = 0.0001), body weight gain improved from -10.1 to +2.0 kg and metabolic requirements improved (p = 0.0001). Also, the Karnofsky score improved significantly (56.7 vs. 65.1, p = 0.0001). Mean survival time was 133 days (range: 36-378).

Stenting of the proximal oesophagus with simultaneous PEG is a safe procedure, allowing the patients to resume oral intake of liquids whilst improving nutritional status and general performance, with an acceptable rate of complications.

Gastroenteric tube feeding plays a major role in the management of patients with poor voluntary intake, chronic neurological or mechanical dysphagia or gut dysfunction, and patients who are critically ill. However, despite the benefits and widespread use of enteral tube feeding, some patients experience complications. This review aims to discuss and compare current knowledge regarding the clinical application of enteral tube feeding, together with associated complications and special aspects. We conducted an extensive literature search on PubMed, Embase and Medline using index terms relating to enteral access, enteral feeding/nutrition, tube feeding, percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy/jejunostomy, endoscopic nasoenteric tube, nasogastric tube, and refeeding syndrome. The literature showed common routes of enteral access to include nasoenteral tube, gastrostomy and jejunostomy, while complications fall into four major categories: mechanical, e.g., tube blockage or removal; gastrointestinal, e.g., diarrhea; infectious e.g., aspiration pneumonia, tube site infection; and metabolic, e.g., refeeding syndrome, hyperglycemia. Although the type and frequency of complications arising from tube feeding vary considerably according to the chosen access route, gastrointestinal complications are without doubt the most common. Complications associated with enteral tube feeding can be reduced by careful observance of guidelines, including those related to food composition, administration rate, portion size, food temperature and patient supervision.