Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 5, 2026
Application of Lucilia sericata Larvae in Debridement of Pressure Wounds in Outpatient Settings
Published on: December 4, 2021
[The frequency of wound infections after PEG-placement and utilization of glycogel wound dressing: a randomized
Gerhard Aschl1, Andreas Kirchgatterer, Manfred Fleischer
1Interne Abteilung/Gastroenterologie, Klinikum Wels-Grieskirchen, Wels, Austria. gerhard.aschl@klinikum-wegr.at
Insights
New bacteriostatic glycogel wound dressing is as effective as standard care for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) sites. This finding suggests glycogel dressing may reduce costs and improve patient comfort by allowing less frequent changes.
Area of Science:
- Gastroenterology
- Infectious Disease
Context:
- Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is a standard procedure for long-term enteral feeding.
- Standardized wound management is crucial for minimizing complications.
- The efficacy of bacteriostatic glycogel wound dressing for PEG sites has not been previously established.
Purpose:
- To compare the effectiveness of bacteriostatic glycogel wound dressing with standard wound care in preventing infections at PEG exit sites.
Summary:
- A prospective randomized trial involving 100 patients undergoing PEG placement compared standard wound care with glycogel dressing.
- Both groups showed similar rates of wound infection (88% with no relevant infection).
- Serious infections requiring PEG removal occurred in 2% of patients in both groups.
Impact:
- Glycogel wound dressing demonstrates comparable efficacy to standard wound care in managing PEG sites.
- Utilizing glycogel dressing may allow for less frequent dressing changes, potentially reducing costs and enhancing patient convenience.
- This study provides evidence for an alternative wound management strategy for PEG procedures.
Background:
Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is the method of choice for long- term artificial enteral feeding. Standardized wound management such as daily dressing changes and local disinfection of the exit site helps to keep complication rates low. New bacteriostatic glycogel wound dressing has not yet been tested. We compared glycogel dressing to the usual method of wound aftercare with regard to wound infections.
Methods:
The standard wound management was compared to glycogel dressing. 100 consecutive patients were investigated in a prospective randomized trial from Aug. 2004 to Jan. 2006 regarding wound infections. We also compared indications for PEG placement, complications other than wound infection, and mortality. The exit site was examined and scored daily using a specific wound scoring system. After 30 days, the patients were followed up by phone calls to determine if any infection had occurred after discharge.
Results:
During our study, 98 out of 100 patients had a successful PEG procedure performed. Out of these 98 patients, 48 patients received standard wound dressing care and 50 patients used glycogel dressing. The indications for PEG placement were not significantly different between the two groups. A total of 88% of patients (n = 42) with standard wound care had no relevant infection (50%, n = 24 with score 0 or 1; 38%, n = 18 had score 2), 10% (n = 5) presented with serious local infection (score 3) and one patient (2%) had severe infection necessitating PEG removal (score 4). In the group using glycogel dressing, 88% of the patients (n = 44) did not show any relevant sign of infection (54%, n = 27 with score 0 or 1; 34%, n = 17 had score 2), 8% (n = 4) had serious local infection (score 3), 2% (n = 1) had severe infection (score 4) and 2% (n = 1) were lost to follow up.
Conclusion:
Regarding wound infection rates after PEG placement, glycogel wound dressing was found to be as effective as standard wound dressing. Thus, omitting daily changes of regular wound dressings by using glycogel dressing instead may be advantageous for patients and generally help to decrease overall cost.
