New laparoscopic assisted percutaneous gastrostomy. Description and comparison with others gastrostomy types

Gastrostomy feeding tube insertion has become a common procedure as it enables patients who require long term enteral feeding. Conventional surgical gastrostomies were the only way of gaining enteral access in patients in which it is not possible to pass an endoscope or a nasogastric tube required for endoscopic or radiological gastrostomies, and in patients in which certain anatomical abnormalities contraindicate performing these techniques. As conventional surgical gastrostomies are associated with high morbidity, especially gastric leakage around the tube, percutaneous laparoscopic assisted gastrostomy (PLAG) may be a better way to gain enteral access.

Observational study of a prospective cohort of 224 patients on whom a gastrostomy was performed for nutritional support between January 2009 and October 2015 at Virgen del Rocío University Hospital in Seville. The types of gastrostomies carried out were: percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG, n = 106), percutaneous radiological gastrostomy (PRG, n = 89), conventional surgical gastrostomy, Open Stamn or Laparoscopic Janeway (SG, n = 9) and percutaneous laparoscopic assisted gastrostomy (PLAG, n = 20), technique that we describe in detail. Short and long term complications are described.

Many more complications were seen in the conventional gastrostomy group than in the other three groups, especially leakage of gastric content around the tube, with burning and irritation of the skin (66% compared with 2.83% in PEG and 0% in PLAG and PRG). The group with the highest proportion of patients completely free of complications was PLAG (75%), whilst in the conventional surgical gastrostomy group, no patient was completely free of complications.

We found lower complication rate in PLAG than any other technique. We believe that PLAG could be preferred technique for patients on whom it is not possible to perform PEG or PRG, as it is safe and easy.