Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 29, 2025

Author Spotlight: Point-of-Care Ultrasound for Gastric Content Assessment and Risk Stratification in Perioperative Care
Published on: September 22, 2023
Percutaneous ultrasound gastrostomy (PUG): first prospective clinical trial
Fabio Accorsi1, Jonathan Chung1, Amol Mujoomdar1
1Department of Medical Imaging, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, ON, Canada.
Graphical Abstarct:
PURPOSE: To report the results of the first-in-human trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of the percutaneous ultrasound gastrostomy (PUG) technique.
Methods:
A prospective, industry-sponsored single-arm clinical trial of PUG insertion was performed in 25 adult patients under investigational device exemption (mean age 64 ± 15 years, 92% men, 80% inpatients, mean BMI 24.5 ± 2.7 kg/m2). A propensity score-matched retrospective cohort of 25 patients who received percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PRG) was generated as an institutional control (mean age 66 ± 14 years, 92% men, 80% inpatients, mean BMI 24.0 ± 2.7 kg/m2). Primary outcomes included successful insertion and 30-day procedure-related adverse events (AE's). Secondary outcomes included procedural duration, sedation requirements, and hospital length of stay.
Results:
All PUG procedures were successful, including 3/25 [12%] performed bedside within the ICU. There was no significant difference between PUG and PRG in rates of mild AE's (3/25 [12%] for PUG and 7/25 [28%] for PRG, p = 0.16) or moderate AE's (1/25 [4%] for PUG and 0/25 for PRG, p = 0.31). There were no severe AE's or 30-day procedure-related mortality in either group. Procedural room time was longer for PUG (56.5 ± 14.1 min) than PRG (39.3 ± 15.0 min, p < 0.001). PUG procedure time was significantly shorter after a procedural enhancement, the incorporation of a Gauss meter to facilitate successful magnetic gastropexy. Length of stay for outpatients did not significantly differ (2.4 ± 0.5 days for PUG and 2.6 ± 1.0 days for PRG, p = 0.70).
Conclusion:
PUG appears effective with a safety profile similar to PRG. Bedside point-of-care gastrostomy tube insertion using the PUG technique shows promise.
Trial Registration Number:
ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT03575754.
More Related Videos
07:44Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage: Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Hepaticogastrostomy in Malignant Biliary Obstruction
Published on: March 25, 2022
04:53A Clinical Trial Assessing the Safety, Efficacy, and Delivery of Olive-Oil-Based Three-Chamber Bags for Parenteral Nutrition
Published on: September 20, 2019
Related Concept Videos
Ultrasound II: Endoscopic Ultrasound and FibroScan
Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS):
Enteral Nutrition II: Nasointestinal and Gastrostomy Feeding
Nasointestinal Feeding
Nasointestinal feeding involves placing a tube...
Peptic Ulcer Disease V: Surgical Management and Nursing Care
Surgical Interventions for Peptic Ulcer Disease
Peptic Ulcer Disease III: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Studies
Few clinical manifestations differentiate gastric ulcers from duodenal ulcers. Distinctions in the location, timing, and pain relief are crucial for healthcare providers in differentiating between gastric and duodenal ulcers during clinical assessments.