Placement technique impacts gastrostomy tube-related complications amongst head and neck cancer patients
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 23, 2025

An Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy Designed to Minimize Anastomotic Complications and Optimize Conduit Function
Published on: April 17, 2020
David Forner1, Florence Mok2, Neil Verma2
1Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Objectives:
Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) placement is essential for the provision of enteral nutrition in select head and neck cancer (HNC) patients. Minimally invasive tube placement is facilitated through one of two techniques, push or pull, but there have been conflicting results regarding safety profiles of these procedures. The objectives of this study were to determine the association of PEG insertion technique with gastrostomy tube complications, including stomal metastases.
Methods:
A multi-institutional retrospective cohort study of patients with HNC undergoing PEG insertion by either the pull (gastroscope assisted) or push (fluoroscopy assisted) technique was performed. Tube-related complications included infection, dislodgement, deterioration, leak, and other. Adjusted analysis was performed via a multivariable logistic regression model.
Results:
1,575 patients were included across three institutions. Tube-related complications occurred in 36% of patients, the most common being peristomal leak (13%) and infection (16%). The push technique (OR 2.66, 95% CI: 1.42-4.97), and the presence of T4 disease (OR 4.62, 95% CI: 1.58-13.51), were associated with a greater risk of developing any tube-related complication. Infection rates were similar between pull and push cohorts. All detected stoma metastases occurred with the pull technique, with an overall prevalence of 0.32% amongst the cohort.
Conclusions:
The push technique is associated with a greater risk of developing any tube-related complication, but the rate of stomal metastases may be higher with the pull technique. There is potential for quality improvement measures to improve tube-related complications associated with either technique.
More Related Videos
03:32Single Incision Plus One Port Laparoscopic Proximal Gastrectomy with Double Channel Anastomosis for Gastric Cancer Treatment
Published on: December 27, 2024
04:05Endoscopic Vacuum Therapy for the Treatment of Anastomotic Leakage after Total Gastrectomy with Esophagojejunostomy
Published on: August 22, 2025
Related Concept Videos
Enteral Nutrition I: Orogastric and Nasogastric Feeding
Orogastric (OG) and nasogastric (NG) feeding are two standard methods used for enteral nutrition. Enteral nutrition is often preferred over...
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
Tracheostomy: Procedure and Tubes
Tracheostomy tubes can be made of semiflexible plastic (polyurethane or silicone), rigid plastic, or metal, and they come in...
Aneurysm IV: Nursing Management
Tracheostomy Care I: Pre-procedural Steps
Required Equipment
The equipment necessary for tracheostomy care includes: