Current gastroenterology reports · 2022
When Should the Appropriateness of PEG be Questioned?
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Roche Keelin Flannery, Bower Katie L, Collier Bryan, Neel Dustin, Esry Laura
Аннотация
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review aims to analyze the evidence regarding the appropriateness of PEG placement in the following clinical situations: short bowel syndrome, head and neck cancer, dementia and palliative use in malignant bowel obstruction.
RECENT FINDINGS: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tubes are placed for a variety of clinical indications by numerous different specialties. First described in 1980, PEG tubes are now the dominant method of enteral access. Typically, PEG tubes are technically feasible procedures that can come with significant risk for both minor and major complications. Therefore, it is important to perform an in-depth, patient specific risk-benefit analysis when considering insertion. By analyzing the current evidence regarding benefits in these situations, superimposed by the lens of biomedical ethics, we make recommendations that are accessible to any provider who may be a consultant or proceduralist, helping to provide informed care that is in the patient's best interest.
RECENT FINDINGS: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tubes are placed for a variety of clinical indications by numerous different specialties. First described in 1980, PEG tubes are now the dominant method of enteral access. Typically, PEG tubes are technically feasible procedures that can come with significant risk for both minor and major complications. Therefore, it is important to perform an in-depth, patient specific risk-benefit analysis when considering insertion. By analyzing the current evidence regarding benefits in these situations, superimposed by the lens of biomedical ethics, we make recommendations that are accessible to any provider who may be a consultant or proceduralist, helping to provide informed care that is in the patient's best interest.