Klinische Padiatrie · 1996
[Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in childhood and adolescence].
Аннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание 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.
Behrens R, Muschweck H, Richter T
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Nasogastric tube-feeding often is necessary in the treatment of chronically ill patients. The disadvantage (irritation of the hypopharynx, dislocation, stigma) can be avoided by the percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG). In childhood there is only limited experience with this techniques.
PATIENTS AND METHOD: We report about 89 children with PEG. Indications were central dysphagia (67), dystrophy caused by chronic renal failure or congenital heart disease (15), application of special diets (6) and gastric volvulus (1). The endoscopy was done in sedation.
RESULTS: The PEG was placed in the stomach (73) or duodenum (16). 14 Complications were observed: inflammation at the insertion site (2), perforation (2, healing under conservative treatment), dislocation of the duodenal part into the stomach or occlusion (6) and distraction of the retention disk (4). There were no procedures-related deaths. The mean duration of the PEG was more than 1 year. The affected persons were very pleased with the efficacy of this treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: In all patients (including infants) requiring long-term tube-feeding the option of a PEG should be taken into consideration. In our experience the PEG is associated with a low rate of complications and provides a major improvement for children who are dependent on tube feeding.
PATIENTS AND METHOD: We report about 89 children with PEG. Indications were central dysphagia (67), dystrophy caused by chronic renal failure or congenital heart disease (15), application of special diets (6) and gastric volvulus (1). The endoscopy was done in sedation.
RESULTS: The PEG was placed in the stomach (73) or duodenum (16). 14 Complications were observed: inflammation at the insertion site (2), perforation (2, healing under conservative treatment), dislocation of the duodenal part into the stomach or occlusion (6) and distraction of the retention disk (4). There were no procedures-related deaths. The mean duration of the PEG was more than 1 year. The affected persons were very pleased with the efficacy of this treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: In all patients (including infants) requiring long-term tube-feeding the option of a PEG should be taken into consideration. In our experience the PEG is associated with a low rate of complications and provides a major improvement for children who are dependent on tube feeding.