Skip to main content
Log in

Long-term follow-up of consequences of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tubes in nursing home patients

  • Original Articles
  • Published:
Digestive Diseases and Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

PEG (percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy) tubes are frequently placed in nursing home patients. The aim of this study was to assess retrospectively the long-term changes in functional and nutritional statuses, tube-related complications, and factors influencing survival in 46 nursing home residents, mean age 73.6 years (range 19–96). Functional status was evaluated by a standard rehabilitation medicine scale. Nutritional status was evaluated by serum albumin and cholesterol concentrations and by weight. PEG-related complications requiring hospitalization or emergency room or clinic evaluations were noted. Additionally, changes in resuscitation status were noted. The predominant indication for PEG placement was dementia (52%). At PEG placement, 48% of patients had total functional impairment. Regardless of the severity of impairment, no patient's functional status improved after PEG. Nutritional status did not improve significantly. Mortality approached 50% and 60% at 12 and 18 months, respectively, and was significantly related to age, resuscitation status, and serum albumin concentration. All patients under 40 years of age at PEG survived, in contrast to 41.3% of patients over 40 years of age (P<0.001). Sixty-three percent of patients who were “full code” at PEG placement survived, in contrast to 10% of “no code” patients (P<0.001). Albumin ≥3.5 g/dl at PEG or thereafter was associated with improved survival (P<0.001) as compared to albumin <3.5 g/dl. PEG-related complications occurred in 34.7% of patients, and the first occurred four months after PEG. We conclude that realistic expectations of what PEG can accomplish be a factor in the decision to place a PEG tube in nursing home patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gauderer MWL, Ponsky JL, Izant RJ Jr: Gastrostomy without laparotomy: A percutaneous endoscopic technique. J Pediatr Surg 15:872–875, 1980

    Google Scholar 

  2. Larson DE, Fleming CR, Ott BJ, Schroeder KW: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: Simplified access for enteral nutrition. Mayo Clin Proc 58:103–107, 1983

    Google Scholar 

  3. Larson DE, Burton DD, Schroeder KW, Dimagno EP: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. Indications, success, complications and mortality in 314 consecutive patients. Gastroenterology 93:48–52, 1987

    Google Scholar 

  4. Ponsky JL, Gauderer MWL, Stellato TA, Aszode A: Percutaneous approaches to enteral alimentation. Am J Surg 149:102–105, 1985

    Google Scholar 

  5. Foutch PG, Woods CA, Talbert GA, Sanowski RA: A critical analysis of the Sacks-Vine gastrostomy tube: A review of 120 consecutive procedures. Am J Gastroenterol 83:812–815, 1988

    Google Scholar 

  6. Kirby DF, Craig RM, Tsang T, Plotnick BH: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomies: A prospective evaluation and review of literature. JPEN 10:155–159, 1986

    Google Scholar 

  7. Grant JP: Comparison of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy with Stamm gastrostomy. Ann Surg 207:590–603, 1988

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ciocon JO, Silverstone FA, Graver LM, Foley CJ: Tube feedings in elderly patients: Indications, benefits and complications. Arch Intern Med 148:429–433, 1988

    Google Scholar 

  9. Fay DE, Poplausky M, Gruber M, Lance P: Long-term enteral feeding: A retrospective comparison of delivery via percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy and nasoenteric tubes. Am J Gastroenterol 86:1604–1609, 1991

    Google Scholar 

  10. Wolfsen HC, Kozarek RA, Ball TJ, Patterson DJ, Botoman VA: Tube dysfunction following percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy and jejunostomy. Gastrointest Endosc 36:261–263, 1990

    Google Scholar 

  11. Foutch PG, Haynes WC, Bellapravalu S, Sanowski RA: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG): A new procedure comes of age. J Clin Gastroenterol 8:10–15, 1986

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kirby DF, Craig RM, Tsang TK, Plotnick BH: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomies: A prospective evaluation and review of literature. JPEN 10:155–159, 1986

    Google Scholar 

  13. Llaneza PP, Menendez AM, Roberts R, Dunn GD: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: clinical experience and follow-up. South Med J 81:321–324, 1988

    Google Scholar 

  14. Wolfsen HC, Kozarek RA, Ball TJ, Patterson DJ, Botoman VA, Ryan JA: Long-term survival in patients undergoing percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy and jejunostomy. Am J Gastroenterol 85:1120–1122, 1990

    Google Scholar 

  15. Klonoff-Cohen H, Barrett-Conner EL, Edelstein SL: Albumin levels as a predictor of mortality in the healthy elderly. J Clin Epidemiol 45(3):207–212, 1992

    Google Scholar 

  16. Finucane P, Aslan SM, Duncan D: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in elderly patients. Postgrad Med J 67:371–373, 1991

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kaw, M., Sekas, G. Long-term follow-up of consequences of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tubes in nursing home patients. Digest Dis Sci 39, 738–743 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02087416

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02087416

Key words

Navigation