[A comparative study of 2 technics of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy].
OBJECTIVE
To compare the two most frequently used methods of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: Pull-string Ponsky-Gauderer type and Push-over-wire Sachs-Vine gastrostomy.


METHODS
Forty-four patients with oral feeding incapacity were prospectively randomized to one of the two methods of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. In 22 patients the Ponsky-Gauderer type were used and in the other 22 the Sachs-Vine gastrostomy were employed. In every case the gastrostomy tube was replaced 4-5 months after its placement by a Flexiflo tube. The mean follow-up of the patients was 7.3 months (range: 4-18).


RESULTS
Gastrostomy was successful in every case. No differences were found between the two procedures in technical difficulties or complications during gastrostomy placement. Wound infection occurred in 6 patients (13%), 3 in each group, and in all cases it was cured with topic antibiotic treatment administered through the gastrostomy. Tube dislodgement was observed in 3 patients in the Ponsky-Gauderer group (soft internal with-holder). The only significant difference between the two procedures was found at the removal of the gastrostomy tube. In the Sachs-Vine type the removal of the tube was always endoscopically performed (due to the presence of a rigid internal with-holder), while the Ponsky-Gauderer type was always done by traction (soft internal with-holder). No related procedure mortality was found with any of the two techniques.


CONCLUSIONS
Both percutaneous endoscopic gastrotomy techniques are similar in efficacy, safety and morbidity and they prove to be a valid alternative to surgical gastrostomy in patients with oral feeding incapacity.
Fernández
I
I
Servicio Medicina Digestivo, Hospital Doce de Octubre, Madrid.
Rodríguez
S
S
González
A
A
Castellano
G
G
Montejo
J C
JC
Casis
B
B
Garfia
C
C
Martín
A
A
Sánchez
F
F
Solís
J A
JA
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D016009:Chi-Square Distribution; D003365:Costs and Cost Analysis; D005260:Female; D020699:Gastroscopes; D005773:Gastroscopy / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000191:economics / Q000379:methods*; D005774:Gastrostomy / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000191:economics / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011446:Prospective Studies
Estudio comparativo de dos técnicas de gastrostomía endoscópica percutánea.