Linked Life Data

2107116

Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/2107116

Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
1
pubmed:dateCreated
1990-4-26
pubmed:abstractText
This study compared operative gastrostomy (OG) (by surgeons) with endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) (by physicians) in a prospective randomized fashion to determine whether one technique was superior. PEG (Sachs-Vine) and OG (Stamm) were done using local anesthesia. Patients were assessed for complications, mortality, tube function, and cost. Groups were equally matched for indications and underlying disease. Fifty-seven had OG and 64 had attempted PEG. Complications occurred in 26% of OG patients and 9% died. Complications occurred in 25% of PEG patients and 12% died. Tube feeding was initiated in both groups within a mean of 29 (24 to 72) hours of the gastrostomy placement. OG cost $1675 and PEG $979 to perform. Twenty-one PEG patients required endoscopic tube change which raised their total cost to $1574. We conclude there is no difference between OG (using local anesthesia) and PEG with regard to morbidity, mortality, or tube function. The endoscopic technique does appear to have economic advantage.
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
IM
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:issn
0016-5107
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
36
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
1-5
pubmed:dateRevised
2007-11-15
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:articleTitle
Endoscopic versus operative gastrostomy: final results of a prospective randomized trial.
pubmed:affiliation
Department of Surgery (Gastrointestinal/Tumor), University of Colorado, Denver.
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Clinical Trial, Comparative Study, Randomized Controlled Trial