Biomechanical comparison of two percutaneous gastropexy techniques for securing percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tubes in canine cadavers

Bradley A. Bishop 1Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32608.

Search for other papers by Bradley A. Bishop in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
 DVM
and
Alexander E. Gallagher 1Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32608.

Search for other papers by Alexander E. Gallagher in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
 DVM, MS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2460/ajvr.80.11.1020
Volume/Issue:
Volume 80: Issue 11
Online Publication Date:
01 Nov 2019
Restricted access
Sign In Reprints and Permissions Purchase Article

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To biomechanically assess outcomes for 2 percutaneous gastropexy techniques and determine the amount of time necessary to perform the techniques for securing percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tubes in canine cadavers.

ANIMALS

18 canine cadavers.

PROCEDURES

6 cadavers were assigned to each of 3 groups (PEG tube only, PEG tube with T-fastener gastropexy, and PEG tube with U-stitch gastropexy). Time to completion of placement of a PEG tube and gastropexy was recorded. After tubes were placed, the stomach and body wall on the left side of the abdomen were removed and biomechanically tested. Maximum tension at the time of initial failure of the PEG tube or gastropexy was recorded.

RESULTS

Significantly more force was required to induce failure for the T-fastener and U-stitch techniques than for the PEG tube only technique. In addition, both the T-fastener and U-stitch techniques required significantly more time for placement than did the PEG tube only technique.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Results suggested that performing a T-fastener or U-stitch gastropexy may decrease the risk of early dislodgement of a PEG tube in dogs. However, studies conducted with these techniques in live dogs would be necessary to confirm this hypothesis. The additional amount of time needed to perform the T-fastener or U-stitch gastropexy would likely be clinically unimportant.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To biomechanically assess outcomes for 2 percutaneous gastropexy techniques and determine the amount of time necessary to perform the techniques for securing percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tubes in canine cadavers.

ANIMALS

18 canine cadavers.

PROCEDURES

6 cadavers were assigned to each of 3 groups (PEG tube only, PEG tube with T-fastener gastropexy, and PEG tube with U-stitch gastropexy). Time to completion of placement of a PEG tube and gastropexy was recorded. After tubes were placed, the stomach and body wall on the left side of the abdomen were removed and biomechanically tested. Maximum tension at the time of initial failure of the PEG tube or gastropexy was recorded.

RESULTS

Significantly more force was required to induce failure for the T-fastener and U-stitch techniques than for the PEG tube only technique. In addition, both the T-fastener and U-stitch techniques required significantly more time for placement than did the PEG tube only technique.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Results suggested that performing a T-fastener or U-stitch gastropexy may decrease the risk of early dislodgement of a PEG tube in dogs. However, studies conducted with these techniques in live dogs would be necessary to confirm this hypothesis. The additional amount of time needed to perform the T-fastener or U-stitch gastropexy would likely be clinically unimportant.

Contributor Notes

Address correspondence to Dr. Gallagher (gallaghera@ufl.edu).
Cover American Journal of Veterinary Research
American Journal of Veterinary Research
Publication Date:
01 Nov 2019

  • 1. Aguiar J, Chang YM, Garden OA. Complications of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in dogs and cats receiving corticosteroid treatment. J Vet Intern Med 2016;30:1008–1013.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 2. Armstrong PJ, Hardie EM. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. J Vet Intern Med 1990;4:202–206.

  • 3. Dwyer KM, Watts DD, Thurber JS, et al. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: the preferred method of elective feeding tube placement in trauma patients. J Trauma 2002;52:26–32.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 4. Larson DE, Burton DD, Schroeder KW, et al. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. Indications, success, complications, and mortality in 314 consecutive patients. Gastroenterology 1987;93:48–52.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 5. Rosenberger LH, Newhook T, Schirmer B, et al. Late accidental dislodgement of a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube: an underestimated burden on patients and the health care system. Surg Endosc 2011;25:3307–3311.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 6. Salinardi BJ, Harkin KR, Bulmer BJ, et al. Comparison of complications of percutaneous endoscopic versus surgically placed gastrostomy tubes in 42 dogs and 52 cats. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 2006;42:51–56.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 7. Schrag SP, Sharma R, Jaik NP, et al. Complications related to percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tubes. A comprehensive clinical review. J Gastrointestin Liver Dis 2007;16:407–418.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 8. Marks S. Nasoesophageal, esophagostomy, gastrostomy, and jejunal tube placement techniques. In: Ettinger SJ, Feldman EC, Cote E, eds. Textbook of veterinary internal medicine. 8th ed. St Louis: Elsevier Inc, 2017;323–332.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 9. Crowe DT. Nutritional support for the hospitalized patient: an introduction to tube feeding. Compend Contin Educ Pract Vet 1990;12:1711–1721.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 10. Culp WTN, Balsa IM, Kim SY, et al. Description and biomechanical comparison of a percutaneous radiologic gastropexy technique in a canine cadaver model. Vet Surg 2016;45:456–463.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 11. Fox-Alvarez WA, Case JB, Cooke KL, et al. Temporary percutaneous T-fastener gastropexy and continuous decompressive gastrostomy in dogs with experimentally induced gastric dilatation. Am J Vet Res 2016;77:771–778.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 12. Georgeson K, Owings E. Surgical and laparoscopic techniques for feeding tube placement. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 1998;8:581–592.

  • 13. Petrosyan M, Hunter C, Estrada J, et al. Subcutaneous fixation of gastrostomy tube is superior to temporary fixation. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2010;20:207–209.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 14. Brown AS, Mueller PR, Ferrucci JT. Controlled percutaneous gastrostomy: nylon T-fastener for fixation of the anterior gastric wall. Radiology 1986;158:543–545.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 15. Nixdorff N, Diluciano J, Ponsky T, et al. The endoscopic U-stitch technique for primary button placement: an institution's experience. Surg Endosc 2010;24:1200–1203.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 16. Seifarth FG, Dong ML, Guerron AD, et al. Endoscopic gastrostomy button with double-lasso U-stitch in children. JSLS 2015;19:e2015.0002.

  • 17. Brooks JW. Postmortem changes in animal carcasses and estimation of the postmortem interval. Vet Pathol 2016;53:929–940.

  • 18. Aeschlimann KA, Mann FA, Middleton JR, et al. Comparison of enterotomy leak pressure among fresh, cooled, and frozen-thawed porcine jejunal segments. Am J Vet Res 2018;79:576–580.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 19. Gaynor JS, Dunlop CI, Wagner AE, et al. Complications and mortality associated with anesthesia in dogs and cats. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1999;35:13–17.

  • 20. Foster A, Given M, Thornton E, et al. Removal of T-fasteners 2 days after gastrostomy is feasible. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2009;32:317–319.

  • 21. Thornton FJ, Fotheringham T, Haslam PJ, et al. Percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy with and without T-fastener gastropexy: a randomized comparison study. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2002;25:467–471.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 22. Balsa IM, Culp WTN, Johnson EG, et al. Efficacy of two radiologic-assisted prophylactic gastropexy techniques. Vet Surg 2016;45:464–470.

  • 23. Mellinger JD, Simon IB, Schlechter B, et al. Tract formation following percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in an animal model. Surg Endosc 1991;5:189–191.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Advertisement