Send to

Choose Destination
J Am Coll Surg. 2008 Nov;207(5):737-44. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2008.06.335. Epub 2008 Aug 9.

Reduced risk of peristomal infection of direct percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in cancer patients: comparison with the pull percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy procedure.

Author information

Gastroenterological Center, Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Cancer Institute Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.



Although pull percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (Pull-PEG) is a commonly used procedure, peristomal infection and tumor implantation are considered unavoidable complications of this procedure as the instrument passes through the oral cavity. A novel extracorporeal PEG technique, Direct-PEG, has been developed to reduce the risk of peristomal infection and implantation.


The Direct-PEG procedure was performed on 87 patients from April 2006 to April 2007 in a single, high-volume cancer center in Japan. To compare the surgical outcomes of Direct-PEG and Pull-PEG, the clinical outcomes of Direct-PEG, such as peristomal infection, were retrospectively collected and compared with those of 64 patients having Pull-PEG procedures from April 2005 to March 2006.


The mean operation time for the Direct-PEG group (13+/-1 minutes) was comparable to that for the Pull-PEG group (12+/-1 minutes), and the mean visual analogue pain score during surgery was lower for the Direct-PEG group (3.5+/-1.7) than for the Pull-PEG group (24.6+/-3.6; p < 0.001). The incidence of peristomal infection was lower in the Direct-PEG group (1%) than in the Pull-PEG group (9%; p=0.001). Although the most common major underlying disease in the groups was oropharyngeal or esophageal tumor, tumor implantation was not observed in either group.


Direct-PEG may be superior to the Pull-PEG method for a high-volume cancer center because of reduced risks of infection.

[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center