Understanding Why Patients Die After Gastrostomy Tube Insertion: A Retrospective Analysis of Mortality

G Longcroft-Wheaton, P Marden, Benjamin Colleypriest, D Gavin, Gordon Taylor, M Farrant

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

22 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: To understand the causes of mortality of inpatients receiving a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube compared with a survival curve predicted from a model proposed by Levine et at (2007). Design: A retrospective study of patients receiving a PEG over an 18-month Period. Setting: Royal United Hospital Bath, a district general hospital in the southwest of England. Patients: Fifty-five cases, with 44 found eligible for inclusion. Interventions: A Levine score was calculated For this cohort. A survival curve after PEG was Produced and compared with the Kaplan-Meier curve predicted by the Levine model. main Outcome Measures: Mortality over a period of 1 year. Results: The mortality at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months was 16%, 20%, 25%, and 28%, respectively. This matched the predicted death rate from the Levine model closely (Pearson's rank correlation coefficient = 0.96). Conclusions: The authors found that the mortality of patients receiving a PEG followed that Predicted for a similar cohort of patients without PEGs in the Levine model. This Suggests that the deaths observed were due to underlying comorbidities, can provide a baseline for mortality targets for PEG services, and is useful Patient information regarding the risks and benefits of the Procedure. The findings demonstrate that PEG does no harm and Supports the accepted opinion that nutrition support is associated with it better outcome. Furthermore, they show, that most deaths Occur within the first month of Placement and would support arguments for delaying placement until outcome from the underlying condition is more predictable.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)375-379
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition
Volume33
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2009

Fingerprint

Gastrostomy
Mortality
Survival
District Hospitals
Baths
General Hospitals
England
Comorbidity
Inpatients
Retrospective Studies
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)

Keywords

  • nutrition support
  • gastrostomy tube
  • enteral feeding
  • PEG

Cite this

Understanding Why Patients Die After Gastrostomy Tube Insertion: A Retrospective Analysis of Mortality. / Longcroft-Wheaton, G; Marden, P; Colleypriest, Benjamin; Gavin, D; Taylor, Gordon; Farrant, M.

In: Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, Vol. 33, No. 4, 2009, p. 375-379.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Longcroft-Wheaton, G, Marden, P, Colleypriest, B, Gavin, D, Taylor, G & Farrant, M 2009, 'Understanding Why Patients Die After Gastrostomy Tube Insertion: A Retrospective Analysis of Mortality', Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 375-379. https://doi.org/10.1177/0148607108327156
Longcroft-Wheaton, G ; Marden, P ; Colleypriest, Benjamin ; Gavin, D ; Taylor, Gordon ; Farrant, M. / Understanding Why Patients Die After Gastrostomy Tube Insertion: A Retrospective Analysis of Mortality. In: Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition. 2009 ; Vol. 33, No. 4. pp. 375-379.
@article{04d91d6a69eb41df957bbe3db72c82a6,
title = "Understanding Why Patients Die After Gastrostomy Tube Insertion: A Retrospective Analysis of Mortality",
abstract = "Objectives: To understand the causes of mortality of inpatients receiving a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube compared with a survival curve predicted from a model proposed by Levine et at (2007). Design: A retrospective study of patients receiving a PEG over an 18-month Period. Setting: Royal United Hospital Bath, a district general hospital in the southwest of England. Patients: Fifty-five cases, with 44 found eligible for inclusion. Interventions: A Levine score was calculated For this cohort. A survival curve after PEG was Produced and compared with the Kaplan-Meier curve predicted by the Levine model. main Outcome Measures: Mortality over a period of 1 year. Results: The mortality at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months was 16{\%}, 20{\%}, 25{\%}, and 28{\%}, respectively. This matched the predicted death rate from the Levine model closely (Pearson's rank correlation coefficient = 0.96). Conclusions: The authors found that the mortality of patients receiving a PEG followed that Predicted for a similar cohort of patients without PEGs in the Levine model. This Suggests that the deaths observed were due to underlying comorbidities, can provide a baseline for mortality targets for PEG services, and is useful Patient information regarding the risks and benefits of the Procedure. The findings demonstrate that PEG does no harm and Supports the accepted opinion that nutrition support is associated with it better outcome. Furthermore, they show, that most deaths Occur within the first month of Placement and would support arguments for delaying placement until outcome from the underlying condition is more predictable.",
keywords = "nutrition support, gastrostomy tube, enteral feeding, PEG",
author = "G Longcroft-Wheaton and P Marden and Benjamin Colleypriest and D Gavin and Gordon Taylor and M Farrant",
year = "2009",
doi = "10.1177/0148607108327156",
language = "English",
volume = "33",
pages = "375--379",
journal = "Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition",
issn = "0148-6071",
publisher = "Sage Publications",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Understanding Why Patients Die After Gastrostomy Tube Insertion: A Retrospective Analysis of Mortality

AU - Longcroft-Wheaton, G

AU - Marden, P

AU - Colleypriest, Benjamin

AU - Gavin, D

AU - Taylor, Gordon

AU - Farrant, M

PY - 2009

Y1 - 2009

N2 - Objectives: To understand the causes of mortality of inpatients receiving a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube compared with a survival curve predicted from a model proposed by Levine et at (2007). Design: A retrospective study of patients receiving a PEG over an 18-month Period. Setting: Royal United Hospital Bath, a district general hospital in the southwest of England. Patients: Fifty-five cases, with 44 found eligible for inclusion. Interventions: A Levine score was calculated For this cohort. A survival curve after PEG was Produced and compared with the Kaplan-Meier curve predicted by the Levine model. main Outcome Measures: Mortality over a period of 1 year. Results: The mortality at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months was 16%, 20%, 25%, and 28%, respectively. This matched the predicted death rate from the Levine model closely (Pearson's rank correlation coefficient = 0.96). Conclusions: The authors found that the mortality of patients receiving a PEG followed that Predicted for a similar cohort of patients without PEGs in the Levine model. This Suggests that the deaths observed were due to underlying comorbidities, can provide a baseline for mortality targets for PEG services, and is useful Patient information regarding the risks and benefits of the Procedure. The findings demonstrate that PEG does no harm and Supports the accepted opinion that nutrition support is associated with it better outcome. Furthermore, they show, that most deaths Occur within the first month of Placement and would support arguments for delaying placement until outcome from the underlying condition is more predictable.

AB - Objectives: To understand the causes of mortality of inpatients receiving a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube compared with a survival curve predicted from a model proposed by Levine et at (2007). Design: A retrospective study of patients receiving a PEG over an 18-month Period. Setting: Royal United Hospital Bath, a district general hospital in the southwest of England. Patients: Fifty-five cases, with 44 found eligible for inclusion. Interventions: A Levine score was calculated For this cohort. A survival curve after PEG was Produced and compared with the Kaplan-Meier curve predicted by the Levine model. main Outcome Measures: Mortality over a period of 1 year. Results: The mortality at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months was 16%, 20%, 25%, and 28%, respectively. This matched the predicted death rate from the Levine model closely (Pearson's rank correlation coefficient = 0.96). Conclusions: The authors found that the mortality of patients receiving a PEG followed that Predicted for a similar cohort of patients without PEGs in the Levine model. This Suggests that the deaths observed were due to underlying comorbidities, can provide a baseline for mortality targets for PEG services, and is useful Patient information regarding the risks and benefits of the Procedure. The findings demonstrate that PEG does no harm and Supports the accepted opinion that nutrition support is associated with it better outcome. Furthermore, they show, that most deaths Occur within the first month of Placement and would support arguments for delaying placement until outcome from the underlying condition is more predictable.

KW - nutrition support

KW - gastrostomy tube

KW - enteral feeding

KW - PEG

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=67649195923&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0148607108327156

U2 - 10.1177/0148607108327156

DO - 10.1177/0148607108327156

M3 - Article

VL - 33

SP - 375

EP - 379

JO - Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition

JF - Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition

SN - 0148-6071

IS - 4

ER -