ArticleZeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie2018
[Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in geriatrics : Indications, technique and complications].
Article in Zeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The technique of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) was introduced in 1979 as a semi-invasive approach for children with the need for a gastric fistula in order to avoid an operative intervention. The suture pull-through method was rapidly established and is now omnipresent. Because scientific evidence is broadly missing, there is some uncertainty about the indications in geriatric medicine. Guidelines do not recommend the insertion of a PEG in patients with severe dementia and malnutrition. Tube feeding is mainly recommended as a temporary method for patients who cannot take oral nutrition for more than 3 days or for whom the energy intake for more than 10 days presumably covers less than 50% of their needs, assuming that the overall prognosis is reasonable. Insertion of a PEG is only recommended if artificial nutrition is expected to be necessary for more than 3-4 weeks or if a nasogastric tube is not tolerated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.