Jejunostomy Tube Insertion for Enteral Nutrition: Comparison of Outcomes after Laparoscopic versus Radiologic Insertion.

purposeTo retrospectively compare technical success and major complication rates of laparoscopically versus radiologically inserted jejunostomy tubes. MATERIALS AND

methodsIn this single-institution retrospective study, 115 patients (60 men; mean age, 59.7 y) underwent attempted laparoscopic jejunostomy tube insertion as a standalone procedure during a 10-year period and 106 patients (64 men; mean age, 61.0 y) underwent attempted direct percutaneous radiologic jejunostomy tube insertion during an overlapping 6-year period. Clinical outcomes were retrospectively reviewed with primary focus on predictors of procedure-related major complications within 30 days.

resultsPatients undergoing laparoscopic jejunostomy tube insertion were less likely to have previous major abdominal surgery (P < .001) or to be critically ill (P < .001) and had a higher body mass index (P = .001) than patients undergoing radiologic insertion. Technical success rates were 95% (110 of 115) for laparoscopic and 97% (103 of 106) for radiologic jejunostomy tube insertion (P = .72). Major procedural complications occurred in 7 patients (6%) in the laparoscopic group and in 5 (5%) in the radiologic group (P = 1.0). For laparoscopic jejunostomy tubes, only previous major abdominal surgery was significantly associated with a higher major procedure complication rate (14% [5 of 37] vs 3% [2 of 78] in those without; P = .039). In the radiologic jejunostomy group, only obesity was significantly associated with a higher major complication rate: 20% (2 of 10) vs 3% (3 of 96) in nonobese patients (P = .038).

conclusionsLaparoscopic and radiologic jejunostomy tube insertion both showed high success and low complication rates. Previous major abdominal surgery and obesity may be pertinent discriminators for patient selection.