ArticleCureus2023
Evaluation of 644 Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Patients in a Single Center.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Is Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy an Innocent Procedure? A Retrospective Single-Center Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Outcomes of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) in HIV patients.BMC gastroenterology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveOur study aimed to review and evaluate the indications, complications, complication-related risk factors, and mortality rates of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) performed in a single university hospital.
methodsWe retrospectively examined hospital records of all 819 patients who underwent PEG between January 2010 and January 2019. Patients whose information was not available for various reasons, who had a history of gastrectomy, who were under 18 years old, and/or who had undergone PEG before, were excluded from the study.
resultsThe mean age of the patients was 65.12 ± 15.42 years, and the majority of the patients (60.6%) were female. In the vast majority of patients, the PEG indication was due to neurological causes (71.5%), among which the majority was a stroke. The overall complication rate in our study was 11.2%. The most common was a peristomal infection in 37 (5.7%) patients. Patients who were not under any antibiotic treatment and/or had diabetes mellitus had a higher risk for peristomal infection. Dementia increased the risk of tube dislodgement. The use of clopidogrel, the simultaneous use of aspirin and clopidogrel, and hypertension were independent risk factors for bleeding complications. The one-year mortality risk was significantly higher in patients who underwent PEG due to neurological causes compared to those who underwent PEG due to malignancy or other reasons (
conclusionThe PEG procedure is a safe and feasible technique due to its low complication and mortality rate in patients with swallowing disorders who need long-term nutritional support.
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.