ArticleJapanese journal of radiology2025
Investigation of tube replacement cases of percutaneous transesophageal gastro-tubing in cancer patients.
Article in Japanese journal of radiology, 2025. 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.
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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePercutaneous transesophageal gastro-tubing (PTEG) is an interventional radiology technique used for enteral feeding, or drainage in malignant bowel syndrome cases, serving as an alternative to percutaneous gastrostomy. Despite its safety and effectiveness in improving quality of life, comprehensive studies on PTEG tube replacement are limited. This study aimed to investigate the cases of PTEG tube replacement. MATERIAL AND
methodsThis single-center retrospective cohort study was conducted at the National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan. Data were collected from patients who underwent PTEG for malignant bowel obstruction or enteral feeding and then required tube replacement between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2023. Patient characteristics, duration of tube indwelling, PTEG tube tip position, causes of replacement, and whether dilation or re-PTEG was performed during replacement were analyzed, excluding patients who were transferred or deceased before the initial replacement. Statistical analyses were performed using the Chi-square, Fisher's exact, and Mann-Whitney U tests, with significance set at P < 0.05.
resultsOf 236 patients who underwent PTEG, 56 required an initial tube replacement. The mean age was 55 years, with 51.8 % of patients predominantly male. The primary indication for PTEG was decompression (52 patients). The median tube indwelling duration was 31 days, with the tube tip positioned in the gastric or duodenal in 64.3 % of cases. The most frequent reason for common replacement procedures, performed in 44 patients, was tube dysfunction. Replacement due to accidental removal in 12 patients led to higher rates of dilation or re-PTEG. The duration after accidental removal significantly affected the necessity for dilation or re-PTEG.
conclusionThis study on initial PTEG tube replacement in cancer patients indicated that tube dysfunction is the primary reason for replacement, and accidental removal is more likely to require dilation or re-PTEG.
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.