ArticleRadiology case reports2026
Percutaneous transesophageal gastric catheter removal and follow up: A case series.
Article in Radiology case reports, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Percutaneous transesophageal gastric catheter (PTEG) placement is an alternative technique for gastric decompression in patients who require long-term venting with contraindication(s) to traditional gastrostomy access (percutaneous, endoscopic, or surgical), such as primary or metastatic gastric cancer, refractory ascites, or altered anatomy. Despite growing evidence supporting PTEG's efficacy and safety especially for palliative care, literature on catheter removal, and follow-up is sparse. We present 4 cases of PTEG catheter removal in patients with malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) and contraindications to radiologic percutaneous gastrostomy (PG). Each case involved successful PTEG placement, followed by removal once symptoms resolved. Follow-up periods varied, with no reported complications postremoval and a median follow-up time of 599 (139-725) days. PTEG provides a viable alternative for patients requiring gastric decompression who are not candidates for PG. This case series demonstrates the safety and feasibility of PTEG catheter removal, even within the limitations of the sample size. This case series demonstrates that PTEG catheter removal after symptomatic relief of malignant bowel obstruction is safe. Further research is needed to better understand the long-term outcomes and to confirm these preliminary findings.
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.