Incidence and Management of Bleeding Complications Following Percutaneous Radiologic Gastrostomy.
10.3348/kjr.2012.13.2.174
- Author:
Nieun SEO
1
;
Ji Hoon SHIN
;
Gi Young KO
;
Hyun Ki YOON
;
Dong Il GWON
;
Jin Hyoung KIM
;
Kyu Bo SUNG
Author Information
1. Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul 138-736, Korea. jhshin@amc.seoul.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy;
Bleeding;
Transcatheter arterial embolization
- MeSH:
Adult;
Aged;
Aged, 80 and over;
Embolization, Therapeutic/*methods;
Female;
Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/diagnosis/*epidemiology/*therapy;
*Gastrostomy;
Humans;
Incidence;
Male;
Middle Aged;
Postoperative Hemorrhage/diagnosis/*epidemiology/*therapy;
Retrospective Studies;
Time Factors;
Treatment Outcome
- From:Korean Journal of Radiology
2012;13(2):174-181
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE: Upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is a serious complication that sometimes occurs after percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PRG). We evaluated the incidence of bleeding complications after a PRG and its management including transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 574 patients who underwent PRG in our institution between 2000 and 2010. Eight patients (1.4%) had symptoms or signs of upper GI bleeding after PRG. RESULTS: The initial presentation was hematemesis (n = 3), melena (n = 2), hematochezia (n = 2) and bloody drainage through the gastrostomy tube (n = 1). The time interval between PRG placement and detection of bleeding ranged from immediately after to 3 days later (mean: 28 hours). The mean decrease in hemoglobin concentration was 3.69 g/dL (range, 0.9 to 6.8 g/dL). In three patients, bleeding was controlled by transfusion (n = 2) or compression of the gastrostomy site (n = 1). The remaining five patients underwent an angiography because bleeding could not be controlled by transfusion only. In one patient, the bleeding focus was not evident on angiography or endoscopy, and wedge resection including the tube insertion site was performed for hemostasis. The other four patients underwent prophylactic (n = 1) or therapeutic (n = 3) TAEs. In three patients, successful hemostasis was achieved by TAE, whereas the remaining one patient underwent exploration due to persistent bleeding despite TAE. CONCLUSION: We observed an incidence of upper GI bleeding complicating the PRG of 1.4%. TAE following conservative management appears to be safe and effective for hemostasis.
