Abstract
ABSTRACT
Objectives
Patients requiring long‐term enteral nutrition or continuous infusion of carbidopa/levodopa can benefit from jejunostomy tube placement. Recently, directly placed percutaneous transgastric jejunal tubes (TGJs) have been used instead of gastrostomy tubes with jejunal extensions (PEG‐Js) for enteral access. We aim to compare patient characteristics and outcomes after placement of TGJs placed via the introducer technique compared to PEG‐Js.
Methods
We performed a retrospective study of 141 patients (TGJ = 58, PEG‐J = 83) assessed at Mayo Clinic between 2010 and 2024. Patients were identified using a prospectively maintained procedure data registry. Demographic data, patient characteristics, procedural indications, complications, and first‐replacement date were gathered. Statistical analysis included the Wilcoxon rank sum test, chi‐square test, Fisher's exact test, and Kaplan‐Meier estimates. Patients receiving carbidopa/levodopa were excluded from complications analysis due to the carbidopa/levodopa tube's proprietary structure. A
p
‐value of
Results
Our results demonstrated no difference in cumulative incidence of complications within 1 year for TGJs and PEG‐Js,
p
‐value 0.48. Regarding time to first replacement, treating death as a competing risk factor, there was no statistically significant difference in cumulative incidence of replacement within 1 year for TGJs and PEG‐Js,
p
‐value 0.389.
Conclusions
Our study demonstrates that both direct TGJs and PEG‐Js are safe options for long‐term jejunal feeding. More studies are needed to compare endoscopic to radiologically placed percutaneous transgastric jejunal feeding tubes.