Page 28 - Effects and Efficacy of (Laparoscopic) Gastrostomy Placement in Children - Josephine Franken

Literature search (June 19th 2012)
Pubmed
n = 1852
Embase
n = 1437
Total: n = 3267
Cochrane
n = 78
Papers retrieved after search:
n = 2347
Potentially relevant for full-text screening:
n = 180
Potentially relevant for more detailed evaluation: n = 11
Included papers:
n =5
• • •
•
Not relevant after full-tekst screening: n = 169
• Domain = adult: n = 2
Only one gastrostomy technique: n = 95 Gastrostomy technique undefined: n = 47 Fluoroscopy guided gastrostomy: n = 11 Determinant is not gastrostomy: n = 5
•
• No seperate outcomes: n = 2 Only technique description: n = 7
Double papers: n = 920
Not relevant after title/abstract screening: n = 2167
Not relevant after detailed screening: n = 6
• Age<26years:n=1
• Selection bias based on patient
characteristics: n = 2
• No report on outcomes of interest: n = 3
Figure 1. Flowchart of literature search.
Table 1. studies comparing PeG and LGP in children.
study (year)
surgical technique
Akay 2010
2004 2008
PEG
134
7.4
100%
86/48
7.4
Gauderer technique
LGP
104
55/49
3.1
4-tacking sutures
Fraser 2009
2000 2008
PEG
282
NR
100%
849/685
3
NR
LGP
270
NR
Zamakhshary 2005
2002 2003
PEG
93
NR
85%
45/48
5
Gauderer technique
LGP
26
100%
12/14
5
2 anchor/ 1 purse-string*
Conlon 2004
1992 2002
PEG
33
82.8 (0-135.6)
100%
NR
NR
NR
LGP
75
NR
Lee 2002
1998 1999
PEG
8
NR
100%
NR
NR
NR
LGP
8
2 sutures through abdominal wall
Legend: FU: Follow-up; NR: Not Recorded; Techniques: PEG: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy; LGP: Laparoscopic gastrostomy; Patients: NI: Neurologically impaired; Surgical technique: * = Modified Rothen- berg technique
26
Period Technique number
Mean FU (months)
neurologic impairment
Male / Female Age