Role of Prophylactic Antibiotics in New Introducer PEG-Gastropexy

NCT ID: NCT00375414

Last Updated: 2007-05-07

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

97 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2003-10-31

Study Completion Date

2007-04-30

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Peristomal infections are the commonest complications of PEG despite prophylactic antibiotics which may result in emergence of resistant micro-organisms like Methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Introducer PEG technique avoids the sojourn of PEG catheter through the oropharynx so chances of infectious complications are negligible. It was not popular because of associated risks and complications. However the new introducer PEG gastropexy has been recently proved to be safe. To determine the incidence of peristomal wound infections during the immediate 7 day post procedure follow up period after the new introducer PEG gastropexy

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

BACKGROUND:PEG can be performed by pull, push or introducer technique, pull method is the one most commonly used worldwide. PEG site infection is clearly the commonest procedure related complication of PEG placement and the routinely used pull technique has been shown to have quite high (4-30%), peristomal infectious complications. To curtail these infectious complications various gastroenterological societies have recommended giving intravenous prophylactic antibiotics 30 minutes prior to the procedure which has been shown to significantly reduce this complication. Despite this the incidence of peristomal infectious complications remains high post PEG. Another problem associated with the administration of prophylactic antibiotics is the emergence of resistant micro-organisms especially the Methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) at the PEG site. Introducer PEG is the technique of PEG placement which avoids the transit of PEG catheter through the oropharynx. Despite its introduction since 19 years back it has not become popular among endoscopists because of technical difficulties and complications associated with it. However the newer introducer PEG technique using endoscopic gastropexy has been shown to be quite safe and easy to perform in recent studies. We at our institute have been performing this procedure since January 2003 and on prospective follow up have found much lower incidence of peristomal infections with it. Recently Maetani et al have already demonstrated in a prospective randomised trial that the introducer type PEG results in fewer infectious complications as compared to conventional pull PEG. There is no study comparing introducer PEG technique with or without administration of prophylactic antibiotics. As in principal, the chances of infections are much lower in the introducer technique. We want to address this issue in a randomised double blind placebo controlled settings in those patients who will as it is unfit to undergo routine pull PEG because of upper gastrointestinal (UGI) malignant stenoses.

SUMMARY: Peristomal infections are the commonest complications of PEG despite prophylactic antibiotics which may result in emergence of resistant micro-organisms like Methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Introducer PEG technique avoids the travel of PEG catheter through the oropharynx which is richly inhabitated with microorganisms so chances of infectious complications at the raw PEG wound are negligible. This technique was not popular because of associated risks and complications in the past which has shown it to result in complications like deflation of balloons, catheter dislodgement, leading to peritonitis etc. However the new introducer PEG gastropexy has been recently proved to be safe. At our institute about 200 PEG procedures are performed annually, out of these 10-12% have tight stenotic stricture in which pull PEG is not possible without dilatation of oropharyngeal tract. We plan to randomise these patients in to 2 groups with and without antibiotics (placebo). PEG will be done using the new introducer PEG, Freka® Pexact CH/FR 15 (Fresenius Kabi, Germany), in which the gastric wall is sutured non surgically to the anterior abdominal wall using 2 silk sutures. Peristomal wound would be assessed daily for 7 days using 2 types of point scores systems (given by Jain and by Gossner) by 2 members of nutrition support team independently. As these are the objective scoring systems, we intend to determine the grades of post procedure peristomal infections in these patients.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Head and Neck Neoplasms Wound Infection

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

DOUBLE

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

PEG-Gastropexy

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Patients having very tight stenotic malignant lesions of the upper GI tract (i.e. esophagus and or oropharynx) in whom routine pull PEG is not possible without dilatation/bougeinage of the UGI tract. The GI lumen in patients included in this study would have just sufficiently enough diameters to allow only the passage of thin (8.8 mm) endoscope.

Exclusion Criteria

* Allergies to Ceftriaxone antibiotics,
* Patients receiving systemic antibiotics,
* Any contraindications to PEG like, severe coagulation disorders, peritonitis, peritoneal carcinomatosis, burns or inability to achieve transillumination.
Minimum Eligible Age

16 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

88 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Bethanien Krankenhaus gGmbH

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

Johann Wolfgang Goethe University Hospital

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Yogesh M Shastri, MD, DNB

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

JW Goethe University Hospital, Frankfurt

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Department of Medicine I, Division of Gastroenterology and Clinical Nutrition, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-University Hospital,

Frankfurt am Main, , Germany

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Germany

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Shastri YM, Hoepffner N, Tessmer A, Ackermann H, Schroeder O, Stein J. New introducer PEG gastropexy does not require prophylactic antibiotics: multicenter prospective randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2008 Apr;67(4):620-8. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2007.10.044.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 18374024 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

Gastropexy

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id