Endosc Int Open 2016; 04(03): E292-E295
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-100192
Original article
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Insufflation with carbon dioxide reduces pneumoperitoneum after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG): a randomized controlled trial

Christopher J. Murphy
1   Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah, United States
,
Douglas G. Adler
1   Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah, United States
,
Kristen Cox
1   Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah, United States
,
Daniel N. Sommers
2   Department of Radiology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah, United States
,
John C. Fang
1   Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah, United States
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

submitted 20 May 2015

accepted after revision 16 December 2015

Publication Date:
10 February 2016 (online)

Background and study aims: Pneumoperitoneum following PEG placement has been reported in up to 60 % of cases, and while usually benign and self-limited, it can lead to evaluation for suspected perforation. This study was designed to determine whether using CO2 compared to ambient air for insufflation during PEG reduces post-procedure pneumoperitoneum.

Patients and Methods: Prospective, double-blind, randomized trial of 35 consecutive patients undergoing PEG at a single academic medical center. Patients were randomized to insufflation with CO2 or ambient air. The primary outcome was pneumoperitoneum determined by left-lateral decubitus abdominal x-rays 30 minutes after PEG placement. Secondary endpoints included abdominal distention, pain, and bloating.

Results: PEG was successfully placed in 17 patients using CO2 and 18 patients using ambient air. Three patients in each arm were unable or declined to have x-rays completed and were excluded. Pneumoperitoneum was identified in 2/14 (14.3 %) using CO2 and 8/15 (53.3 %) using ambient air (P = 0.05). There was no significant difference in abdominal distention, visual analog scale (VAS) scores for pain or bloating between CO2 and ambient air.

Conclusion: Utilizing CO2 significantly reduces the frequency of post-procedural pneumoperitoneum compared to use of ambient air during PEG placement, with no difference in waist circumference, pain or bloating between CO2 and ambient air. CO2 appears to be safe and effective for use and may be the insufflation agent of choice during PEG.

 
  • References

  • 1 Gauderer MW, Ponsky JL, Izant RJ. Gastrostomy without laparotomy: a percutaneous endoscopic technique. J Ped Surg 1980; 15: 872-875
  • 2 Schrag SP, Sharma R, Jaik NP et al. Complications related to percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tubes. A comprehensive clinical review. J Gastrointestin Liver Dis 2007; 16: 407-418
  • 3 Dulabon GR, Abrams JE, Rutherford EJ. The incidence and significance of free air after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. Am Surg 2002; 68: 590-593
  • 4 Wiesen AJ, Sideridis K, Fernandes A et al. True incidence and clinical significance of pneumoperitoneum after PEG placement: a prospective study. Gastrointest Endosc 2006; 64: 886-889
  • 5 Wojtowycz MM, Arata Jr. JA, Micklos TJ et al. CT findings after uncomplicated percutaneous gastrostomy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1988; 151: 307-309
  • 6 Gottfried EB, Plumser AB, Clair MR. Pneumoperitoneum following percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. A prospective study. Gastrointest Endosc 1986; 32: 397-399
  • 7 Nishiwaki S, Araki H, Hayashi M et al. Inhibitory effects of carbon dioxide insufflation on pneumoperitoneum and bowel distension after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. World J Gastroenterol 2012; 18: 3565-3570 ( DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v18.i27.3565. )
  • 8 Snape J, Poon M, Green J et al. Pneumoperitoneum following PEG insertion: a clinical dilemma. Acute Med 2010; 9: 120-121
  • 9 Wu J, Hu B. The role of carbon dioxide insufflation in colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Endoscopy 2012; 44: 128-136 ( DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1291487. )
  • 10 Bretthauer M, Seip B, Aasen S et al. Carbon dioxide insufflation for more comfortable endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a randomized, controlled, double-blind trial. Endoscopy 2007; 39: 58-64
  • 11 Maple JT, Keswani RN, Hovis RM et al. Carbon dioxide insufflation during ERCP for reduction of postprocedure pain: a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 70: 278-283 ( DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.12.050. )
  • 12 Dellon ES, Hawk JS, Grimm IS et al. The use of carbon dioxide for insufflation during GI endoscopy: a systematic review. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 69: 843-849 ( DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.05.067. )
  • 13 Paspatis GA, Dumonceau JM, Barthet M et al. Diagnosis and management of iatrogenic endoscopic perforations: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Position Statement. Endoscopy 2014; 46: 693-711
  • 14 Seo EH, Kim TO, Park MJ et al. The efficacy and safety of carbon dioxide insufflation during colonoscopy with consecutive esophagogastroduodenoscopy in moderately sedated outpatients: a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial. J Clin Gastroenterol 2013; 47: 45-49