Complications Associated With Image-Guided Gastrostomy and Gastrojejunostomy Tubes in Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the complications associated with the image-guided insertion of gastrostomy (G) and gastrojejunostomy (GJ) tubes in children, performed by the retrograde percutaneous route. METHODS: A convenience sample of 208 charts of 840 patients recorded as having G and/or GJ tubes placed by the interventional radiology service in a 4-year period (1995-1999) at the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto, Canada, were selected for review. Complications were categorized as major (including subcutaneous abscess, peritonitis, septicemia, gastrointestinal bleeding, and death) or minor. RESULTS: In total, 253 tubes (208 G tubes, 41 GJ tubes, 4 G and GJ tubes) were placed in the 208 patients reviewed. The median age at the time of insertion was 15 months (range: 7 days-18 years). The most common diagnostic category was neurologic disease (47%). The main indications for tube insertion were recorded as failure to thrive (57%) and risk of aspiration (47%). Major complications were seen in 5% of patients. Peritonitis was noted in 3%, and there was 1 death related to tube insertion (0.4%). Minor complications were found in 73% of patients, including tube dislodgement (37%), tube leakage (25%), and G-tube site skin infection (25%). GJ tubes had a higher rate than G tubes of obstruction, migration, dislodgement, leakage, and intussusception. Site infection, gastroesophageal reflux, and bleeding from the site were seen less frequently in patients with GJ tubes compared with G tubes. CONCLUSION: G and GJ tubes placed by the image-guided retrograde percutaneous method are associated with a wide range of complications. The majority of these are minor and are predominantly related to tube maintenance, but major complications, including death, do occur.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".