Comparison of Owner Management and Complications in 67 Cats With Esophagostomy and Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Feeding Tubes

• Published in: The Journal of the American Animal Hospital Association Vol. 39; no. 3; pp. 241 - 246
• Main Authors: Ireland, Lisa M, Hohenhaus, Ann E, Broussard, John D, Weissman, Brenda L
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States American Animal Hospital Association 01.05.2003
• Subjects: Animal Husbandry; Animals; body weight; Cat Diseases - therapy; Cats; Enteral Nutrition - instrumentation; Enteral Nutrition - veterinary; Esophagostomy - statistics & numerical data; Esophagostomy - veterinary; Female; Gastrostomy - statistics & numerical data; Gastrostomy - veterinary; Humans; Intubation, Gastrointestinal - methods; Intubation, Gastrointestinal - veterinary; Male; New York City - epidemiology; Postoperative Complications - epidemiology; Postoperative Complications - etiology; Postoperative Complications - veterinary; Records as Topic - veterinary; Retrospective Studies; surveys; Weight Gain; New York City
• ISSN: 0587-2871; 1547-3317
• DOI: 10.5326/0390241

Esophagostomy feeding tubes were placed in 46 cats. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) feeding tubes were placed in 21 cats. Owner management and complications and facility of use were evaluated retrospectively by review of medical records and owner survey. Both tube types were equally effective for maintenance of body weight, ease of owner management, and complication rates. All of 12 owners surveyed were comfortable with PEG tube management. Ninety-six percent of 24 owners surveyed were comfortable with esophagostomy tube management. The esophagostomy tube can be placed less invasively, without specialized equipment, making it an excellent alternative to the PEG tube.