Prophylactic vs reactive PEG tube placement in early-stage head and neck (H&N) cancer treated with curative-intent radiotherapy: Balancing benefit and burden in real-world practice.
This study aims to compare the outcomes of prophylactic versus reactive PEG tube placement in patients with head and neck cancer undergoing radiotherapy.
Conducted a retrospective study using the TriNetX Network database.
Stratified 2,752 adults with head and neck cancer based on timing of PEG placement: prophylactic (pPEG) or reactive (rPEG).
Analyzed outcomes at 6 months and 1 year using Kaplan–Meier methods and Cox proportional-hazards models.
At 6 months, pPEG showed lower all-cause mortality (HR 0.8, 95% CI 0.7-0.9; p=0.04) but higher hospitalization and complications.
At 1 year, no significant difference in all-cause mortality; pPEG resulted in higher hospitalization and complications (HR 1.2, 95% CI 1.1-1.5; p=0.04).
pPEG was linked to an increased risk of dysphagia and malnutrition at both 6 months (HR 1.3, p<0.01) and 1 year (HR 1.3, p<0.01).
Abstract
12150 Background: Timing of Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (PEG) placement during curative-intent radiotherapy for H p 1 indicates higher hazard in pPEG vs rPEG; HR < 1 indicates lower hazard.
问 AI
Like
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper
问 AI
Like
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper
Prophylactic vs reactive PEG tube placement in early-stage head and neck (H&N) cancer treated with curative-intent radiotherapy: Balancing benefit and burden in real-world practice. | Synapse