Abstract
Background
Debate exists about the safety of ventriculoperitoneal shunt placement in the presence of a gastrostomy tube and the timing of these procedures from each other. Using a large database, we sought to determine the rates of shunt infection and revision in patients who had both devices placed, based on the timing between procedures.
Methods
We performed a retrospective database analysis using a multi-institutional database (TriNetX), looking at all patients diagnosed with gastrostomy tube with subsequent ventriculoperitoneal shunt placement and vice-versa. We also evaluated patients who had gastrostomy tubes and shunts placed at the same time. We categorized cohorts into patients with device placement after 1-10 days, 11-30 days, and after one month of the other. Our primary endpoints were shunt infection and shunt revision.
Results
Patients who had same-day gastrostomy tube and shunt placement had a shunt infection rate of 10.06% within five years, and 14.53% had a shunt revision. With prior shunting and subsequent gastrostomy tube placement within 1-10 days, 12.18% had shunt infections, and 17.88% had shunt revisions; for those who had subsequent gastrostomy tube placement within 11-30 days, shunt infections were seen in 10.57%, and shunt revisions in 19.41%; gastrostomy tube placement after one month or longer of shunt placement resulted in 15.39% of patients having shunt infections and 17.73% with shunt revision. Prior gastrostomy tube patients with subsequent shunt placement, within 1-10 days had shunt infection rates of 8.27% and revision rates of 14.39%; for shunt placement within 11-30 days, shunt infections were seen in 10.82%, and shunt revisions were done in 14.33% of patients; for shunt placement after one month or longer, shunt infection rate was 11.68%, and revision rate was 16.80%.
Conclusions
Our results demonstrate no significant difference in shunt infection rates and shunt revision rates between same-day gastrostomy tube and shunt placement versus placement within 1-10 days, 11-30 days, or any time after one month from one another.
Keywords: mortality, revision, meningitis, infection, outcomes, g-tube, peg, shunt, neurosurgery
Introduction
Patients with neurologic injury requiring a ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS) often also require gastrostomy tube (G-tube) placement for nutritional support. Likewise, patients with neurologic injury requiring a G-tube for nutritional support may also have hydrocephalus requiring a VPS [1]. However, there is debate about the safety of ventriculoperitoneal shunt placement in the presence of a gastrostomy tube, and vice-versa, and the timing of such procedures from each other. The discourse stands on the risk of shunt malfunction and shunt infection with bacterial pathogens related to a G-tube [1-6]. Therefore, we sought to determine the shunt infection rates and shunt revision in patients who had both devices placed, based on the timing between procedures, using a large database.
Materials and methods
This was a retrospective comparative case-control study. We used a de-identified database network (TriNetX) to retrospectively query via ICD-10 and current procedural terminology codes to evaluate all patients with a prior G-tube placement with subsequent VPS placement, as well as patients with a prior VPS with subsequent G-tube placement. We also evaluated patients who had G-tubes and VPS placed at the same time. We categorized placement into cohorts for those patients who had device placement after 1-10 days, 11-30 days, and after one month of the other. Data were obtained from 62 health care organizations (HCOs) spanning 11 countries. The database includes variables on demographics, diagnoses, medications, laboratory values, genomics, and procedures. The identity of the HCOs and patients is not disclosed to comply with ethical guidelines regarding data re-identification. Because of the database's federated nature, an IRB waiver has been granted. Our use of this database and its validity has been disclosed by previous literature, and exact details of the network have been previously described [7-10].
The medical information included age at the initial procedure (index) date, as well as sex, race, and comorbidities of hypertension, acute kidney injury, diabetes, ischemic heart disease, heart failure, atrial fibrillation, disorders of lipoprotein metabolism disorders, and other dyslipidemias, obesity, history of nicotine dependence, chronic respiratory disease, cirrhosis, alcohol abuse or dependence, and peripheral vascular disease, recorded up to the date of the index date. Our primary outcomes of interest were shunt infection and shunt revision rates. These outcomes were obtained over five years. Chi-square analysis was performed on categorical variables. Comparisons were made between same-day G-tube and shunt versus each cohort.
Results
We identified 4,269 patients with a VPS and G-tube. In addition, 179 (4.19%) patients had a VPS and G-tube placed the same day, 509 (11.92%) patients with a prior VPS and G-tube placement within 1-10 days, 814 (19.07%) within 11-30 days, and 897 (21.01%) with placement after one month. Thus, there were 278 (6.51%) patients with prior G-tube and placement of a VPS within 1-10 days, 342 (8.01%) within 11-30 days, and 1,250 (29.28%) with placement after one month. Baseline demographics and characteristics can be seen in Table 1.
Table 1. Baseline demographics and population characteristics.
| ICD-10 Code | Diagnosis | Same day G-tube/shunt, n (%) | Prior shunt, G-tube within 1-10 days, n (%) | Prior shunt, G-tube within 11-30 days, n (%) | Prior shunt, G-tube after 1 month, n (%) | Prior G-tube, shunt within 1-10 days, n (%) | Prior G-tube, shunt within 11-30 days, n (%) | Prior G-tube, shunt after 1 month, n (%) |
| AI | Age at Index in years | 47.16 (100.00) | 49.55 (100.00) | 51.58 (100.00) | 34.39 (100.00) | 47.32 (100.00) | 45.30 (100.00) | 41.59 (100.00) |
| M | Male | 124 (70.06) | 342 (67.46) | 563 (69.51) | 572 (63.69) | 168 (60.00) | 198 (57.89) | 770 (62.19) |
| F | Female | 74 (41.81) | 206 (40.63) | 326 (40.25) | 426 (47.44) | 112 (40.00) | 144 (42.11) | 506 (40.87) |
| 2106-3 | White | 103 (58.19) | 301 (59.37) | 484 (59.75) | 472 (52.56) | 165 (58.93) | 189 (55.26) | 732 (59.13) |
| 2054-5 | Black or African American | 35 (19.77) | 95 (18.74) | 134 (16.54) | 162 (18.04) | 83 (29.64) | 103 (30.12) | 266 (21.49) |
| 2131-1 | Unknown Race | 15 (8.48) | 56 (11.05) | 91 (11.24) | 142 (15.81) | 25 (8.93) | 35 (10.23) | 154 (12.44) |
| 2028-9 | Asian | <10 (<5.65) | 12 (2.37) | 17 (2.09) | 18 (2.00) | <10 (<3.57) | <10 (<2.92) | 35 (2.83) |
| I10-I16 | Hypertensive Diseases | 50 (28.25) | 327 (64.49) | 575 (70.99) | 429 (47.77) | 173 (61.79) | 195 (57.02) | 734 (59.29) |
| R13 | Aphagia and Dysphagia | 25 (14.12) | 270 (53.25) | 428 (52.84) | 561 (62.47) | 165 (58.93) | 172 (50.29) | 297 (23.99) |
| R40 | Somnolence, Stupor and Coma | 22 (12.43) | 222 (43.79) | 429 (52.96) | 468 (52.12) | 145 (51.79) | 186 (54.39) | 724 (58.48) |
| F17 | Nicotine Dependence | 20 (11.29) | 127 (25.05) | 214 (26.42) | 368 (40.98) | 64 (22.86) | 91 (26.61) | 521 (42.08) |
| N17-N19 | Acute Kidney Failure and Chronic Kidney Disease | 18 (10.17) | 122 (24.06) | 194 (23.95) | 228 (25.39) | 62 (22.14) | 72 (21.05) | 252 (20.36) |
| E78 | Lipoprotein Metabolism Disorders and Other Dyslipidemia | 16 (9.04) | 116 (22.88) | 216 (26.67) | 12 (1.34) | 60 (21.43) | 74 (21.64) | 291 (23.51) |
| R63 | Symptoms and Signs Concerning Food and Fluid Intake | 15 (8.48) | 108 (21.30) | 183 (22.59) | 159 (17.71) | 56 (20.00) | 72 (21.05) | 197 (15.91) |
| I20-I25 | Ischemic Heart Diseases | 14 (7.91) | 87 (17.16) | 190 (23.46) | 214 (23.83) | 56 (20.00) | 62 (18.13) | 239 (19.31) |
| I48 | Atrial Fibrillation and Flutter | <10 (<5.65) | 51 (10.06) | 88 (10.86) | 119 (13.25) | 31 (11.07) | 37 (10.82) | 103 (8.32) |
| I50 | Heart Failure | <10 (<5.65) | 85 (16.77) | 149 (18.39) | 28 (3.12) | 39 (13.93) | 40 (11.69) | 16 (1.292) |
| I73 | Other Peripheral Vascular Diseases | <10 (<5.65) | <10 (<1.97) | <10 (<1.24) | 43 (4.79) | <10 (<3.57) | 17 (4.97) | 66 (5.33) |
| E08-E13 | Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus | 14 (7.91) | 87 (17.16) | 165 (20.37) | 130 (14.48) | 51 (18.21) | 58 (16.96) | 381 (30.78) |
| J40-J47 | Chronic Lower Respiratory Diseases | 11 (6.22) | 86 (16.96) | 150 (18.52) | 80 (8.91) | 44 (15.71) | 59 (17.25) | 180 (14.54) |
| Z87.891 | Personal History of Nicotine Dependence | <10 (<5.65) | 74 (14.59) | 116 (14.32) | 212 (23.61) | 33 (11.79) | 38 (11.11) | 272 (21.97) |
| R53 | Malaise and Fatigue | <10 (<5.65) | 61 (12.03) | 120 (14.82) | 92 (10.25) | 45 (16.07) | 38 (11.11) | 272 (21.97) |
| F10.1 | Alcohol Abuse | <10 (<5.65) | 39 (7.69) | 68 (8.39) | 142 (15.81) | 27 (9.64) | 33 (9.65) | 52 (4.20) |
| F10.2 | Alcohol Dependence | <10 (<5.65) | 20 (3.95) | 43 (5.31) | 296 (32.96) | 14 (5.00) | 19 (5.56) | 128 (10.34) |
| K74 | Fibrosis and Cirrhosis of Liver | <10 (<5.65) | 18 (3.55) | 50 (6.17) | 18 (2.00) | <10 (<3.57) | <10 (<2.92) | 140 (11.31) |
Patients who had same-day G-tube and VPS placement had a VPS infection rate of 10.06% within 5-years, and 14.53% had a VPS revision. In the prior VPS group with subsequent G-tube placement within 1-10 days, 12.18% had VPS infections (p=0.45), and 17.88% had VPS revisions (p=0.30); for those who had subsequent G-tube placement within 11-30 days, VPS infections were seen in 10.57% (p=0.84) of patients, and VPS revisions in 19.41% (p=0.13); G-tube placement after one month or longer of VPS placement resulted in 15.39% of patients having VPS infections (p=0.064) and 17.73% having a VPS revision (p=0.30). In patients with a G-tube with subsequent VPS placement within 1-10 days, VPS infection rates were 8.27% (p=0.52), and VPS revision rates were 14.39% (p=0.97); for VPS placement within 11-30 days of G-tube placement, VPS infections were seen in 10.82% (p=0.79), and VPS revisions were done in 14.33% (p=0.95) of patients; for VPS placement after one month or longer of G-tube placement, VPS infection rate was 11.68% (p=0.52) and shunt revision rate was 16.80% (p=0.44). (Table 2)
Table 2. Rates of VPS infection and VPS revision.
| Total n | VPS infection n, (%) | VPS revision n, (%) | |
| Same day G-tube/VPS | 179 | 18 (10.06) | 26 (14.56) |
| Prior VPS, G-tube within 1-10 days | 509 | 62 (12.18) | 91 (17.88) |
| Prior VPS, G-tube within 11-30 days | 814 | 86 (10.57) | 158 (19.41) |
| Prior VPS, G-tube after 1 month | 897 | 138 (15.39) | 159 (17.73) |
| Prior G-tube, VPS within 1-10 days | 278 | 23 (8.27) | 40 (14.39) |
| Prior G-tube, VPS within 11-30 days | 342 | 37 (10.82) | 49 (14.33) |
| Prior G-tube, VPS after 1 month | 1250 | 146 (11.68) | 210 (16.80) |
Discussion
Our results demonstrate no significant difference in VPS infection rates and VPS revision rates between same-day G-tube and VPS placement versus placement within 1-10 days, 11-30 days, or any other time after one month from one another. While previous studies have shown a VPS infection rate of 0-30%, our study shows an infection rate of 8.27%-15.39% within five years [1-6]. VPS revision rates ranged from 14.33% to 19.41% within five years of follow-up.
In 2020 Tyler et al. published a retrospective analysis looking at G-tube placement and VPS placement within the same hospitalization. They found a VPS infection rate in three out of 45 patients (7%) [5].
In 2017 Oterdoom et al. published a systematic review of VPS and G-tube placement. They found nine relevant studies and overall found VPS infections in 26 out of 208 patients (12.5%). In addition, 137 out of 208 patients had VPS before G-tube placement, with a VPS infection rate of 4.4%; 55 patients had G-tube placement before VPS, with a resulting infection rate of 21.8%; 16 patients had G-tube and VPS placement during the same day, and the infection rate was 50%. The authors concluded that G-tube placement ideally occurs before VPS placement but that having a VPS is not a contraindication to G-tube placement [2].
In 2009, Kim et al. analyzed patients requiring a G-tube both with and without a pre-existing VPS. Of 55 patients, seven (12.7%) had pre-existing shunts. The mean interval between VPS and G-tube placement was 300 days. No patients experienced VPS infections, and the overall complication rate did not differ between the two groups [1]. Cairns et al. in 2009 reported a total of 13 G-tubes placed in 11 patients with prior VPS. One patient had a VPS infection 54 days after G-tube. They also looked at 13 patients with G-tube before VPS placement, and four (30.7%) of these patients had VPS infection. Overall, VPS infection was 20.8%, and the difference between infection rates was not statistically significant (p=0.52). Likewise, patients who had the two procedures performed within 10 days had the highest incidence of infection (30%), with no statistical significance (p=0.67) [6].
Roeder et al. in 2006 examined 55 patients with VPS and G-tube placement. Of 55 patients, seven (12.5%) developed infections. The authors concluded that G-tube placement with VPS is safe and that the order of device placement does not play a significant role [3]. A year before this study, Schulman et al. published a retrospective single-center study of 39 patients with VPS who eventually required a G-tube. The time interval between VPS and G-tube placement was 2 to 564 days. Only two (5%) patients developed meningitis, which was at the 2- and 15-month mark after G-tube placement [4].
A 2021 systematic review of G-tube and VPS placement in the pediatric population by Gerges et al. found four studies involving the timing of VPS and G-tube placement, which reported inconclusive results, with some study patients having no infections with the concomitant placement of both devices, and other studies showing increased risk of shunt infection with prior G-tube placement [11-15].
The major limitation of this study was its retrospective design for data obtention. Furthermore, due to the nature of the database, we were unable to collect patient-level data. Another limitation of this study was the unavailability of radiological images and reports. Also, the diagnostic protocol and tests performed to assess diagnoses were unavailable in the database we utilized/employed. In addition, some misidentification is inevitable in database studies.
Conclusions
In this large database retrospective study, we approached the inconclusive timing between VPS and G-tube placement related to device-related and device-placement infection rates. Our results conclude that there is no significant difference in VPS infection rates or VPS revision rates between same-day G-tube and VPS placement versus placement within 1-10 days, 11-30 days, or any other time after one month from one another. This suggests that these procedures are safe to perform concurrently and that either procedure may not limit the timing of the other.
The content published in Cureus is the result of clinical experience and/or research by independent individuals or organizations. Cureus is not responsible for the scientific accuracy or reliability of data or conclusions published herein. All content published within Cureus is intended only for educational, research and reference purposes. Additionally, articles published within Cureus should not be deemed a suitable substitute for the advice of a qualified health care professional. Do not disregard or avoid professional medical advice due to content published within Cureus.
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Human Ethics
Consent was obtained or waived by all participants in this study
Animal Ethics
Animal subjects: All authors have confirmed that this study did not involve animal subjects or tissue.
References
- 1.Is percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement safe in patients with ventriculoperitoneal shunts? Kim JS, Park YW, Kim HK, Cho YS, Kim SS, Youn NR, Chae HS. World J Gastroenterol. 2009;15:3148–3152. doi: 10.3748/wjg.15.3148. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Systematic review of ventricular peritoneal shunt and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: a safe combination. Oterdoom LH, Marinus Oterdoom DL, Ket JC, van Dijk JM, Scholten P. J Neurosurg. 2017;127:899–904. doi: 10.3171/2016.8.JNS152701. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Placement of gastrostomy tubes in patients with ventriculoperitoneal shunts does not result in increased incidence of shunt infection or decreased survival. Roeder BE, Said A, Reichelderfer M, Gopal DV. Dig Dis Sci. 2007;52:518–522. doi: 10.1007/s10620-006-9311-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.The safety of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement in patients with existing ventriculoperitoneal shunts. Schulman AS, Sawyer RG. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2005;29:442–444. doi: 10.1177/0148607105029006442. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Risk of ventriculoperitoneal shunt infection with coexisting percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube and associated factors. Tyler K, Leon SM, Lowe S, Kellogg R, Lena J, Privette AR, Eriksson EA. Heliyon. 2020;6:0. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03523. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy and ventriculoperitoneal shunts: a dangerous combination? Cairns A, Geraghty J, Al-Rifai A, Babbs C. Dig Endosc. 2009;21:228–231. doi: 10.1111/j.1443-1661.2009.00897.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Cerebral venous thrombosis and portal vein thrombosis: a retrospective cohort study of 537,913 COVID-19 cases. Taquet M, Husain M, Geddes JR, Luciano S, Harrison PJ. EClinicalMedicine. 2021;39:101061. doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.101061. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Outcomes of COVID-19 in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a multicenter research network study in the United States. Raiker R, DeYoung C, Pakhchanian H, Ahmed S, Kavadichanda C, Gupta L, Kardeş S. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2021;51:1057–1066. doi: 10.1016/j.semarthrit.2021.08.010. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.6-month neurological and psychiatric outcomes in 236 379 survivors of COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study using electronic health records. Taquet M, Geddes JR, Husain M, Luciano S, Harrison PJ. Lancet Psychiatry. 2021;8:416–427. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(21)00084-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Using a federated network of real-world data to optimize clinical trials operations. Topaloglu U, Palchuk MB. JCO Clin Cancer Inform. 2018;2:1–10. doi: 10.1200/CCI.17.00067. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Evaluation of risk of gastrostomy and ventriculoperitoneal shunt placement in pediatric patients: a systematic review of the literature. Gerges C, Wijesekera O, Herring E, et al. World Neurosurg. 2021;152:180–188. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2021.05.044. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Percutaneous gastrostomy tube placement in patients with ventriculoperitoneal shunts. Sane SS, Towbin A, Bergey EA, Kaye RD, Fitz CR, Albright L, Towbin RB. Pediatr Radiol. 1998;28:521–523. doi: 10.1007/s002470050401. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Complications of video-assisted gastrostomy in children with or without a ventriculoperitoneal shunt. Backman T, Berglund Y, Sjövie H, Arnbjörnsson E. Pediatr Surg Int. 2007;23:665–668. doi: 10.1007/s00383-007-1930-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Risk of ventriculoperitoneal shunt infections due to gastrostomy feeding tube insertion in pediatric patients with brain tumors. Gassas A, Kennedy J, Green G, et al. Pediatr Neurosurg. 2006;42:95–99. doi: 10.1159/000090462. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Infectious risk to ventriculo-peritoneal shunts from gastrointestinal surgery in the pediatric population. Mortellaro VE, Chen MK, Pincus D, Kays DW, Islam S, Beierle EA. J Pediatr Surg. 2009;44:1201–1204. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2009.02.020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]