Is percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement safe in patients with ventriculoperitoneal shunts?

Table 4 Summary of published data on infections related to gastrostomy placement in patients with ventriculoperitoneal shunts

Investigator	Study design	Method of gastrostomy	Order of PEG & VP shunt	n	VP shunt infection rate	Interval between PEG & VP shunt	Control group	VP shunt infection rate in control group	Antibiotic used
Graham et al[17]	Prospective	Percutaneous endoscopic	VP→PEG	15	0%	2.2 wk	None	-	Cefazolin
Sane et al[18]	Retrospective	Fluoroscopic	VP→PEG	23	9% (2/23)	At least 4 wk	None	-	None
Taylor et al[19]	Retrospective	Percutaneous endoscopic	Simultaneous	16	50% (8/16)	-	VP shunt and tracheostomy without PEG	0% (0/21)	Yes (unspecified)
Baird et al[20]	Retrospective	Percutaneous endoscopic	VP→PEG	6	0%	33 d	None	-	Cefazolin
Schulman et al[21]	Retrospective	Percutaneous endoscopic	VP→PEG	39	5% (2/39)	43.1 d	None	-	72% received (unspecified)
Nabika et al[22]	Retrospective	Percutaneous endoscopic	Both	23	17.4% (4/23)	29.3 d	Only VP shunt	4.9%	Cefazolin
			PEG→VP	12	25% (3/12)	27.2 d		(6/123)
			VP→PEG	11	9.1% (1/11	39.2 d		(P = 0.0519)
Roeder et al[23]	Retrospective	Percutaneous endoscopic and surgical	Both	55	12.7% (7/55)	-	Only PEG	-	90.9% received (unspecified)
			PEG→VP	30	16.6% (5/30)
			VP→PEG	25	8% (2/25)
This study	Retrospective	Percutaneous endoscopic	VP→PEG	7	0% (0/7)	308.7 d	Only PEG	-	Yes (unspecified)