Skip to main content
Top
Published in: CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology 1/2009

01-01-2009 | Laboratory Investigation

Stability of Balloon-Retention Gastrostomy Tubes with Different Concentrations of Contrast Material: In Vitro Study

Authors: Jorge E. Lopera, Alex Alvarez, Clayton Trimmer, Shellie Josephs, Matthew Anderson, Bart Dolmatch

Published in: CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology | Issue 1/2009

Login to get access

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine the performance of two balloon-retention-type gastrostomy tubes when the balloons are inflated with two types of contrast materials at different concentrations. Two commonly used balloon-retention-type tubes (MIC and Tri-Funnel) were inflated to the manufacturer’s recommended volumes (4 and 20 cm3, respectively) with normal saline or normal saline plus different concentrations of contrast material. Five tubes of each brand were inflated with normal saline and 0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100% contrast material dilutions, using either nonionic hyperosmolar contrast, or nonionic iso-osmolar contrast. The tubes were submerged in a glass basin containing a solution with a pH of 4. Every week the tubes were visually inspected to determine the integrity of the balloons, and the diameter of the balloons was measured with a caliper. The tests were repeated every week for a total of 12 weeks. The MIC balloons deflated slightly faster over time than the Tri-Funnel balloons. The Tri-Funnel balloons remained relatively stable over the study period for the different concentrations of contrast materials. The deflation rates of the MIC balloons were proportionally related to the concentration of saline and inversely related to the concentration of the contrast material. At high contrast material concentrations, solidification of the balloons was observed. In conclusion, this in vitro study confirms that the use of diluted amounts of nonionic contrast materials is safe for inflating the balloons of two types of balloon-retention feeding tubes. High concentrations of contrast could result in solidification of the balloons and should be avoided.
Literature
1.
go back to reference de Baere T, Chapot R, Kuoch V et al (1999) Percutaneous gastrostomy with fluoroscopic guidance: single-center experience in 500 consecutive cancer patients. Radiology 210:651–654PubMed de Baere T, Chapot R, Kuoch V et al (1999) Percutaneous gastrostomy with fluoroscopic guidance: single-center experience in 500 consecutive cancer patients. Radiology 210:651–654PubMed
2.
go back to reference Dewald CL, Hiette PO, Sewall LE, Fredenberg PG, Palestrant AM (1999) Percutaneous gastrostomy and gastrojejunostomy with gastropexy: experience in 701 procedures. Radiology 211:651–656PubMed Dewald CL, Hiette PO, Sewall LE, Fredenberg PG, Palestrant AM (1999) Percutaneous gastrostomy and gastrojejunostomy with gastropexy: experience in 701 procedures. Radiology 211:651–656PubMed
3.
go back to reference Lee MJ (1997) PEG–Is the E necessary? A comparison of percutaneous and endoscopic gastrostomy. Clin Radiol 52:77PubMedCrossRef Lee MJ (1997) PEG–Is the E necessary? A comparison of percutaneous and endoscopic gastrostomy. Clin Radiol 52:77PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Wollman B, D’Agostino HB, Walus-Wigle JR, Easter DW, Beale A (1995) Radiologic, endoscopic and surgical gastrostomy: an institutional evaluation and meta-analysis of the literature. Radiology 197:699–704PubMed Wollman B, D’Agostino HB, Walus-Wigle JR, Easter DW, Beale A (1995) Radiologic, endoscopic and surgical gastrostomy: an institutional evaluation and meta-analysis of the literature. Radiology 197:699–704PubMed
5.
go back to reference Hoffer EK, Cosgrove JM, Levin DQ, Herskowitz MM, Sclafani SJ (1999) Radiologic gastrojejunostomy and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: a prospective randomized comparison. J Vasc Interv Radiol 10:413–420PubMedCrossRef Hoffer EK, Cosgrove JM, Levin DQ, Herskowitz MM, Sclafani SJ (1999) Radiologic gastrojejunostomy and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: a prospective randomized comparison. J Vasc Interv Radiol 10:413–420PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Funaki B, Peirce R, Lorenz J et al (2001) Comparison of balloon and mushroom retained large bore gastrostomy catheters. AJR 177:359–362PubMed Funaki B, Peirce R, Lorenz J et al (2001) Comparison of balloon and mushroom retained large bore gastrostomy catheters. AJR 177:359–362PubMed
7.
go back to reference Giuliano AW, Yoon HC, Lomis NN, Miller FJ (2000) Fluoroscopically guided percutaneous placement of large-bore gastrostomy and gastrojejunostomy tubes: review of 109 cases. J Vasc Interv Radiol 11:239–246PubMedCrossRef Giuliano AW, Yoon HC, Lomis NN, Miller FJ (2000) Fluoroscopically guided percutaneous placement of large-bore gastrostomy and gastrojejunostomy tubes: review of 109 cases. J Vasc Interv Radiol 11:239–246PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Dinkel HP, Beer KT, Zbären P, Triller J (2002) Establishing radiological percutaneous gastrostomy with balloon-retained tubes as an alternative to endoscopic and surgical gastrostomy in patients with tumours of the head and neck or oesophagus. Br J Radiol 75:371–377PubMed Dinkel HP, Beer KT, Zbären P, Triller J (2002) Establishing radiological percutaneous gastrostomy with balloon-retained tubes as an alternative to endoscopic and surgical gastrostomy in patients with tumours of the head and neck or oesophagus. Br J Radiol 75:371–377PubMed
9.
go back to reference Lyon SM, Haslam PJ, Duke DM, McGrath FP, Lee MJ (2003) De novo placement of button gastrostomy catheters in an adult population: experience in 53 patients. J Vasc Interv Radiol 14:1283–1289PubMed Lyon SM, Haslam PJ, Duke DM, McGrath FP, Lee MJ (2003) De novo placement of button gastrostomy catheters in an adult population: experience in 53 patients. J Vasc Interv Radiol 14:1283–1289PubMed
Metadata
Title
Stability of Balloon-Retention Gastrostomy Tubes with Different Concentrations of Contrast Material: In Vitro Study
Authors
Jorge E. Lopera
Alex Alvarez
Clayton Trimmer
Shellie Josephs
Matthew Anderson
Bart Dolmatch
Publication date
01-01-2009
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology / Issue 1/2009
Print ISSN: 0174-1551
Electronic ISSN: 1432-086X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-008-9355-z

Other articles of this Issue 1/2009

CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology 1/2009 Go to the issue