345 - Primary Insertion of Low-Profile Balloon Gastrostomy Tubes versus Conventional Corflo PEG Tubes in Children: A Comparative Case-Control Study

Wednesday, April 15, 2026

11:15 AM - 11:24 AM ET

Presenting Author(s)

MK

Mert Koroglu, MD

Clinical Fellow, Pediatric Interventional Radiology
The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada

Author/Co-author(s)

GC

George Chiramel, MBBS

Staff radiologist
The Hospital for Sick Children, Canada
AA

Afsaneh Amirabadi, PhD

Research Program Manager
The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada
AG

Alessandro Gasparetto, MD

Assistant Professor
Sickkids/ University of Toronto, Canada
DP

Dimitri Parra, MBBS

Staff radiologist
The Hospital for Sick Children, Canada
NS

Nicholas Shkumat

Medical physicist
The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada
Joao G. Amaral, MD (he/him/his)

Pediatric Interventional Radiologist
The Hospital for Sick Children, Canada

Purpose: To compare clinical outcomes, complications, procedural efficiency, and radiation exposure between primary insertion of low-profile balloon gastrostomy tubes using a retrograde (“push”) technique and conventional Corflo PEG tubes using an antegrade (“pull”) technique in pediatric patients.

Materials and Methods: This single-center, retrospective case-control study included 142 children who underwent image-guided gastrostomy tube insertion between November 2021 and November 2024. Seventy-one consecutive patients receiving primary low-profile balloon G-tubes were weight- and age-matched to 71 patients receiving conventional Corflo PEG tubes. Clinical, procedural, and follow-up data were extracted from institutional databases and analyzed, including procedural time, radiation dose indices, adverse events (classified using the SIR system), and subsequent interventions.

Results: Median procedural time was shorter in the low-profile group (64 vs 76 minutes, p < 0.001). Radiation exposure was lower with low-profile tubes (PKA 0.74 vs 1.25 Gy·cm², p = 0.04; Ka,r 4.7 vs 7.7 mGy, p = 0.05). Severe adverse events were less frequent in the low-profile group (peritonitis 1.5% vs 5.6%; severe stoma infection 13% vs 18%). Nearly all Corflo patients (86%) required an additional general anesthesia for elective tube exchange, compared with none in the low-profile group. Nutritional outcomes and overall complication rates were comparable between groups.

Conclusion: Primary retrograde insertion of low-profile balloon gastrostomy tubes in children is a safe and effective alternative to conventional Corflo PEG tubes. This approach reduces procedure time, radiation exposure, and the need for repeat anesthesia, while maintaining equivalent nutritional outcomes. Wider adoption may enhance patient and caregiver experience and optimize healthcare resource utilization in pediatric enteral nutrition.