Enteral nutrition during the treatment of head and neck carcinoma: is a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube preferable to a nasogastric tube?

Abstract

Although patients treated for head and neck carcinoma find that the PEG tube is a more acceptable route for enteral nutrition than the NG tube, in the authors' experience, a PEG tube was required for longer periods of time and was associated with more persistent dysphagia and an increased need for pharyngoesophageal dilatation. A randomized prospective trial is needed to test these observations.