Background: The long-term outcomes of artificial nutrition in older people with dysphagia remain uncertain. Enteral nutrition via percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is one of the major methods of artificial nutrition. Enteral feeding is indicated for patients with a functional gastrointestinal tract. However, total parenteral nutrition (TPN) is often inappropriately chosen for artificial nutrition in Japan, even in patients with a functional gastrointestinal tract, as PEG has recently been viewed as an unnecessary life-prolonging treatment in Japan. This study aimed to compare the long-term outcomes between PEG and TPN.

Methods: This single-center retrospective cohort study investigated long-term outcomes in older patients with dysphagia who received PEG or TPN between January 2014 and January 2017. The primary outcome was survival time. Secondary outcomes were oral intake recovery, discharge to home, and the incidence of severe pneumonia and sepsis. We performed 1-to-1 propensity score matching using a 0.05 caliper. The Kaplan–Meier method, log-rank test, and Cox regression analysis were used to compare the survival time between groups.

Results: We identified 253 patients who received PEG (n=180) or TPN (n=73). Older patients, those with lower nutritional states, and severe dementia were more likely to receive TPN. Propensity score matching created 55 pairs. Survival time was significantly longer in the PEG group (median, 317 vs 195 days; P=0.017). The hazard ratio for PEG relative to TPN was 0.60 (95% confidence interval: 0.39–0.92; P=0.019). There were no significant differences between the groups in oral intake recovery and discharge to home. The incidence of severe pneumonia was significantly higher in the PEG group (50.9% vs 25.5%, P=0.010), whereas sepsis was significantly higher in the TPN group (10.9% vs 30.9%, P=0.018).

Conclusions: PEG was associated with a significantly longer survival time, a higher incidence of severe pneumonia, and a lower incidence of sepsis compared with TPN.