Direct comparison
Gastrostomy Tube vs Nasogastric Tube: Differences
Gastrostomy tube vs nasogastric tube compared: FDA class and product codes, plus Cochrane 2015 results on feeding failure, mortality and pneumonia.
Written and maintained by CASRAI Editorial Board
Last updated
Ask CASRAI · free to try
Ask about Gastrostomy Tube vs Nasogastric Tube: Differences
Ask your first 2 questions free below. Subscribers get 150 a day for $29 a month.
An AI assistant specialized in research administration. It cites the sources behind every answer, labels web answers and says when it can't answer.
Answers draw on CASRAI's guides and dictionary plus the federal and funder documents we index: Federal Register, Grants.gov, Regulations.gov and UKRI.
Works on this site and inside Claude, Cursor and the AI tools you already use.
Everything CASRAI publishes — this page, the dictionary, the guides and the news — stays free to read, with no account and no card.
How do Gastrostomy tube (G-tube), Nasogastric tube (NG tube) compare side by side?
The table below compares Gastrostomy tube (G-tube), Nasogastric tube (NG tube) across 11 procurement-relevant dimensions, from where the tube sits through source.
Side-by-side comparison
| Dimension | Gastrostomy tube (G-tube) | Nasogastric tube (NG tube) |
|---|---|---|
| Where the tube sits | Enters the stomach through the abdominal wall (gastrostomy). "Percutaneous" means through the skin; PEG is the endoscopic form studied in the Cochrane review. | Passes through the nose into the stomach (the name: naso- plus gastric). |
| Typical duration noted in the literature | The Cochrane background says PEG is generally used when enteral nutrition is needed for a longer time period. | Described as a classic, time-proven feeding technique; the Cochrane background notes that prolonged use can cause lesions to the nasal wing, chronic sinusitis, gastro-oesophageal reflux and aspiration pneumonia. |
| FDA regulation | Same regulation, 21 CFR 876.5980; the generic type list names "feeding tube" and "gastroenterostomy tube". | 21 CFR 876.5980, "Gastrointestinal tube and accessories"; the generic type list names "nasogastric tube". |
| FDA device class | Class II (special controls), under the same regulation. | Class II (special controls). The "dissolvable nasogastric feed tube guide" accessory is Class I. |
| FDA product codes (openFDA classification database) | Listed mainly as kits: PRP "Balloon Gastrostomy Tube Kit", PSG "Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Kit", PSH "Percutaneous Replacement Gastrostomy Tube Kit", PSF "Non-Balloon Replacement Gastrostomy System", PSK "Replacement Gastrostomy Feeding Catheter Tray". | BSS "Tube, Nasogastric"; FPD "Tube, Feeding"; PSB "Nasogastric Feed Tube Kit". |
| Feeding failure in adults with swallowing disturbances (Cochrane 2015) | Lower proportion of failure with PEG: RR 0.18 (95% CI 0.05 to 0.59), 8 studies, 408 participants, low-quality evidence. | Higher proportion of intervention failure (feeding interruption, tube blockage or leakage, non-adherence). |
| Mortality (Cochrane 2015) | No significant difference: RR 0.86 (95% CI 0.58 to 1.28), 9 studies, 644 participants, very low-quality evidence. | No significant difference between groups. |
| Aspiration pneumonia (Cochrane 2015) | RR 0.70 (95% CI 0.46 to 1.06), 7 studies, 645 participants, low-quality evidence; the interval includes 1, so the difference is not statistically significant. | Not significantly different from PEG. |
| Small stroke trial (Norton et al., BMJ 1996) | 16 patients: 2 (12%) died within 6 weeks; all 16 received the full prescribed feed; 0 treatment failures. Small, dated, single-condition trial; the later Cochrane pooled analysis found no significant mortality difference. | 14 patients after acute dysphagic stroke: 8 (57%) died within 6 weeks; 10 of 14 (71%) lost at least one day's feed; 3 treatment failures. |
| Who decides which to use | Same: an individual clinical decision. The review's background links longer expected need for enteral nutrition with PEG. | Decided by the patient's care team for the individual's condition; neither the regulation nor the review gives a general rule. |
| Source | Same sources, plus Norton B et al., BMJ 1996;312(7022):13-16, PMC2349687 (read 2026-10-30). | 21 CFR 876.5980 (law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/21/876.5980, read 2026-10-30); openFDA device classification API (api.fda.gov/device/classification.json, read 2026-10-30); Gomes CA Jr et al., Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015;(5):CD008096, PubMed 25997528 (read 2026-10-30). |
Common questions
Common questions about Gastrostomy tube (G-tube) vs Nasogastric tube (NG tube)
Is a G-tube the same as an NG tube?
+
No. A nasogastric tube passes through the nose into the stomach, while a gastrostomy tube enters the stomach through the abdominal wall. They are different devices, although the FDA regulates both under 21 CFR 876.5980 as gastrointestinal tubes and accessories (Class II).
Is a gastric tube the same as a nasogastric tube?
+
"Gastric tube" is a loose phrase. The FDA regulation lists "feeding tube", "gastroenterostomy tube" and "nasogastric tube" as separate generic types, so the specific name (nasogastric or gastrostomy) is what identifies the device.
Does a gastrostomy tube work better than a nasogastric tube?
+
In a 2015 Cochrane review of adults with swallowing disturbances, feeding failed less often with PEG than with NG tubes (RR 0.18, low-quality evidence), but mortality (very low quality) and aspiration pneumonia (low quality) did not differ significantly. The evidence is limited to that population, so it is not a general ranking; the choice rests with the care team.
Are NG tubes and gastrostomy tubes regulated the same way by the FDA?
+
Both sit under 21 CFR 876.5980 and are Class II (special controls). Only the dissolvable nasogastric feed tube guide accessory is Class I. The FDA's product codes differ: BSS for the nasogastric tube, and kit codes such as PSG and PSH for gastrostomy.
Going deeper
