Successful rigid endoscopic removal of an esophageal subtotally covered nitinol stent 11 months after initial placement

A simplified technique of esophageal self-expandable metallic stent placement without fluoroscopic and endoscopic guidance for treating esophageal carcinoma

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placement with fluoroscopic guidance is a commonly used technique to relieve obstruction in patients with esophageal carcinoma. However, it has disadvantages such as radiation exposure. SEMS placement with endoscopic guidance also has the disadvantages of causing discomfort to patients as the endoscope and SEMS assembly are simultaneously used and it needs two experts for the procedure to be performed. To overcome these disadvantages, a simplified technique for SEMS placement was developed that does not require fluoroscopic or endoscopic guidance. Our objective was to compare the efficacy and safety of this simplified technique with the conventional SEMS placement method.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective study including patients with esophageal carcinoma who underwent SEMS placement for the palliation of dysphagia.

RESULTS

Sixty-two patients were placed on stents for the palliation for esophageal carcinoma, with 46 patients in the conventional technique group (group A) and 16 in the simplified technique group (group B). The duration of the procedure was considerably lesser in group B than in group A (2 min 53 s vs. 15 min 4 s, p=0.001). The technical success rate achieved in groups A and B were 97.82% and 100%, respectively. SEMS placement required two experts in the conventional technique whereas the simplified technique required only one expert.

CONCLUSION

The advantages of the simplified technique are as follows: technical ease, cost-effectiveness, no exposure to radiation, requirement of minimal manpower, and less time-consuming; these advantages make it the technique day-care procedure.

In situ cooling with ice water for the easier removal of self-expanding nitinol stents

BACKGROUND

It is yet to be determined what effects temperature has on the properties of nitinol in order to simplify the process of removing nitinol self-expanding metal stents (SEMS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We describe the procedure for removal of SEMS in a total of 11 cases with 9 patients. A study involving cooling of nitinol stents in situ with ice water just before their removal was attempted.

RESULTS

All stents were removed successfully. In partially covered and in fully covered stents, the stent rigidity was noticeably reduced following cooling. Stent removal was performed by inversion, which was achieved by pulling on the stent from its distal end. No adverse events were observed during this trial.

CONCLUSION

The higher pliability of the stents after ice-water cooling facilitates stent removal. With this method, a mobilization of all stents by the invagination technique was achieved. The separation of the uncoated stent ends from the intestinal wall by the invagination technique, as well as the mucosal vasoconstriction resulting from the cooling, lead to an easier SEMS removal and may serve to prevent severe bleeding of the mucosal wall during this process.

Safety of endoscopic removal of self-expandable stents after treatment of benign esophageal diseases

BACKGROUND

Temporary placement of self-expandable stents has been increasingly used for the management of benign esophageal diseases.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety of endoscopic removal of esophageal self-expandable stents placed for the treatment of benign esophageal diseases.

DESIGN

Multicenter retrospective study.

SETTING

Six tertiary care centers in the United States and Europe.

PATIENTS

A total of 214 patients with benign esophageal diseases undergoing endoscopic stent removal.

INTERVENTION

Endoscopic stent removal.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Endoscopic techniques for stent removal, time to stent removal, and adverse events related to stent removal.

RESULTS

A total of 214 patients underwent a total of 329 stent extractions. Stents were mainly placed for refractory strictures (49.2%) and fistulae (49.8%). Of the removed stents, 52% were fully covered self-expandable metal stents (FCSEMSs), 28.6% were partially covered self-expandable metal stents (PCSEMSs), and 19.5% were self-expandable plastic stents. A total of 35 (10.6%) procedure-related adverse events were reported, including 7 (2.1%) major adverse events. Multivariate analysis revealed that use of PCSEMSs (P < .001) was a risk factor for adverse events during stent removal. Favorable factors for successful stent removal were FCSEMSs (P ≤ .012) and stent migration (P = .010). No significant associations were found for stent indwelling time (P = .145) and stent embedding (P = .194).

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective analysis, only tertiary care centers.

CONCLUSIONS

With an acceptable major adverse event rate of 2.1%, esophageal stent removal in the setting of benign disease was found to be a safe and feasible procedure. FCSEMSs were more successfully removed than self-expandable plastic stents and PCSEMSs. Adverse events caused by stent removal were not time dependent.

Endoscopic removal of self-expandable metal stents from the esophagus (with video)

BACKGROUND

Self-expandable metals stents (SEMSs) have increasingly been used as a temporary device to bridge chemoradiotherapy in patients with malignant esophageal disease or in patients with benign esophageal defects or stenosis.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the outcome of removal of SEMSs in a large cohort of patients with benign and malignant esophageal disease.

DESIGN

Observational study with standardized treatment and follow-up.

SETTING

Single university center.

PATIENTS

Between 2001 and 2010, 95 consecutive patients referred for endoscopic SEMS extraction were included.

INTERVENTIONS

Endoscopic stent removal.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Technical and functional outcome and complications.

RESULTS

A total of 124 stent extractions were undertaken in 95 patients; both partially covered (68%) and fully covered (32%) SEMSs were removed. Three patients had 2 overlapping SEMSs in place. Successful primary removal was achieved in 89%; the secondary removal rate was 96%. Uncomplicated primary removal rate was significantly higher for fully covered versus partially covered stents (P = .035) and for single versus overlapping stents (P = .033). Patients with a complicated stent removal had the stent in place significantly longer compared with patients with an uncomplicated primary stent removal (126 days vs 28 days; P = .01). Surgical removal was required in 3 patients (2.4%). Six moderate and severe complications (5%) related to the endoscopic extraction occurred.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective, nonrandomized study design.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary endoscopic removal of an SEMS is feasible in the majority of patients with benign and malignant esophageal disease. A longer time that a stent is in place and the use of partially covered SEMSs both impede removal. Moreover, overlapping SEMSs should be avoided for temporary use because stent disintegration and subsequent complications may occur.