An antireflux stent versus conventional stents for palliation of distal esophageal or cardia cancer: a randomized clinical study

Anti-reflux versus conventional self-expanding metal stents in the palliation of esophageal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and study aims  Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) are an effective palliative endoscopic therapy to reduce dysphagia in esophageal cancer. Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a relatively common complaint after non-valved conventional SEMS placement. Therefore, valved self-expanding metal stents (SEMS-V) were designed to reduce the rate of GERD symptoms. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the two stents. Material and methods  This was a systematic review and meta-analysis including only randomized clinical trials (RCT) comparing the outcomes between SEMS-V and non-valved self-expanding metal stents (SEMS-NV) following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. Data were analyzed with Review Manager Software. Quality of evidence was evaluated using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation guidelines. Results  Ten randomized clinical trials including a total of 467 patients, 234 in the SEMS-V group and 233 in the SEMS-NV group, were included. There were no statistically significant differences regarding GERD qualitative analysis (RD -0.17; 95 % CI -0.67, 0.33; P  = 0.5) and quantitative analysis (SMD -0.22; 95 % CI -0.53, 0.08; P  = 0.15) technical success (RD -0.03; 95 % CI -0.07, 0.01; P  = 0.16), dysphagia improvement (RD -0.07; 95 % CI -0.19, 0.06; P  = 0.30), and adverse events (RD 0.07; 95 % CI -0.07, 0.20; P  = 0.32). Conclusions  Both SEMS-V and SEMS-NV are safe and effective in the palliation of esophageal cancer with similar rates of GERD, dysphagia relief, technical success, adverse events, stent migration, stent obstruction, bleeding, and improvement of the quality of life.

Network meta-analysis of palliative treatments in patients with esophageal cancer

We aimed to compare available palliative treatments in terms of survival and to rank these treatments for esophageal cancer. Web of Science, Medline, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Embase were searched. The risk of bias was judged using Cochrane's tools. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the Chi² test and was quantified by I². The results were summarized using the hazard ratio (HR). The rank probability for each treatment was calculated using the p-score. Nineteen RCTs met the eligibility criteria for this study. Treatments formed three networks including networks A, B, and C. The Ultraflex stent (p-score = 0.93), irradiation stent (p-score = 0.89), and thermal ablative therapy (p-score = 0.85) were the first ranking treatments in networks A, B, and C, respectively. Based on the results of this network meta-analysis, it appears that the ultraflex stent, the irradiation stent, and thermal ablative therapy are the better treatments among the networks.

Efficacy and safety of standard and anti-reflux self-expanding metal stent: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Self-expanding metal stents are the main palliative treatment modality for unresectable esophageal cancer. Gastroesophageal reflux is a common adverse outcome after placement of esophageal stent for cancer involving the gastroesophageal junction and the gastric cardia. Anti-reflux stents with valve have been designed to prevent the acid reflux. The superiority of anti-reflux stent over standard stent in preventing gastroesophageal reflux has not been established well. This study compares the anti-reflux stent and the standard stent in terms of their efficacy to prevent acid reflux.

AIM

To compare the standard and the anti-reflux stents in terms of their efficacy, safety, and complications.

METHODS

The meta-analysis included 8 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to compare pooled outcomes of total 395 patients. Primary outcomes include improvement in reflux symptoms and dysphagia score. Secondary outcomes include complications of stent migration, occlusion, and bleeding.

RESULTS

A total of eight RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. Compared to the standard stent, the anti-reflux stent showed a trend towards reduction in the dysphagia score without reaching a statistical significance [Standardized mean difference (SMD): -0.33 (-0.71, 0.05); P = 0.09, I²: 37%]. There was no statistical difference in the gastrointestinal reflux (GER) scores between the two types of stents [SMD: -0.17 (-0.78, 0.45); P = 0.008, I²: 74%]. Compared to standard stent, anti-reflux stent showed no difference in the risk of stent migration [OR: 1.37 (0.66, 2.83); P = 0.40, I²: 0 %], bleeding [OR: 1.43 (0.40, 5.13); P = 0.59, I²: 0 %], and obstruction [OR: 1.66 (0.60, 4.60); P = 0.33, I²: 0 %].

CONCLUSION

Traditional self-expanding standard esophageal stent and anti-reflux stent with valve are similar in terms of outcomes and complications.

Oesophageal stenting: Status quo and future challenges

Oesophageal stents are widely used for palliating dysphagia from malignant obstruction. They are also used with increasing frequency in the treatment of oesophageal perforation, as well as benign strictures from a variety of causes. Improved oncological treatments have led to prolonged survival of patients treated with palliative intent; as a consequence, stents need to function and last longer in order to avoid repeat procedures. There is also increasing need for meticulous procedure planning, careful selection of the device most appropriate for the individual patient and planned follow-up. Furthermore, as more patients are cured, there will be more issues with resultant long-term side-effects, such as recalcitrant strictures due to radiotherapy or anastomotic scarring, which will have to be addressed. Stent design needs to keep up with the progress of cancer treatment, in order to offer patients the best possible long-term result. This review article attempts to illustrate the changing realities in oesophageal stenting, differences in current stent designs and behaviour, as well as the pressing need to refine and modify devices in order to meet the new challenges.

Treatment for unresectable or metastatic oesophageal cancer: current evidence and trends

Approximately half of the patients diagnosed with oesophageal cancer present with unresectable or metastatic disease. Treatment for these patients aims to control dysphagia and other cancer-related symptoms, improve quality of life and prolong survival. In the past 25 years, modestly improved outcomes have been achieved in the treatment of patients with inoperable non-metastatic cancer who are medically not fit for surgery or have unresectable, locally advanced disease. Concurrent chemoradiotherapy offers the best outcomes in these patients. In distant metastatic oesophageal cancer, several double-agent or triple-agent chemotherapy regimens have been established as first-line treatment options. In addition, long-term results of multiple large randomized phase III trials using additional targeted therapies have been published in the past few years, affecting contemporary clinical practice and future research directions. For the local treatment of malignant dysphagia, various treatment options have emerged, and self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement is currently the most widely applied method. Besides the continuous search for improved SEMS designs to minimize the risk of associated complications, efforts have been made to develop and evaluate the efficacy of antireflux stents and irradiation stents. This Review outlines the current evidence and ongoing trends in the different modern-day, multidisciplinary interventions for patients with unresectable or metastatic oesophageal cancer with an emphasis on key randomized trials.

Complications of stent placement in patients with esophageal cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background

Palliative treatments and stents are necessary for relieving dysphagia in patients with esophageal cancer. The aim of this study was to simultaneously compare available treatments in terms of complications.

Methods

Web of Science, Medline, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Embase were searched. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the Chi² test and was quantified by I². The results of this study were summarized in terms of Risk Ratio (RR). The random effects model was used to report the results. The rank probability for each treatment was calculated using the p-score.

Results

Out of 17855 references, 24 RCTs reported complications including treatment related death (TRD), bleeding, stent migration, aspiration, severe pain and fistula formation. In the ranking of treatments, thermal ablative therapy (p-score = 0.82), covered Evolution® stent (p-score = 0.70), brachytherapy (p-score = 0.72) and antireflux stent (p-score = 0.74) were better treatments in the network of TRD. Thermal ablative therapy (p-score = 0.86), the conventional stent (p-score = 0.62), covered Evolution® stent (p-score = 0.96) and brachytherapy (p-score = 0.82) were better treatments in the network of bleeding complications. Covered Evolution® (p-score = 0.78), uncovered (p-score = 0.88) and irradiation stents (p-score = 0.65) were better treatments in network of stent migration complications. In the network of severe pain, Conventional self-expandable nitinol alloy covered stent (p-score = 0.73), polyflex (p-score = 0.79), latex prosthesis (p-score = 0.96) and brachytherapy (p-score = 0.65) were better treatments.

Conclusion

According to our results, thermal ablative therapy, covered Evolution® stents, brachytherapy, and antireflux stents are associated with a lower risk of TRD. Moreover, thermal ablative therapy, conventional, covered Evolution® and brachytherapy had lower risks of bleeding. Overall, fewer complications were associated with covered Evolution® stent and brachytherapy.

Palliation of Dysphagia in Carcinoma Esophagus

Esophageal carcinoma has a special place in gastrointestinal carcinomas because it contains two main types, namely, squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma. Carcinoma esophagus patients require some form of palliation because of locally advanced stage or distant metastasis, where it cannot be subjected to curable treatment with surgery and chemoradiation. Many modalities of palliation of dysphagia are available, but the procedure with least morbidity, mortality, and long-term palliation of dysphagia needs to be chosen for the patient. This study aims to discuss the recent trends in palliation of dysphagia with promising results and the most suitable therapy for palliation of dysphagia in a given patient. A total of 64 articles that were published between years 2005 and 2015 on various modes of palliation of dysphagia in carcinoma esophagus were studied, which were mainly randomized and prospective studies. Through this study, we conclude that stents are the first choice of therapy for palliation, which is safe and cost-effective, and they can be combined with either radiotherapy or chemotherapy for long-term palliation of dysphagia with good quality of life. Radiotherapy can be used as a second-line treatment modality.

Gastrointestinal stenting: Current status and imaging features

The use of stents in the gastrointestinal tract has been subjected to major changes. Initially, the use of stents was restricted to malignant strictures in patients with metastatic disease. But thanks to reduction of the morbidity and mortality rates, they are now used with curative intention and in patients with benign diseases after careful selection. However, for patients presenting with colon obstruction due to an advanced colon carcinoma, the mortality and morbidity are still high. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of indications, techniques and further developments of the stents in the gastrointestinal tract and to highlight the predominant role of multidetector row computed tomography (MDCT) in the detection of potential complications.

Interventions for dysphagia in oesophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

Most patients with oesophageal and gastro-oesophageal carcinoma are diagnosed at an advanced stage and require palliative intervention. Although there are many kinds of interventions, the optimal one for the palliation of dysphagia remains unclear. This review updates the previous version published in 2009.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review was to systematically analyse and summarise the efficacy of different interventions used in the palliation of dysphagia in primary oesophageal and gastro-oesophageal carcinoma.

SEARCH METHODS

To find new studies for this updated review, in January 2014 we searched, according to the Cochrane Upper Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Diseases model, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL; and major conference proceedings (up to January 2014).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included in which patients with inoperable or unresectable primary oesophageal cancer underwent palliative treatment. Different interventions like rigid plastic intubation, self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) insertion, brachytherapy, external beam radiotherapy, chemotherapy, oesophageal bypass surgery, chemical and thermal ablation therapy, either head-to-head or in combination, were included. The primary outcome was dysphagia improvement. Secondary outcomes included recurrent dysphagia, technical success, procedure related mortality, 30-day mortality, adverse effects and quality of life.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data collection and analysis were performed in accordance with the methods of the Cochrane Upper Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Diseases Review Group.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 3684 patients from 53 studies. SEMS insertion was safer and more effective than plastic tube insertion. Thermal and chemical ablative therapy provided comparable dysphagia palliation but had an increased requirement for re-interventions and for adverse effects. Anti-reflux stents provided comparable dysphagia palliation to conventional metal stents. Some anti-reflux stents might have reduced gastro-oesophageal reflux and complications. Newly-designed double-layered nitinol (Niti-S) stents were preferable due to longer survival time and fewer complications compared to simple Niti-S stents. Brachytherapy might be a suitable alternative to SEMS in providing a survival advantage and possibly a better quality of life, and might provide better results when combined with argon plasma coagulation or external beam radiation therapy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Self-expanding metal stent insertion is safe, effective and quicker in palliating dysphagia compared to other modalities. However, high-dose intraluminal brachytherapy is a suitable alternative and might provide additional survival benefit with a better quality of life. Some anti-reflux stents and newly-designed stents lead to longer survival and fewer complications compared to conventional stents. Combinations of brachytherapy with self-expanding metal stent insertion or radiotherapy are preferable due to the reduced requirement for re-interventions. Rigid plastic tube insertion, dilatation alone or in combination with other modalities, and chemotherapy alone are not recommended for palliation of dysphagia due to a high incidence of delayed complications and recurrent dysphagia.

How are palliative care cancer populations characterized in randomized controlled trials? A literature review

CONTEXT

The difficulties in defining a palliative care patient accentuate the need to provide stringent descriptions of the patient population in palliative care research.

OBJECTIVES

To conduct a systematic literature review with the aim of identifying which key variables have been used to describe adult palliative care cancer populations in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

The data sources used were MEDLINE (1950 to January 25, 2010) and Embase (1980 to January 25, 2010), limited to RCTs in adult cancer patients with incurable disease. Forty-three variables were systematically extracted from the eligible articles.

RESULTS

The review includes 336 articles reporting RCTs in palliative care cancer patients. Age (98%), gender (90%), cancer diagnosis (89%), performance status (45%), and survival (45%) were the most frequently reported variables. A large number of other variables were much less frequently reported.

CONCLUSION

A substantial variation exists in how palliative care cancer populations are described in RCTs. Few variables are consistently registered and reported. There is a clear need to standardize the reporting. The results from this work will serve as the basis for an international Delphi process with the aim of reaching consensus on a minimum set of descriptors to characterize a palliative care cancer population.

Evidence-based recommendations on upper gastrointestinal tract stenting: a report from the stent study group of the korean society of gastrointestinal endoscopy

Endoscopic stents have evolved dramatically over the past 20 years. With the introduction of uncovered self-expanding metal stents in the early 1990s, they are primarily used to palliate symptoms of malignant obstruction in patients with inoperable gastrointestinal (GI) cancer. At present, stents have emerged as an effective, safe, and less invasive alternative for the treatment of malignant GI obstruction. Clinical decisions about stent placement should be made based on the exact understanding of the patient's condition. These recommendations based on a critical review of the available data and expert consensus are made for the purpose of providing endoscopists with information about stent placement. These can be helpful for management of patients with inoperable cancer or various nonmalignant conditions in the upper GI tract.

Antireflux stents versus conventional stents for management of stenosis of distal esophageal and gastric cardia: An systematic review

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of anti-reflux stents versus conventional stents for the management of stenosis of distal esophageal and gastric cardia in patients with esophageal cancer.

METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs)that evaluated anti-reflux stents versus conventional stents in the treatment of stenosis of distal esophageal and gastric cardia in patients with esophageal cancer were electronically searched from the PubMed (1978-2011), EMbase (1966-2011), CBM (1978-2011), Cochrane Library (2011, Issue 11) and CNKI (1979-2011) databases, and relevant published and unpublished data and their references (either in English or Chinese), were also searched manually. The data were extracted and the methodological quality of the incorporated studies was evaluated by two reviewers independently. The RevMan 5.1 software was used for meta-analysis.

RESULTS: Five RCTs involving 234 patients were included. Meta-analysis showed that anti-reflux stents and conventional stents had no significant differences in terms of the incidences of pain (RR = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.16, 1.06), stent migration (RR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.50, 2.11), obstruction (RR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.52, 1.99), gastroesophageal reflux (RR = 1.68, 95% CI: 0.52, 5.48), bleeding (RR = 1.39, 95% CI: 0.44, 4.40), and perforation of the esophagus and stomach (RR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.25, 2.00).

CONCLUSION: The overall curative efficacy of anti-reflux stents for the stenosis of distal esophageal and gastric cardia in patients with esophageal cancer is not better than that of conventional stents. Because of the generally low quality and a small number of studies in the incorporated research, the above conclusion remains to be validated by carrying out more randomized controlled trials with multiple center samples and enough follow-up time.

Outcomes following oesophageal stent insertion for palliation of malignant strictures: A large single centre series

BACKGROUND

Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) are an accepted intervention for malignant dysphagia. Stents vary in ease of insertion, removability, migration and occlusion rates. This series reports the complications, morbidity and mortality associated with several SEMS.

METHOD

A prospective database of patients undergoing fluoroscopic guided oesophageal stent insertion for malignancy between June 2001 and June 2009 was analysed. Patient demographics, intervention outcomes and tumour variables were correlated with stent failure and patient survival. Multivariate analysis was performed to evaluate predictors for stent failure.

RESULTS

Two hundred and seventy-three stents were deployed using nine different types of SEMS. The median Mellow-Pinkas dysphagia score significantly improved from 3 to 1 post-stent insertion (P < 0.001), with a technical success rate of 98%. Stent complications occurred in 95 (36%) patients [recurrent dysphagia n = 49 (19%), migration n = 24 and occlusion n = 25]. Multivariate analysis demonstrates that the covered Niti S stent fails significantly more than the double-layered Niti S stent (OR = 4, P < 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Oesophageal stent insertion provides good palliation for malignant dysphagia, however recurrent dysphagia remains a problem. This major complication occurs more frequently with covered Niti S stents than double-layered Niti S stents. This finding may aid the stent choice used in advanced oesophageal malignancy.

Technical feasibility and safety of a new, implantable reflux control system to prevent gastroesophageal reflux in patients with stents placed through the lower esophageal sphincter (with video)

BACKGROUND

When an esophageal stent is placed through the lower esophageal sphincter (LES), gastroesophageal reflux symptoms may persist despite high-dose proton pump inhibitor therapy. A recently developed, short segment, uncovered nitinol stent with a tricuspid-like valve can be placed inside a previously placed esophageal stent.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the technical feasibility and safety of a reflux control system (RCS) in distally placed esophageal stents.

DESIGN

A prospective case series.

SETTING

Two tertiary-care referral centers.

PATIENTS

This study involved 10 patients who had an "open" stent placed through the LES and 1 patient with severe bile reflux after esophagojejunostomy.

INTERVENTION

Placement of an RCS with fluoroscopic and (in selected cases) endoscopic guidance, from April to October 2010.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Technical success of RCS placement and complications.

RESULTS

Placement of an RCS was successful on the first attempt in all patients; complete expansion to the wall of the host stent was confirmed by fluoroscopy in all cases. In 3 patients, the host stent migrated in <1 month with the RCS still inside. In 8 patients, the RCS was in place for a median of 134 days (range 33-225 days). Three patients died because of malignant disease progression. Eight RCSs were removed endoscopically, together with the host stent without complications. RCS migration did not occur.

LIMITATIONS

Small number of patients, nonrandomized design, lack of pH measurements.

CONCLUSION

Placement of an RCS in a host stent is technically feasible and safe. An RCS can be considered in symptomatic patients with open esophageal stents to prevent gastroesophageal reflux.

WITHDRAWN: Interventions for dysphagia in oesophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

The majority of oesophageal and gastro-oesophageal cancers are diagnosed at an advanced stage and palliative treatment is the realistic management option for most patients. The optimal intervention for the palliation of dysphagia in these patients has not been established.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically analyse and summarise the efficacy of different interventions used in the palliation of dysphagia in primary oesophageal carcinoma.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We undertook a search according to the Cochrane Upper Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Diseases model using the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL and major conference proceedings up to August 2005. The literature search was re-run in August 2006 and March 2007.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with inoperable or unresectable primary oesophageal cancer who underwent palliative treatment. We included rigid plastic intubation, self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) insertion, brachytherapy, external beam radiotherapy, chemotherapy, oesophageal bypass surgery, chemical and thermal ablation therapy, either head-to-head or in combination. The primary outcome was dysphagia improvement. Secondary outcomes included recurrent dysphagia, technical success, procedure related mortality, 30-day mortality, adverse effects and quality of life.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One author assessed the eligibility criteria of each study and extracted data regarding outcomes and factors affecting risk of bias.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 2542 patients from 40 studies. SEMS insertion is safer and more effective than plastic tube insertion. Thermal and chemical ablative therapy provide comparable dysphagia palliation but have an increased requirement for re-interventions and adverse effects. Anti-reflux stents provide comparable dysphagia palliation to conventional metal stents. Some anti-reflux stents might reduce gastro-oesophageal reflux compared to conventional metal stents. Brachytherapy might be a suitable alternative to SEMS in providing a survival advantage and possibly a better quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Self-expanding metal stent insertion is safe, effective and quicker in palliating dysphagia compared to other modalities. However, high-dose intraluminal brachytherapy is a suitable alternative and might provide additional survival benefit with a better quality of life. Self-expanding metal stent insertion and brachytherapy provide comparable palliation to endoscopic ablative therapy but are preferable due to the reduced requirement for re-interventions. Rigid plastic tube insertion, dilatation alone or in combination with other modalities, chemotherapy alone, combination chemoradiotherapy and bypass surgery are not recommended for palliation of dysphagia due to a high incidence of delayed complications and recurrent dysphagia.

Role of esophageal stents in the nutrition support of patients with esophageal malignancy

Endoluminal stents are commonly used for palliative treatment of dysphagia in patients with advanced esophageal malignancies. The most frequently used esophageal stents are self-expanding metal stents. Removable self-expanding plastic stents have recently been used in the management of esophageal cancer patients treated with curative intent. Esophageal stents effectively alleviate dysphagia in most patients, and stent placement is associated with a low rate of complications. This article reviews the use of self-expanding esophageal stents in patients with esophageal cancer. Nutrition considerations following stent placement are addressed.

The use of self-expanding stents in esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer palliation: a meta-analysis and meta-regression analysis of outcomes

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to examine the impact of self-expanding stents versus locoregional treatment modalities in the setting of esophageal cancer palliation.

METHODS

The present meta-analysis pooled the effects of outcomes of 1,027 patients enrolled in 16 randomized controlled trials.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis revealed an advantage to the use of stents compared to locoregional modality treatments with respect to the number of patients requiring reinterventions, although the latter treatment arm had a higher 1-year survival. No difference was observed between the use of the antireflux stents and conventional stents in relieving reflux. Previous chemoradiotherapy had no impact on complications, procedural deaths, and overall patient survival. Differences in outcomes among stents were minimal.

CONCLUSIONS

Conventional self-expanding stents and anti-reflux stents are equally effective. Although the risk difference for 1-year survival favoured locoregional palliative treatment modalities, the latter were associated with a higher number of patients requiring reintervention.

Malignant esophageal dysphagia palliation using insertion of a covered Ultraflex stent without fluoroscopy: a prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of placing self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) without fluoroscopy for palliation of malignant esophageal or esophagogastric strictures.

METHODS

From January 2003 to June 2008, a prospective observational study investigated the placement of covered proximal-release Ultraflex stents without fluoroscopy in nonoperable malignant esophageal and esophagogastric strictures. The technical success as well as the early and late complications (perforation, migration, severe gastroesophageal reflux, hematemesis, and reobstruction due to tissue ingrowth or overgrowth) were recorded. Dysphagia before and after stent placement was scored on a 5-point scale. All the patients were observed monthly in the outpatient clinic or by telephone contact until death.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 89 patients (16 women; mean age, 69.54±7.1 years) with dysphagia due to inoperable esophageal or esophagogastric malignant strictures (29 squamous cell cancers, 52 adenocarcinomas, and 8 obstructive malignant extrinsic compressions). The mean stricture length was 6.2±2.8 cm. Endoscopic deployment was achieved for 83 patients (93.2%), with accurate stent positioning in all the patients except one. An adequate relief of symptoms was noted for 82 of the patients (92.1%). During the follow-up period, 36 patients (43.4%) had recurrent dysphagia, caused by tumor overgrowth in 32 cases and stent migration in 4 cases, after an average time of 82 days (range 67-216 days). A stent-in-stent procedure was performed in 27 cases. For two patients, a third stent-in-stent needed to be placed after 85 and 216 days, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In most cases, SEMSs can be accurately and safely positioned without fluoroscopy for palliative treatment of malignant esophageal dysphagia.

Antireflux stent versus conventional stent in the palliation of distal esophageal cancer. A randomized, multicenter clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

Patients with incurable distal esophageal or cardia cancer often need palliative stenting to relieve their dysphagia but stents passing through the cardia can cause reflux and aspiration, leading to a reduced health-related quality of life (HRQL). This study addressed the hypothesis that antireflux stenting improves HRQL compared to conventional stenting.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In a single-blind, multicenter, randomized trial in patients with inoperable esophageal or cardia cancer requiring palliative stenting passing through the cardia, 65 patients were stented. Patients received either an antireflux stent (Esophageal Z-Stent with Dua antireflux valve; n = 28) or a conventional stent (Esophageal Z-stent, Ultraflex or Wallstent; n = 37). Validated questionnaires (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OES18) were used to collect information on HRQL at baseline and 1 and 3 months after stenting. Main outcome measurements were differences in HRQL scores between baseline and 1 and 3 months after stenting.

RESULTS

Scores for most aspects of HRQL were similar in the two groups, and no statistically significant differences were found. Some general symptoms however showed clinically relevant improvement in the antireflux stent group, while esophageal-specific symptoms such as dysphagia seemed clinically better, and symptoms of reflux were clinically reduced in the conventional stent group but not in the antireflux stent group.

CONCLUSION

This study, although limited in size, provided no obvious support for using the antireflux stent in preference to the conventional stent in the palliation of distal esophageal or cardia cancer from an HRQL perspective.

A new metal stent with a controlled-release system for palliation of malignant dysphagia: a prospective, multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Self-expanding metal stents are frequently used for the palliation of malignant dysphagia. Recently, a new stent design, the Evolution stent (Cook Medical, Limerick, Ireland), was developed. The stent has an internal and external silicone coating to resist tissue ingrowth and uncoated dual flanges on both ends to prevent migration. Its controlled-release system may allow full control and precise positioning of the stent.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the safety and clinical effectiveness of the Evolution stent for the palliation of dysphagia in patients with malignant strictures located in the esophagus (n = 33 [75%]) or gastric cardia (n = 11 [25%]).

METHODS

All patients who underwent placement of an esophageal Evolution stent from February to December 2008 received follow-up telephone calls 14 days after treatment and thereafter monthly until death. Data on technical and clinical outcome, complications, and recurrent dysphagia were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 44 patients (32 [73%] men, median age 74 years [range 48-91 years]) were treated with the Evolution stent. The median tumor length was 6 cm (range 1-11 cm). Stent placement was technically successful in 41 patients. Dysphagia improved from a median of 3 (ability to swallow liquids only) to 1 (ability to eat some solid foods) 4 weeks after stent placement. Major complications occurred in 4 (9%) patients, ie, pneumonia (3 patients) and hemorrhage (1 patient). Two (5%) patients died of pneumonia. Minor complications included gastroesophageal reflux and mild retrosternal pain in 11 (25%) and 4 (9%) patients, respectively. Recurrent dysphagia developed in 11 (25%) patients as a result of tissue ingrowth or overgrowth (6 patients; 14%), food impaction (3 patients; 7%), or stent migration (2 patients; 5%).

CONCLUSIONS

The Evolution stent is safe and effective for the palliation of dysphagia from esophageal and gastric cardia cancer. Randomized trials are needed to compare this device with other stent designs.

Role of esophageal stents in benign and malignant diseases

These recommendations provide an evidence-based approach to the role of esophageal stents in the management of benign and malignant diseases. These guidelines have been developed under the auspices of the American College of Gastroenterology and its Practice Parameters Committee and approved by the Board of Trustees. The following guidelines are based on a critical review of the available scientific literature on the topic identified in Medline and PubMed (January 1992-December 2008) using search terms that included stents, self-expandable metal stents, self-expandable plastic stents, esophageal cancer, esophageal adenocarcinoma, esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, esophageal stricture, perforations, anastomotic leaks, tracheoesophageal fistula, and achalasia. These guidelines are intended for use by health-care providers and apply to adult, but not pediatric, patients. As with other practice guidelines, these guidelines are not intended to replace clinical judgment but rather to provide general guidelines applicable to the majority of patients. Clinicians need to integrate recommendations with their own clinical judgment, and with individual patient circumstances, values, and preferences. They are intended to be flexible, in contrast to standards of care, which are inflexible policies designed to be followed in every case. Specific recommendations are based on relevant published information. The quality of evidence and strength of recommendations have been assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system, which is a system that has been adopted by multiple national and international societies. The GRADE system is based on a sequential assessment of quality of evidence, followed by assessment of the balance between benefits vs. downsides (harms, burden, and costs) and subsequent judgment regarding the strength of recommendation.

Recent advances in the use of stents for esophageal disease

The use of self-expanding metal esophageal stents has evolved dramatically over the last 20 years. Stents themselves have morphed from simple open-mesh wire devices to a variety of partially and fully covered metal and plastic protheses designed to resist in-growth and migration. Indications include grown considerably from simply palliating malignant dysphagia to the treatment of benign conditions such as refractory strictures, perforations, and fistulas, bridging tumors through neoadjuvant therapy and even serving as support for mucosal healing after ablative therapies. This article describes the current experience with esophageal stenting for malignant and benign conditions and examines new innovations in stent design and applications.

Interventions for dysphagia in oesophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

The majority of oesophageal and gastro-oesophageal cancers are diagnosed at an advanced stage and palliative treatment is the realistic management option for most patients. The optimal intervention for the palliation of dysphagia in these patients has not been established.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically analyse and summarise the efficacy of different interventions used in the palliation of dysphagia in primary oesophageal carcinoma.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We undertook a search according to the Cochrane Upper Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Diseases model using the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL and major conference proceedings up to August 2005. The literature search was re-run in August 2006 and March 2007.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with inoperable or unresectable primary oesophageal cancer who underwent palliative treatment. We included rigid plastic intubation, self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) insertion, brachytherapy, external beam radiotherapy, chemotherapy, oesophageal bypass surgery, chemical and thermal ablation therapy, either head-to-head or in combination. The primary outcome was dysphagia improvement. Secondary outcomes included recurrent dysphagia, technical success, procedure related mortality, 30-day mortality, adverse effects and quality of life.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One author assessed the eligibility criteria of each study and extracted data regarding outcomes and factors affecting risk of bias.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 2542 patients from 40 studies. SEMS insertion is safer and more effective than plastic tube insertion. Thermal and chemical ablative therapy provide comparable dysphagia palliation but have an increased requirement for re-interventions and adverse effects. Anti-reflux stents provide comparable dysphagia palliation to conventional metal stents. Some anti-reflux stents might reduce gastro-oesophageal reflux compared to conventional metal stents. Brachytherapy might be a suitable alternative to SEMS in providing a survival advantage and possibly a better quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Self-expanding metal stent insertion is safe, effective and quicker in palliating dysphagia compared to other modalities. However, high-dose intraluminal brachytherapy is a suitable alternative and might provide additional survival benefit with a better quality of life. Self-expanding metal stent insertion and brachytherapy provide comparable palliation to endoscopic ablative therapy but are preferable due to the reduced requirement for re-interventions. Rigid plastic tube insertion, dilatation alone or in combination with other modalities, chemotherapy alone, combination chemoradiotherapy and bypass surgery are not recommended for palliation of dysphagia due to a high incidence of delayed complications and recurrent dysphagia.

[Self-expanding metal stents for palliation of malignant oesophageal obstruction]

BACKGROUND

Malignant oesophageal stenosis can be caused by cancer of the oesophagus, gastric cardia, lungs, mediastinum or, rarely, breast. Most of these cases are inoperable due to advanced stage of the disease, comorbidities or age of the patients; and palliative treatment can be applied only. The quality of life is mostly determined by the extent of dysphagia. Several methods are available to palliate dysphagia. Hereby, the authors review their results with palliation of malignant oesophageal obstruction applying self-expanding metal stents.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

68 endoscopic stent implantations were performed in 64 patients (15 female and 49 male) with malignant dysphagia between 2003 and 2008. After radiological investigations, distally deployed covered stents with or without an antireflux valve were placed, depending on the localization of the tumour. In one patient with a stenosis localized in the upper third of the oesophagus a proximally deployed covered stent was used. The aim was to re-establish oral nutrition and cover possible fistulas.

RESULTS

Significant improvement of swallowing was detected in every patient. Average dysphagia score has improved from 3.2 to 1.7. Technical difficulties during stenting occurred in a relatively low percentage of patients only (2 in 68; i.e. 2.94%). Fistulas were covered in every case. Early stent migration (<7 days) happened in one case. One patient suffered non-fatal myocardial infarction two days after stent placement. In 5 cases tumour in- and overgrowth, in 4 cases bleeding was seen as late complications. Oesophago-tracheal fistula was noted in three patients after stent implantation. Late stent migration (>7 days) occurred in two patients. Re-stenting was necessary in four cases, while three patients needed an upper GI endoscopy for cleansing the stent caused by food obstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

According to our data self-expanding metal stents are highly effective and safe for improving dysphagia. Stent-related complications are relatively rare. This method is highly recommended for palliation of malignant dysphagia.

Application progress of stent placement in esophageal malignant and benign stenosis

Stent placement is widely used for palliation of dysphagia caused by advanced esophageal carcinoma. As the development of technology, many new stents are being used for clinical therapy. Some stents are added with anti-reflux valve or retrievable device, some are loaded with ¹²⁵I; the biodegradable stent are even invented. Improvement of sents can decrease many complications while elevate survival rates. Several nonsurgical palliative modalities including endoluminal laser therapy, photodynamic therapy, electrocoagulation and brachytherapy are available to recanalize malignant stenosis, but the fastest palliative method is stent placement. Reports about treating benign esophageal stricture with stents are increasing, and temporary and biodegradable stents have a better effect.

Palliative treatment of unresectable esophagogastric junction tumors: balloon dilation combined with chemotherapy and/or radiation therapy and metallic stent placement

PURPOSE

To prospectively evaluate an algorithm for palliative treatment of unresectable esophagogastric junction tumors based on stricture length.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eighty-six patients with malignant esophagogastric obstructions were referred to the interventional radiology department for balloon dilation or stent placement due to dysphagia. Balloon dilation was performed in patients (n = 39) with a short segmental (< or =4 cm) stricture, whereas stent placement was performed in patients (n = 47) with a long segmental (>4 cm) stricture. In the balloon group, 16 patients with esophageal carcinoma underwent both chemotherapy and radiation therapy, whereas 23 patients with gastric carcinoma underwent only chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Technical success was achieved in all procedures in all patients (100%). The overall clinical success rate of balloon dilation and stent placement for a malignant esophagogastric junction was 87% (75 of 86 patients). Clinical success was achieved in 29 of the 39 patients in the balloon group (74%) and 98% (46 of the 47 patients in the stent group (98%). The overall complication rate was 21% (18 of 86 patients). Seventeen complications, which consisted of reflux (n = 8), migration (n = 6), tumor overgrowth (n = 2), and tissue hyperplasia (n = 1), occurred after stent placement, whereas one complication (intramural rupture) occurred after balloon dilation. The median symptom-free and survival periods were 120 (95% confidence interval: 114, 263) and 147 (95% confidence interval: 98, 196) days, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The treatment strategies seem to be reasonable for palliative therapy in patients with malignant esophagogastric junction obstructions. However, further investigations are needed to minimize the drawbacks of the methods and to determine optimal treatments in patients with unresectable malignant esophagogastric junction obstructions.

Clinical outcomes and patency of self-expanding metal stents in patients with malignant upper gastrointestinal obstruction

This study was performed to evaluate clinical outcomes and factors associated with patency of self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) in patients with malignant upper gastrointestinal (UGI) obstruction. In 83 patients with malignant UGI obstruction, 118 SEMS placements were performed. Obstruction sites were esophagus/gastro-esophageal junction (GEJ) and gastric outlet (GO) in 41 and 42 patients, respectively. Technical success was achieved in 99.2% and clinical success in 90.5%, with no procedure-related complications. Re-obstruction and migration occurred in 38.1% during a mean follow-up of 137 days; both occurred significantly more often with GO than esophageal/GEJ obstruction (49.2% vs 23.9%). Patency rates of esophageal/GEJ obstruction were 93.5, 78.1 and 67.0% at 30, 90 and 180 days, respectively, and were significantly higher than those of GO obstruction-71.7, 51.8 and 32.5%. Palliative chemotherapy or radiation therapy was not associated with stent patency. Endoscopic SEMS placement is a safe and effective palliative treatment for malignant UGI obstruction, and complications or stent patency differed according to obstruction site.

Factors predicting survival in patients with advanced oesophageal cancer: a prospective multicentre evaluation

BACKGROUND

Oesophageal cancer is often diagnosed at an advanced stage, with poor prognosis and severe morbidity. In majority of cases, palliative treatment is the only option available.

AIM

To find factors that can predict survival for patients with incurable cancer of the oesophagus or gastro-oesophageal junction and hence aid in the choice of treatment.

METHODS

Ninety-six patients were included. Health-related quality of life questionnaires (EORTC QLQ C-30 and QLQ OES18) were administered and computerized tomography-derived size assessment of the primary tumours was performed. Univariate and multivariate Cox-regression analyses were used to determine potential predictors of survival.

RESULTS

Karnofsky Index, occurrence of metastases (M-stage), Union International Contre le Cancer-stage, computerized tomography-derived tumour size assessment and 10 of 25 scales and single items from the health-related quality of life questionnaires were found to be related to survival. In the multivariate analysis, three of the health-related quality of life questionnaire scales (physical functioning, fatigue and reflux) were found to add prognostic information to M-stage, the single strongest predictor (HR 1.9, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

In addition to M-stage, the outcome of health-related quality of life questionnaires can sharpen the prediction of survival in patients with advanced cancer of the oesophagus or gastro-oesophageal junction and thus aid in the choice of palliative treatment strategy.

Stents in the GI tract

The application of stents in the GI tract has expanded tremendously. Stent placement is the most frequently used treatment modality for palliating dysphagia from esophageal or gastric cardia cancer. Newly designed esophageal stents, including the Polyflex stent and the Niti-S double stent, have been introduced to reduce recurrent dysphagia owing to migration or nontumoral or tumor overgrowth. Stents are also the treatment of choice for esophagorespiratory fistulas, for proximal malignant lesions near the upper esophageal sphincter, for recurrent carcinoma after esophagectomy or gastrectomy and for sealing traumatic or iatrogenic nonmalignant ruptures, such as Boerhaave's syndrome and leakages following surgery. Stents in the latter patient group should be removed within 4-8 weeks after placement to prevent the formation of granulation tissue or hyperplasia at the stent ends. For gastric outlet obstruction, many case series have been published. Only two, small, randomized controlled trials have compared stent placement with gastrojejunostomy to date, and a large, randomized trial is currently being conducted in The Netherlands. Obstructive jaundice caused by a malignancy in the common bile duct can be treated effectively with plastic or metal stent placement. However, a prognostic score needs to be developed that guides a treatment decision towards using either of these stents. Finally, colonic stents are applied successfully for acute malignant obstruction as a 'bridge to surgery' in patients with tumors that are deemed to be resectable, or as a palliative treatment for patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease.

Endoscopic stenting of esophageal cancer: the clinical impact

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize the most relevant articles with regard to endoscopic stenting of esophageal cancer published in 2006.

RECENT FINDINGS

In 2006, there were two studies on esophageal stents with experimental designs and adequate size to contribute to an evaluation of esophageal stent technology. A study on an antireflux stent will not measurably change the current use of this device, but emphasizes the need for additional investigation. A study on a self-expanding plastic stent was the largest study to date demonstrating a self-expanding plastic stent to be comparable to self-expanding metal stents. Other published studies in 2006 on esophageal stents include review articles, case reports and small case series that are not addressed in this review.

SUMMARY

Self-expanding metal stents remain an important option for the treatment of patients with tracheoesophageal fistulae and esophageal malignancies. Recent innovations are dominated by a shift toward self-expanding esophageal stents that are potentially removable. Such potentially removable stents allow for expanded clinical applications and will be the focus of publications in 2007.