One- and two-step self-expandable metal stent placement for distal malignant biliary obstruction: a propensity analysis

One-step versus two-step distal self-expandable metal stent placement: A multicenter prospective randomized trial

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Two methods of transpapillary covered self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement are used for distal malignant biliary obstruction (MBO): after initial drainage by plastic stent (two-step method) and without previous drainage (one-step method).

METHODS

In total, 90 patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer and distal MBO were enrolled in this prospective multicenter randomized study and allocated to one-step (n = 45) and two-step (n = 45) groups. The main outcome was the time to recurrent biliary obstruction (TRBO). Secondary outcomes were the rates of early and late adverse events, survival time, the time required for bilirubin level reduction, and cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

The median TRBO did not differ significantly between the one-step and two-step groups (not available vs 314 days, P = 0.134). SEMS migration occurred significantly more frequently in the two-step group (14.3% vs 0%, P = 0.026). No significant difference was observed between groups in early (7.3% vs 14.3%, P = 0.483) or late (12.2% and 11.9%, P = 1) adverse events other than RBO, survival time (P = 0.104), or the median number of days required to reach a bilirubin level considered to be acceptable for chemotherapy administration (<3 mg/dL; P = 0.881). The total costs of stent placement and reintervention were significantly lower in the one-step SEMS group (3347 vs 5465 US dollars, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The superiority of TRBO with two-step SEMS placement was not demonstrated. One-step SEMS placement might be a promising method from the viewpoints of cost-effectiveness and less invasiveness (UMIN-CTR clinical trial registration number: UMIN000016010).

Antireflux metal stent for biliary obstruction: Any benefits?

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with stent placement has been utilized as standard palliative management of distal malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). Compared to plastic stents, metal stents can provide longer-term relief of symptoms. When a large-bore metal stent is placed across the ampulla, patients are predisposed to the risk of cholangitis or stent dysfunction due to reflux of duodenal contents. To mitigate the risk of adverse events associated with the duodenobiliary reflux, efforts have been directed to development of antireflux metal stents (ARMSs). The antireflux property has been introduced through adding of an antireflux valve to the duodenal stent end. Evidence from clinical studies indicates that ARMSs may not only reduce the risk of ascending cholangitis during follow-up but also prolong stent patency time. However, the results of clinical studies testing ARMSs are inconsistent owing to heterogeneous designs of antireflux valves and stent bodies. Metal stents are increasingly indicated for benign biliary strictures and MBO in the setting of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and therefore, research is warranted to evaluate ARMSs for those indications. Given that endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided transmural biliary drainage has gained popularity, the optimal timing of placing an ARMS in relation to EUS-guided and percutaneous drainage should be investigated. Development and evaluation of ARMSs require an integrative approach utilizing phantom and animal models, measurements of stent mechanical properties, and in vivo functional study after stent placement. In this review article, we summarize updated evidence on ARMSs for MBO and discuss issues that should be addressed in future studies.

Comparison of patency and cost-effectiveness of self-expandable metal and plastic stents used for malignant biliary strictures: a Polish single-center study

INTRODUCTION

Most patients with malignant biliary obstruction are suited only for palliation by endoscopic drainage with plastic stents (PS) or self-expandable metal stents (SEMS).

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical outcome and costs of biliary stenting with SEMS and PS in patients with malignant biliary strictures.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 114 patients with malignant jaundice who underwent 376 endoscopic retrograde biliary drainage (ERBD) were studied.

RESULTS

ERBD with the placement of PS was performed in 80 patients, with one-step SEMS in 20 patients and two-step SEMS in 14 patients. Significantly fewer ERBD interventions were performed in patients with one-step SEMS than PS or the two-step SEMS technique (2.0±1.12 vs. 3.1±1.7 or 5.7±2.1, respectively, P<0.0001). The median hospitalization duration per procedure was similar for the three groups of patients. The patients' survival time was the longest in the two-step SEMS group in comparison with the one-step SEMS and PS groups (596±270 vs. 276±141 or 208±219 days, P<0.001). Overall median time to recurrent biliary obstruction was 89.3±159 days for PS and 120.6±101 days for SEMS (P=0.01). The total cost of hospitalization with ERBD was higher for two-step SEMS than for one-step SEMS or PS (1448±312, 1152±135 and 977±156&OV0556;, P<0.0001). However, the estimated annual cost of medical care for one-step SEMS was higher than that for the two-step SEMS or PS groups (4618, 4079, and 3995&OV0556;, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Biliary decompression by SEMS is associated with longer patency and reduced number of auxiliary procedures; however, repeated PS insertions still remain the most cost-effective strategy.

Partially covered self-expandable metal stents versus polyethylene stents for malignant biliary obstruction: a cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND⁄

OBJECTIVE

Partially covered self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) and polyethylene stents (PES) are both commonly used in the palliation of malignant biliary obstruction. Although SEMS are significantly more expensive, they are more efficacious than PES. Accordingly, a cost-effectiveness analysis was performed.

METHODS

A cost-effectiveness analysis compared the approach of initial placement of PES versus SEMS for the study population. Patients with malignant biliary obstruction underwent an endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography to insert the initial stent. If the insertion failed, a percutaneous transhepatic cholangiogram was performed. If stent occlusion occurred, a PES was inserted at repeat endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, either in an outpatient setting or after admission to hospital if cholangitis was present. A third-party payer perspective was adopted. Effectiveness was expressed as the likelihood of no occlusion over the one-year adopted time horizon. Probabilities were based on a contemporary randomized clinical trial, and costs were issued from national references. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

A PES-first strategy was both more expensive and less efficacious than an SEMS-first approach. The mean per-patient costs were US$6,701 for initial SEMS and US$20,671 for initial PES, which were associated with effectiveness probabilities of 65.6% and 13.9%, respectively. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of these results.

CONCLUSION

At the time of initial endoscopic drainage for patients with malignant biliary obstruction undergoing palliative stenting, an initial SEMS insertion approach was both more effective and less costly than a PES-first strategy.

Comparison of endoscopic stenting for malignant biliary obstruction: A single-center study

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of single-step endoscopic placement of self-expandable metallic stents (SEMS) for treatment of obstructive jaundice.

METHODS: A retrospective study was performed among 90 patients who underwent transpapillary biliary metallic stent placement for malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) between April 2005 and October 2012. The diagnosis of primary disease and MBO was based on abdominal ultrasound, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, endoscopic ultrasound, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with brush cytology, biopsy, and/or a combination of these modalities. The type of SEMS (covered or non-covered, 8 mm or 10 mm in diameter) was determined by the endoscopist. Ninety patients were divided into two groups: group 1 (49 patients) who underwent a single-step SEMS placement and group 2 (41 patients) who underwent a two-step SEMS placement. The technical success rate, complication rate, stent patency, and patient survival rate were compared between the groups. In addition, to identify the clinical prognostic factors associated with patient survival, the following variables were evaluated in Cox-regression analysis: gender, age, etiology of MBO (pancreatic cancer or non-pancreatic cancer), clinical stage (IVb; with distant metastases or IVa >; without distant metastases), chemotherapy (with or without), patency of the stent, and the use of single-step or two-step SEMS.

RESULTS: Immediate technical success was achieved in 93.9% (46/49) in group 1 and in 95.1% (39/41) in group 2, with no significant difference (P = 1.0). Similarly, there was no difference in the complication rates between the groups (group 1, 4.1% and group 2, 4.9%; P = 0.62). Stent failure was observed in 10 cases in group 1 (20.4%) and in 16 cases in group 2 (39.0%). The patency of stent and patient survival revealed no difference between the two groups with Kaplan-Meier analysis, with a mean patency of 111 ± 17 d in group 1 and 137 ± 19 d in group 2 (P = 0.91), and a mean survival of 178 ± 35 d in group 1 and 222 ± 23 d in group 2 (P = 0.57). On the contrary, the number of days of hospitalization associated with first-time SEMS placement in group 1 was shorter when compared with that number in group 2 (28 vs 39 d; P < 0.05). Multivariate analysis revealed that a clinical stage of IVa > (P = 0.0055), chemotherapy (P = 0.0048), and no patency of the stent (P = 0.011) were independent prognostic factors associated with patient survival.

CONCLUSION: Our results showed that single-step endoscopic metal stent placement was safe and effective for treating obstructive jaundice secondary to various inoperable malignancies.

Use of stents in treatment of malignant biliary obstruction

Stents are now recognized as the first choice of palliative therapy for malignant biliary obstruction. Since stents can effectively relieve obstruction, reduce jaundice, and improve the quality of life, their usage in inoperable biliary tract cancer patients has broad prospects. This paper reviews the use of stents in the treatment of malignant biliary obstruction with regards to stent type, selection, placement and the combination of stenting with other means of treatment.

Covered self-expandable metal stent deployment promises safe neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic head cancer

BACKGROUND

Patients with borderline resectable pancreatic head cancer (BRPHC) have been treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (NACRT) using metallic stents. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and complications of covered self-expanding metallic stents (CSEMS) during the NACRT and surgical period.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We reviewed the outcomes of patients with BRPHC, then divided them chronologically into three groups as follows. Group A: upfront surgery with plastic stent (PS) deployment; group B: PS deployment plus neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and/or NACRT; group C: CSEMS deployment plus NAC/NACRT. Patients were categorized as borderline resectable based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines, 2010. Days to reintervention (DR), reintervention rate, and the rate of R0 and complications were studied. Safe margin-negative resection (R0) surgery was defined as R0 surgery without reintervention during the NACRT period and no postoperative complications.

RESULTS

DR were as follows. Groups A, B and C were 32, 55 and 97 days, respectively (P < 0.05). R0 surgery obtained in groups A, B and C was 53% (9/17), 100% (17/17) and 93% (14/15), respectively. CSEMS did not interfere with surgery. Safe R0 surgery obtained in groups B and C was 11% (2/19) and 67% (10/15), respectively (P < 0.05). Multivariate analysis showed that the odds ratio for safe R0 surgery was 16.210 (95% CI 2.457-106.962, P = 0.003) for CSEMS placement.

CONCLUSION

CSEMS should be considered to relieve symptomatic biliary obstruction in patients with BRPHC receiving NACRT in view of the high attainability rate of safe R0 surgery compared to that with PS deployment.