Radioactive Stent for Malignant Esophageal Obstruction: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Endoscopic spray cryotherapy for dysphagia palliation in esophageal cancer: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and study aims Endoscopically delivered liquid nitrogen spray cryotherapy is reported to be a safe and possibly more effective strategy for dysphagia palliation in patients with advanced esophageal cancer. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to pool all available data to evaluate the impact of this treatment modality. Methods Electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library) from January 2005 through June 2023 were searched for studies evaluating endoscopically delivered liquid nitrogen spray cryotherapy for dysphagia palliation in patients with advanced esophageal cancer. Pooled proportions were calculated using random-effects (DerSimonian-Laird) model. Results From an initial 895 studies, data were extracted and analyzed from five studies comprising a total of 230 patients that met inclusion criteria. In this pooled analysis, dysphagia improved or did not deteriorate in 81.40% of patients (95% confidence interval [CI] 73.75-87.99). Significant improvement in dysphagia was reported by 55.19% of patients (95% CI 29.62-79.37). An alternate method of dysphagia palliation despite spray cryotherapy was required in 18.78% of patients (95% CI 8.09-32.63) with 10.56% (95% CI 2.53-23.18) requiring esophageal stents. The weighted mean number of spray cryotherapy sessions per patient was 3.37 (95% CI 2.55-4.18). The pooled major adverse event rate was 3.26% (95% CI 0.15-10.14). Conclusions Endoscopic liquid nitrogen spray cryotherapy can effectively and safely treat dysphagia in esophageal cancer. It can be considered an option for dysphagia palliation in centers with expertise and equipment.

Endoscopic Palliative Therapies for Esophageal Cancer

Endoscopic palliation of dysphagia for patients with inoperable esophageal cancer is complex, highly dependent on local expertise, and best done in a multidisciplinary fashion. Systemic therapy is the standard of care because it has been shown to improve survival. Esophageal stenting has traditionally been the most used endoscopic modality. Some modalities such as laser and photodynamic therapy are rarely used. There has been an increasing amount of data on cryotherapy, especially for patients with mild-to-moderate dysphagia on systemic chemotherapy. This article will discuss the latest evidence guiding the palliation of esophageal cancer.

Stents metálicos autoexpandibles en la obstrucción maligna del esófago: estudio multicéntrico por 25 años

Antecedentes: las prótesis metálicas autoexpandibles mejoran la disfagia en pacientes con cáncer esofágico (CE) incurable. En las últimas décadas se han introducido nuevos tipos de stents y se ha implementado la quimiorradioterapia para el CE, generando cambios en los perfiles de riesgo de los pacientes. Se desconoce si estos cambios han afectado la paliación con stents. Pacientes y métodos: estudio retrospectivo en tres centros de Medellín-Colombia; pacientes sometidos a colocación de prótesis esofágicas paliativas para disfagia maligna (1997-2022). Se evaluaron en dos períodos: 1997-2009 (n = 289) y 2010-2022 (n = 318), complicaciones mayores y menores después del implante, la influencia de las terapias oncológicas y la sobrevida. Resultados: se evaluaron 607 pacientes sometidos a prótesis esofágicas. 296 (48,8%) se complicaron, y fue mayor en el segundo periodo (52,5% frente a 48,1%), al igual que las complicaciones mayores (20,8% frente a 14,2%, p = 0,033), sin diferencias en complicaciones menores (33,9% frente a 31,8%, p = 0,765). 190 (31,3%) pacientes presentaron disfagia recurrente, estable en ambos períodos. La migración aumentó con el tiempo (de 13,1% a 18,2%, p = 0,09). El evento adverso menor más frecuente fue dolor, que aumentó con el tiempo (de 24,9% a 33,95%, p < 0,01), y los factores asociados fueron quimiorradioterapia, ausencia de fístula y carcinoma de células escamosas. El reflujo ácido disminuyó en el segundo grupo (p = 0,038). El 12% de pacientes requirieron otra intervención para alimentarse. No se impactó la sobrevida con el tiempo y uso de stents. Conclusiones: los stents son una alternativa en la disfagia maligna no quirúrgica, aunque la disfagia recurrente no ha disminuido con el tiempo. Las complicaciones menores relacionadas con el stent van en aumento, asociadas a la implementación de la quimiorradioterapia.

Best Practices in Esophageal, Gastroduodenal, and Colonic Stenting

Endoscopic stenting is an area of endoscopy that has witnessed noteworthy advancements over the last decade, resulting in evolving clinical practices among gastroenterologists around the world. Indications for endoscopic stenting have progressively expanded, becoming a frequent part of the management algorithm for various benign and malignant conditions of the gastrointestinal tract, from esophagus to rectum. In addition to expanded indications, continuous technological enhancements and development of novel endoscopic stents have resulted in an increased success of these approaches and, in some cases, allowed new applications. This review aimed to summarize best practices in esophageal, gastroduodenal, and colonic stenting.

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.

I-125 seeds with chemotherapy for progressive non-small-cell lung cancer after first-line treatment: a meta-analysis

Background

Continuing therapy for aggressive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after first-line treatment (FLT) is challenging. The clinical efficacy of second-line chemotherapy (SLCT) for progressive NSCLC is limited. In this meta-analysis, we aim to evaluate the clinical efficacy of the combination of I-125 seeds brachytherapy (ISB) and SLCT in progressive NSCLC after FLT.

Methods

The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP databases were screened for relevant publications until September 2021. Meta-analyses are conducted by RevMan 5.3 and Stata 12.0.

Results

Our meta-analysis encompassed 6 studies (4 retrospective studies and 2 randomized controlled trials), which included 272 patients that underwent ISB with SLCT (combined group) and 257 patients that received SLCT alone (chemotherapy alone group). The complete response (24.7% vs. 7.0%, P < 0.00001), treatment response (65.7% vs. 38.1%, P = 0.0002), and disease control (95.2% vs. 80.4%, P < 0.00001) rates are markedly elevated for patients receiving combined therapy versus those receiving chemotherapy alone. Moreover, pooled progression-free survival (P = 0.0001) and overall survival (P < 0.00001) were remarkably extended for patients that received the combination therapy, while no obvious differences were detected in the pooled myelosuppression (39.0% vs. 30.6%, P = 0.05) and gastrointestinal response (38.5% vs. 35.9%, P = 0.52) rates between 2 groups. Significant heterogeneity was found in the endpoints of the treatment response and progression-free survival.

Conclusions

This meta-analysis demonstrated that ISB could enhance the clinical efficacy of SLCT in patients with progressive NSCLC after FLT without inducing major toxic side effects.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Modern Management of Esophageal Cancer: Radio-Oncology in Neoadjuvancy, Adjuvancy and Palliation

The modern management of esophageal cancer is crucially based on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach. Radiotherapy is involved in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings; moreover, it includes radical and palliative treatment intention (with a focus on the use of a stent and its potential integration with radiotherapy). In this review, the above-mentioned settings and approaches will be described. Referring to available international guidelines, the background evidence bases will be reviewed, and the ongoing, more relevant trials will be outlined. Target definitions and radiotherapy doses to administer will be mentioned. Peculiar applications such as brachytherapy (interventional radiation oncology), and data regarding innovative approaches including MRI-guided-RT and radiomic analysis will be reported. A focus on the avoidance of surgery for major clinical responses (particularly for SCC) is detailed.

Futuristic Developments and Applications in Endoluminal Stenting

Endoscopic stenting is a well-established option for the treatment of malignant obstruction, temporary management of benign strictures, and sealing transmural defects, as well as drainage of pancreatic fluid collections and biliary obstruction. In recent years, in addition to expansion in indications for endoscopic stenting, considerable strides have been made in stent technology, and several types of devices with advanced designs and materials are continuously being developed. In this review, we discuss the important developments in stent designs and novel indications for endoluminal and transluminal stenting. Our discussion specifically focuses on (i) biodegradable as well as (ii) irradiating and drug-eluting stents for esophageal, gastroduodenal, biliary, and colonic indications, (iii) endoscopic stenting in inflammatory bowel disease, and (iv) lumen-apposing metal stent.

Esophageal stenting for benign and malignant disease: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - Update 2021

MALIGNANT DISEASE

1: ESGE recommends placement of partially or fully covered self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) for palliation of malignant dysphagia over laser therapy, photodynamic therapy, and esophageal bypass.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 2 : ESGE recommends brachytherapy as a valid alternative, alone or in addition to stenting, in esophageal cancer patients with malignant dysphagia and expected longer life expectancy.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends esophageal SEMS placement for sealing malignant tracheoesophageal or bronchoesophageal fistulas. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 4 : ESGE does not recommend SEMS placement as a bridge to surgery or before preoperative chemoradiotherapy because it is associated with a high incidence of adverse events. Other options such as feeding tube placement are preferable. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

BENIGN DISEASE

5: ESGE recommends against the use of SEMSs as first-line therapy for the management of benign esophageal strictures because of the potential for adverse events, the availability of alternative therapies, and their cost. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 6: ESGE suggests consideration of temporary placement of self-expandable stents for refractory benign esophageal strictures. Weak recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 7: ESGE suggests that fully covered SEMSs be preferred over partially covered SEMSs for the treatment of refractory benign esophageal strictures because of their very low risk of embedment and ease of removability. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 8: ESGE recommends the stent-in-stent technique to remove partially covered SEMSs that are embedded in the esophageal wall. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 9: ESGE recommends that temporary stent placement can be considered for the treatment of leaks, fistulas, and perforations. No specific type of stent can be recommended, and the duration of stenting should be individualized. Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence. 10 : ESGE recommends considering placement of a fully covered large-diameter SEMS for the treatment of esophageal variceal bleeding refractory to medical, endoscopic, and/or radiological therapy, or as initial therapy for patients with massive bleeding. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.

A stent with radioactive seed strand insertion for inoperable malignant biliary obstruction: A meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study was to assess the relative clinical effectiveness of stent insertion with or without radioactive seed strand (RSS) insertion in patients suffering from malignant biliary obstruction (MBO).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Relevant articles published as of November 2020 in the Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases were identified and analyzed. Primary study endpoints for this meta-analysis were stent dysfunction, stent patency, and overall survival (OS), whereas secondary endpoints were rates of clinical success and complications. RevMan v5.3 was used to perform all meta-analyses.

RESULTS

In total, there were nine studies incorporating 643 patients (280 and 363 who underwent stent insertion with and without RSS, respectively). No differences were observed between these groups with respect to pooled rates of clinical success (p = 0.25), stent dysfunction (p = 0.47), cholangitis (p = 0.97), cholecystitis (p = 0.95), or pancreatitis (p = 0.66). However, stent patency duration (p < 0.00001) and patients' OS (p < 0.00001) were significantly increased in patients in the stent + RSS group. No heterogeneity was detected for any of these endpoints, nor did funnel plots yield any publication bias. A subgroup analysis of patients with hilar MBO similarly exhibited stent + RSS insertion to be associated with longer stent patency and OS as compared with stent insertion alone.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings showed that relative to stent insertion, stent + RSS insertion is associated with longer OS and stent patency in patients with inoperable MBO.