Factors That Affect Stent-Related Complications in Patients with Malignant Obstruction of the Esophagus or Gastric Cardia

Successful management of malignant colovesical fistula using covered colonic self-expanding metallic stent: a case report

BACKGROUND

A colovesical fistula (CVF) is commonly treated by resection of the intestine containing the fistula or creation of a defunctioning stoma. We herein report a case of successful fistula closure and avoidance of colostomy after placement of a covered colonic self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) as a palliative treatment for a malignant CVF.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 75-year-old man undergoing infusional 5-fluorouracil and irinotecan chemotherapy plus bevacizumab for recurrent peritoneal dissemination of rectal cancer was admitted to our hospital because of fecaluria with a high-grade fever. Blood tests showed a moderate inflammatory reaction (white blood cell count, 9200/mm3; C-reactive protein, 11.03 mg/dL; procalcitonin, 1.33 ng/mL). Urinary sediment examination showed severe bacteriuria. Abdominal contrast-enhanced computed tomography showed intravesical gas, thickening of the posterior wall of the bladder, and irregular thickening of the sigmoid colon wall contiguous with the posterior bladder wall. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) clearly showed a fistula between the bladder and sigmoid colon. Colonoscopy revealed a circumferential malignant stricture 15 cm from the anal verge, and a fistula to the bladder was identified by water-soluble contrast medium. We diagnosed a complicated urinary tract infection (UTI) associated with a CVF due to peritoneal dissemination and started empirical treatment with sulbactam/ampicillin. Given the absence of active inflammatory findings around the fistula on MRI and the patient's physical frailty, we decided to place a covered SEMS to close the fistula. Under fluoroscopic and endoscopic guidance, a covered colonic SEMS of 80-mm length and 20-mm diameter was successfully deployed, and the fistula was sealed immediately after placement. Urine culture on day 3 after stenting was negative for bacteria, and a contrast study on day 5 showed no fistula. The patient was discharged home on day 6 with no complications. The UTI did not recur for 4 months after discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

A covered colonic SEMS was useful for sealing a malignant CVF in a patient unfit for surgery, and MRI was valuable to determine the status of the fistula. A covered colonic SEMS could be an alternative to surgical treatment for CVFs in patients who require palliative care.

Efficacy and Safety of Self-Expandable Metallic Stent Placement for Malignant Esophageal Fistula

Patients with malignant esophageal fistulas often experience dysphagia and infection, resulting in poor prognoses. Self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placement is a palliative treatment option; however, its efficacy and safety are unclear. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of SEMS placement for malignant esophageal fistulas. We retrospectively investigated patients who underwent SEMS placement for malignant esophageal fistulas between 2013 and 2022 at the Cancer Institute Hospital. Dysphagia scores (DSs) before and after SEMS placement, adverse events, and overall survival from SEMS placement until death were evaluated. A total of 17 patients underwent SEMS placement, including 12 and 5 patients with esophageal and lung cancers, respectively. Prior treatments included chemoradiotherapy (n = 11), radiotherapy (n = 4), and chemotherapy (n = 4); two patients underwent palliative radiotherapy after chemotherapy. All procedures were technically successful. After SEMS placement, 14 (82.4%) patients were able to consume semisolid or solid food (DS ≤ 2). Major adverse events were encountered in only one case. The median survival time after SEMS placement was 71 days (range 17-247 days). SEMS placement allowed most patients to resume oral intake with a low rate of major adverse events. SEMS placement is a reasonable palliative treatment option for patients with malignant fistulas who have poor prognoses.

Endoscopic Stenting for Malignant Dysphagia in Patients with Esophageal Cancer

Malignant dysphagia is a common problem in patients with esophageal cancer. Endoscopic stenting can resolve dysphagia caused by malignant stricture; however, controversy exists regarding the use of esophageal stenting for the treatment of malignant stricture, including whether stenting or radiotherapy is superior, whether stenting before or after radiotherapy is safe, whether stenting before or after chemotherapy is safe, and whether low-radial-force stents are safer than conventional stents. Among treatment options for malignant dysphagia, stenting may have some disadvantages in terms of pain relief and the risk of adverse events compared with radiotherapy and in terms of survival compared with gastrostomy. Additionally, the risk of stent-related adverse events is significantly associated with prior radiotherapy. The risk of perforation is especially high when a radiation dose of >40 Gy is delivered to the esophagus after stenting, whereas perforation is not associated with prior chemotherapy or additional chemotherapy after stenting. Nevertheless, stenting remains an important palliative option, especially for patients with a short life expectancy and a strong desire for oral intake, because stenting can facilitate a more rapid improvement in dysphagia than radiotherapy or gastrostomy. The application of a low-radial-force stent should be considered to reduce the risk of adverse events, especially in patients with prior radiotherapy.

Hemostasis of massive bleeding from esophageal tumor: A case report

BACKGROUND

Esophageal cancer is a common type of cancer and serious bleeding from esophageal tumors can occur in routine clinical practice. The arrest of bleeding from esophageal tumor is not a trivial task, which can sometimes require nonstandard solutions. We report a case of successful hemostasis of massive bleeding from esophageal tumor performed by a novel two-balloon catheter inserted endoscopically, with a local hemostatic treatment applied.

CASE SUMMARY

A 36-years old male patient with advanced esophageal cancer developed bleeding from the tumor following endoscopic stenting with a self-expanding metal stent. Due to the ineffectiveness of standard approaches, after a medical conference, the patient was treated with a novel method based on the use of a two-balloon catheter creating an isolated area in esophagus and locally dispersing hemostatic polysaccharide powder inside the isolated interior. Hemostasis was successful and subsequent endoscopic examination revealed the presence of organized clot and localized defect, which was coagulated in a planned manner.

CONCLUSION

The authors present a new catheter-based method of hemostasis of esophageal tumor bleeding.

Laparoscopic versus open surgery for locally advanced and metastatic gastric cancer complicated with bleeding and/or stenosis: short- and long-term outcomes

Background

Laparoscopic surgery has justified its efficacy in the treatment of early gastric cancer. There are limited data indicating the eligibility of laparoscopic interventions in locally advanced gastric cancer. Publications describing the safety of laparoscopic techniques in the treatment of local and metastatic gastric cancer complicated by bleeding and stenosis are scarce.

Methods

The study included patients with histologically confirmed locally advanced and disseminated gastric cancer and complicated with bleeding and/or stenosis who underwent gastrectomy with vital indications between February 2012 and August 2018. Surgical and oncologic outcomes after laparoscopic surgery (laparoscopic surgery) and open surgery (OS) were compared.

Results

In total, 127 patients (LS, n = 52; OS, n = 75) were analyzed. Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. Forty-four total gastrectomies with resection of the abdominal part of the esophagus, 63 distal subtotal (43 Billroth-I and 20 Billroth-II), and 19 proximal gastrectomies were performed. The median duration of surgery was significantly longer in the LS group, 253 min (interquartile range [IQR], 200–295) versus 210 min (IQR, 165–220) (p < 0.001), while median intraoperative blood loss in the LS group was significantly less, 180 ml (IQR, 146—214) versus 320 ml (IQR, 290–350), (p < 0.001). Early postoperative complications occurred in 35% in the LS group and in 45 % of patients in the OS group (p = 0.227). There was no difference in postoperative mortality rates between the groups (3 [6 %] versus 5 (7 %), p = 1.00). Median intensive care unit stay and median postoperative hospital stay were significantly shorter after laparoscopy, 2 (IQR, 1–2) versus 4 (IQR, 3–4) days, and 8 (IQR, 7–9) versus 10 (IQR, 8–12) days, both p < 0.001. After laparoscopy, patients started adjuvant chemotherapy significantly earlier than those after open surgery, 20 vs. 28 days (p < 0.001). However, overall survival rates were similar between the group. Three-year overall survival was 24% in the LS group and 27% in the OS groups.

Conclusions

Despite the technical complexity, in patients with complicated locally advanced and metastatic gastric cancer, laparoscopic gastrectomies were associated with longer operation time, reduced intraoperative blood loss, shorter reconvalescence, and similar morbidity, mortality rates and long-term oncologic outcomes compared to conventional open surgery.

Outcomes of patients with malignant esophagogastric junction obstruction receiving metallic stents: A single-center experience

BACKGROUND

Malignancies-related esophagogastric junction (EGJ) obstruction is usually diagnosed in inoperable status with poor clinical outcomes. Metallic stent placement at EGJ could improve dysphagia for these patients. However, studies regarding the outcomes in these patients receiving metallic stents are still limited. This study aimed to investigate the outcomes of metallic stent placement in malignant EGJ obstruction.

METHODS

Forty-one patients with inoperable malignant EGJ obstruction receiving metallic stent placement were retrospectively enrolled. The clinical outcomes between different stents and deployment techniques were analyzed.

RESULTS

The overall technical success rate was 97.6% and clinical success rate was 92.1%. The median overall survival time was 77 (4-893) days, and the patency time was 71 (4-893) days, respectively. Poststent radiotherapy significantly prolonged survival and stent patency. Between patients receiving uncovered or partially covered metal stents, there was no difference in procedure-related complications, survival time, and stent patency time. Moreover, the clinical outcomes in patients receiving duodenal stents for malignant EGJ obstruction are not inferior to those receiving esophageal stents.

CONCLUSION

This study provides crucial information for endoscopists to establish individualized stenting strategies for malignant EGJ obstruction.

Endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy: British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline update

This is a collaboration between the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), and is a scheduled update of their 2016 guideline on endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy. The guideline development committee included representatives from the British Society of Haematology, the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society, and two patient representatives from the charities Anticoagulation UK and Thrombosis UK, as well as gastroenterologists. The process conformed to AGREE II principles, and the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were derived using GRADE methodology. Prior to submission for publication, consultation was made with all member societies of ESGE, including BSG. Evidence-based revisions have been made to the risk categories for endoscopic procedures, and to the categories for risks of thrombosis. In particular a more detailed risk analysis for atrial fibrillation has been employed, and the recommendations for direct oral anticoagulants have been strengthened in light of trial data published since the previous version. A section has been added on the management of patients presenting with acute GI haemorrhage. Important patient considerations are highlighted. Recommendations are based on the risk balance between thrombosis and haemorrhage in given situations.

Endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy: British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline update

This is a collaboration between the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), and is a scheduled update of their 2016 guideline on endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy. The guideline development committee included representatives from the British Society of Haematology, the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society, and two patient representatives from the charities Anticoagulation UK and Thrombosis UK, as well as gastroenterologists. The process conformed to AGREE II principles and the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were derived using GRADE methodology. Prior to submission for publication, consultation was made with all member societies of ESGE, including BSG. Evidence-based revisions have been made to the risk categories for endoscopic procedures, and to the categories for risks of thrombosis. In particular a more detailed risk analysis for atrial fibrillation has been employed, and the recommendations for direct oral anticoagulants have been strengthened in light of trial data published since the previous version. A section has been added on the management of patients presenting with acute GI haemorrhage. Important patient considerations are highlighted. Recommendations are based on the risk balance between thrombosis and haemorrhage in given situations.

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.

Esophageal metal stent for malignant obstruction after prior radiotherapy

The association between severe adverse events (SAEs) and prior radiotherapy or stent type remains controversial. Patients with esophageal or esophagogastric junctional cancer who underwent stent placement (2005-2019) were enrolled in this retrospective study conducted at a tertiary cancer institute in Japan. The exclusion criteria were follow-up period of < 1 month and insufficient data on stent type or cancer characteristics. We used Mann-Whitney's U test for quantitative data and Fisher's exact test for categorical data. Multivariate analysis was performed using a logistic regression model. 107 stents were placed. Low radial-force stents (L group) were used in 51 procedures and high radial-force stents (H group) in 56 procedures. SAEs developed after nine procedures, the median interval from stent placement being 6 days (range, 1-141 days). SAEs occurred more frequently in the H (14%: 8/56) than in the L group (2%: 1/51) (P = 0.03). In patients who had undergone prior radiotherapy, SAEs were more frequent in the H (36%: 4/11) than in the L group (0%: 0/13) (P = 0.03). Re-obstruction and migration occurred after 16 and three procedures, respectively; these rates did not differ significantly between groups (P = 0.59, P = 1, respectively). Low radial-force stents may reduce the risk of SAEs after esophageal stenting.

Self-expandable metal stent of esophagogastric junction versus pyloric area obstruction in advanced gastric cancer patients: Retrospective, comparative, single-center study

Upper gastrointestinal stenting is a palliative treatment for relieving symptoms such as nausea, vomiting, and dietary intake in patients with obstruction due to inoperable advanced stomach cancer. Self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) implantation for malignant obstruction has recently become more effective, safer, and less expensive than operative modality. It also has better short-term outcomes, particularly a shorter hospital stay and a more rapid return to oral intake, than surgical treatment. However, there is no comparative analysis regarding the efficacy, side effects, and survival rate of stenting between the esophagogastric junction (EGJ) and pyloric obstructions.To compare the prognoses and complications after SEMS implantation between EGJ and pyloric obstructions in advanced gastric cancer.Among advanced gastric cancer patients with gastrointestinal obstruction diagnosed from January 2008 to December 2017 at the Gastroenterology Department of Chungnam National University Hospital, 42 and 76 patients presented with EGJ (EGJ obstruction group) and gastric pyloric obstructions (pyloric obstruction group), respectively. We retrospectively reviewed the survival period, changes in food intake, and complications of these patients before and after SEMS placement.The prevalences of aspiration pneumonia were 11.9% (5/42) and 2.6% (2/76) in the EGJ and pyloric obstruction groups, respectively, before SEMS placement (P value: .041). Other symptoms associated with gastric malignant obstruction were not statistically different between the groups. Success rate and adverse events did not significantly differ between the EGJ and pyloric obstruction groups. There was no difference in frequency of stent reinsertion procedures performed owing to reobstruction, but the reprocedure average period was statistically significantly longer in the EGJ obstruction group [EGJ obstruction: 158.3 days (±42.4); pyloric obstruction: 86.0 days (±29.1)] (P value: .022). As an index of improved dietary status, the Gastric Outlet Obstruction Scoring System score was not significantly different between the groups before and after SEMS placement.The EGJ and pyloric obstruction groups did not significantly differ in prognosis or complication rates. However, EGJ stent was more stable than pyloric stent when reobstruction was considered.

Treatment option of endoscopic stent insertion or gastrojejunostomy for gastric outlet obstruction due to gastric cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

There are currently two treatment options for gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) due to gastric cancer, endoscopic stenting and surgical gastrojejunostomy. However, their therapeutic effects have not yet been established. Therefore, the present study was undertaken to examine these effects.

METHODS

The Japanese Gastric Cancer Association invited its delegates to participate in a retrospective multicenter cohort study on patients with GOO due to gastric cancer who underwent stent therapy or gastrojejunostomy in 2015.

RESULTS

We obtained data from 85 patients undergoing stent therapy and 94 undergoing gastrojejunostomy from 42 hospitals. Baseline data revealed that stent patients had lower food intake, poorer performance status, and worse prognostic indices than gastrojejunostomy patients. Postoperative food intake and survival times were worse in stent patients than in gastrojejunostomy patients. We performed propensity score matching to select pairs of patients with similar baseline characteristics in the two treatment groups. After matching, the frequency of postoperative complications was significantly less in stent patients (3%, 1/33) than in gastrojejunostomy patients (21%, 7/34; p = 0.03). A low residue or full diet was achieved by 97% of stent patients (32/33) and 97% of gastrojejunostomy patients (33/34) (p = 0.98). Median survival times were 7.8 months in stent patients and 4.0 months in gastrojejunostomy patients (p = 0.38).

CONCLUSIONS

Propensity score matching demonstrated that endoscopic stent placement resulted in less postoperative morbidity than and a similar food intake and equivalent survival times to gastrojejunostomy. These results suggest the utility of stent therapy.

Clinical effectiveness and safety of self-expanding metal stent placement following palliative chemotherapy in patients with advanced esophageal cancer

PURPOSE

To investigate the effect of prior chemotherapy on self-expanding metal stent (SEMS)-related complications in patients with locally advanced primary esophageal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from patients with locally advanced primary esophageal cancer who received SEMS placement with or without prior chemotherapy were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were grouped according to prior palliative therapy: group A (n = 41) had received SEMS only, and group B (n = 64) had received palliative chemotherapy prior to SEMS placement. Patients' age, stricture length, tumor location, and dysphagia score prior to SEMS placement were evaluated. The overall patient cohort had a median follow-up period of 129 days (range 11-463). Outcomes after SEMS placement, including technical and clinical success rates, the occurrence of complications, and overall survival, were compared.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the two groups regarding patients' age, stricture length, tumor location, and dysphagia score prior to SEMS placement. SEMS placement was technically successful in all patients, with no procedure-related complications reported. Clinical success was achieved in 95.1% of patients in group A and 96.8% of patients in group B. The duration of stent patency was significantly shorter in group B [162 days; 95% confidence interval (CI) 126.6-198.4 vs. group A (339 days; 95% CI 258.8-419.3], p = 0.001. No significant differences were seen between the two groups regarding dysphagia score improvement [group A (3.15 ± 0.57 to 1.17 ± 0.83; p < 0.001) and group B (3.17 ± 0.80 to 1.14 ± 0.79; p < 0.001); p = 0.66], complications [group A (10/41), and group B (24/64); p = 0.094], or overall survival [the median and mean overall survival periods were 105 (95% CI 30-180) and 132 days (95% CI 97-167), respectively, in group A, and 126 (95% CI 88-164) and 156 days (95% CI 132-180), respectively, in group B; p = 0.592].

CONCLUSION

Prior chemotherapy did not increase the risk of complications following SEMS placement in patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer. SEMS patency was significantly longer in patients who did not receive chemotherapy prior to SEMS placement.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 4, Case Series.

Comparison of 125 Iodine Seed-Loaded Stents with Different Diameters in Esophageal Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study

Currently, there are no recommendations or guidelines concerning the preferred diameter of esophageal stents for palliative treatment, owing to the lack of adequate evidence. We therefore conducted a retrospective cohort study to evaluate whether 18 mm stents would achieve a similar function of dysphagia relief with fewer complications and longer survival compared to 20 mm stents. Esophageal cancer patients who underwent 125 iodine seed-loaded stent placement with a diameter of either 18 mm (n = 103) or 20 mm (n = 54) were included at five hospitals in China. The stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to control potential confounding factors and bias that are inherent in a retrospective study. The primary endpoint was dysphagia relief. Stent-related complications and overall survival were assessed as the secondary endpoints. In the IPTW-adjusted analysis, no significant difference was found in the dysphagia score between the two groups either at 1 week after stent placement or at the last week before death. Despite a comparable rate of overall complications, there was a significantly lower incidence of severe retrosternal pain (15.4% vs. 32.7%, p = 0.013) and a trend toward longer survival (median survival, 176 days [95% confidence interval (CI) 144 to 209] vs. 109 days [92 to 126], p = 0.057) in the 18 mm group. An irradiated stent with a diameter of 18 mm showed a similar outcome of dysphagia relief to that achieved with a 20 mm diameter stent, but halved the incidence of retrosternal pain after stent placement.

Comparison of Efficacy of Self-Expandable Metallic Stent Placement in the Unresectable Esophageal Cancer Patients

This is a retrospective study to evaluate the prevention of complications of metallic stent placement in patients with unresectable advanced esophageal cancer. A total of 87 patients were treated with 4 types of metal stents in the esophagus over a period of 18 years. Stent placement was technically successful. The most common prior treatment was chemoradiotherapy. There were no significant differences in the rate of patients with no complications among the prior treatments. Approximately, 30% of patients had the most common chest pain in complications. Stent placement within one month after the completion of chemoradiotherapy should be avoided for the prevention of the chest pain. There was no significant difference in the rate of patients with no complications by lesion location. The rate of no complications was higher for the Niti-S stent than the Gianturco Z-stent or Ultraflex stent. Of note, no complications were noted for the Niti-S ultrathin stent at all. Among cases of stent-related death, the most common type of complication was respiratory disorder caused by the stent that seems to be thick and hard. Therefore, the stent with thin and flexible characteristics like the Niti-S ultrathin stent will solve the various problems of esophageal stent placement.