Lumen-apposing metal stents versus traditional self-expanding metal stents for endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic drainage has become the preferred treatment for pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs). There is still a lack of reliable evidence to prove which metal stent is the best choice for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage of PFCs. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) compared to traditional self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) in meta-analysis.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library up to July 15, 2023. Relevant publications that compared LAMS with traditional SEMS for drainage of patients' PFCs under EUS-guidance were included. This meta-analysis assessed endpoints using Review Manager 5.3 and Stata 14.0 statistical software.

RESULT

Nine citations comprising 707 patients with PFCs were included. The clinical success rate of LAMS tended to be higher than that of SEMS (RR = 1.07, 95%CI [1.00, 1.15], P = 0.05). LAMS had a lower technical success rate (RR = 0.97, 95%CI [0.94, 0.99], P = 0.02) and faster procedure time (minutes) (MD =  - 24.29, 95%CI [- 25.59, - 22.99], P < 0.00001) compared to SEMS. In addition, LAMS had fewer overall adverse events (RR = 0.64, 95%CI [0.48, 0.87], P = 0.004). For specific adverse events, LAMS had fewer migration (RR = 0.37, 95%CI [0.19, 0.72], P = 0.003), occlusion (RR = 0.43, 95%CI [0.22, 0.82], P = 0.01) and infection (RR = 0.38, 95%CI [0.20, 0.70], P = 0.002). There was no significant difference in bleeding and perforation between the two stents. For hospital stay (days), LAMS group was similar to SEMS group (MD =  - 3.34, 95%CI [- 7.71, - 1.03], P = 0.13). Regarding recurrence, LAMS group was fewer than SEMS group (RR = 0.41, 95%CI [0.21, 0.78], P = 0.007).

CONCLUSION

Compared to traditional SEMS, LAMS has a higher clinical success rate, faster procedure time, fewer adverse events, similar hospital stay and lower recurrence rate in EUS-guided drainage of PFCs. LAMS is a good choice with a high technical success rate over 95%, and using a shorter length or "one-step" operation can further improve it. Richer placement experience is required for LAMS placement under EUS-guidance.

Self-expanding metal stents versus decompression tubes as a bridge to surgery for patients with obstruction caused by colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Using self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) and decompression tubes (DT) as a bridge-to-surgery (BTS) treatment may avoid emergency operations for patients with colorectal cancer-caused obstructions. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the two approaches.

METHODS

We systematically retrieved literature from January 1, 2000, to May 30, 2023, from the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, SinoMed, Wanfang Data, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials databases. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or cohort studies of SEMS versus DT as BTS in colorectal cancer obstruction were selected. Risks of bias were assessed for RCTs and cohort studies using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool version 2 and Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions. Certainty of evidence was determined using the Graded Recommendation Assessment. Odds ratio (OR), mean difference (MD), and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were used to analyze measurement data.

RESULTS

We included eight RCTs and eighteen cohort studies involving 2,061 patients (SEMS, 1,044; DT, 1,017). Pooled RCT and cohort data indicated the SEMS group had a significantly higher clinical success rate than the DT group (OR = 1.99, 95% CI 1.04, 3.81, P = 0.04), but no significant difference regarding technical success (OR = 1.29, 95% CI 0.56, 2.96, P = 0.55). SEMS had a shorter postoperative length of hospital stays (MD = - 4.47, 95% CI - 6.26, - 2.69, P < 0.00001), a lower rates of operation-related abdominal pain (OR = 0.16, 95% CI 0.05, 0.50, P = 0.002), intraoperative bleeding (MD = - 37.67, 95% CI - 62.73, - 12.60, P = 0.003), stoma creation (OR = 0.41, 95% CI 0.23, 0.73, P = 0.002) and long-term tumor recurrence rate than DT (OR = 0.47, 95% CI 0.22, 0.99, P = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

SEMS and DT are both safe as BTS to avoid emergency surgery for patients with colorectal cancer obstruction. SEMS is preferable because of higher clinical success rates, lower rates of operation-related abdominal pain, intraoperative bleeding, stoma creation, and long-term tumor recurrence, as well as a shorter postoperative length of hospital stays. Trial registration CRD42022365951 .

Self-expanding metal stents for the treatment of malignant colon obstruction from extra-colonic malignancy versus intra-colonic malignancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The relative utility of self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) insertion for malignant colon obstruction (MCO) due to extra-colonic malignancy (ECM) versus intra-colonic malignancy (ICM) is understudied.

METHODS

A systematic search was done from inception-April 2021 to identify reports of safety and efficacy of SEMS insertion for the treatment of MCO-ECM versus MCO-ICM. A meta-analysis of proportions, comparative meta-analysis to compute relative risks (RR), and mean differences (MD) was performed. Subgroup analyses and influence analyses were conducted. The certainty in estimates of effect(s) was assessed using the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

Eight non-randomized studies were identified; 46% (39-53%) and 63% (59-67%) of patients in the ECM and ICM groups were male. Most obstructions were in the rectosigmoid colon in both ECM and ICM groups. SEMS insertion in MCO-ECM was associated with an increased risk of technical failure compared to MCO-ICM (RR 2.92; 1.13-7.54; Certainty: Very Low). Risk of clinical failure of SEMS was higher in MCO-ECM compared to MCO-ICM (RR 2.88; 1.58-2.52; Certainty: Very Low). The risk of clinical failure remained significant throughout the influence analysis, as well as on subgroup analysis. There was no significant difference in the risk of adverse events or luminal perforation with SEMS insertion among patients with MCO-ECM and MCO-ICM. On influence analysis, removal of one study unveiled a significant increase in the risk of luminal perforation in MCO-ECM (RR 3.22; 1.44-7.19; p = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

SEMS for MCO-ECM may have a technical success rate comparable to or questionably worse than MCO-ICM, with low certainty in estimate of effects. SEMS deployment in MCO-ECM carries a higher risk of clinical failure, with a questionably higher risk of luminal perforation.

CIRSE Standards of Practice on Placement of Upper Gastrointestinal Stents

BACKGROUND

Image-guided insertion of stents in the upper gastrointestinal trunk is an effective, minimally invasive treatment option to provide immediate relief of symptoms caused by upper gastrointestinal tract obstruction related to advanced-stage malignant causes or benign causes that lead to lumen narrowing.

PURPOSE

This document, as with all CIRSE Standards of Practice documents, is not intended to impose a standard of clinical patient care but will recommend a reasonable approach to best practices for performing stenting of the upper gastrointestinal tract, namely the oesophageal and gastroduodenal segments. Our purpose is to provide up-to-date recommendations for placement of upper gastrointestinal tract stents based on the previously published guidelines on this topic in 2005 and 2007.

METHODS

The writing group was established by the CIRSE Standards of Practice Committee and consisted of a group of internationally recognised experts in performing upper gastrointestinal stenting. The writing group reviewed the existing literature using PubMed to search for relevant publications in the English language up to September 2021. The final recommendations were formulated through consensus.

CONCLUSION

Insertion of stents in the oesophageal and gastroduodenal tracts has an established role in the successful management of malignant or benign obstructions. This Standards of Practice document provides up-to-date recommendations for the safe performance of upper gastrointestinal stent placement.

Outcomes After Colonic Self-Expanding Metal Stent Insertion Without Fluoroscopy: A Surgeon-Led 10-Year Experience

INTRODUCTION

Colonic self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) can be used to relieve malignant and benign large bowel obstruction (LBO) as a bridge to surgery (BTS) and for palliation. Guidelines suggest the use of fluoroscopic guidance for deployment. This may be difficult to obtain after hours and in certain centers. We aimed to determine the outcomes of stenting under endoscopic guidance alone.

METHODS

All patients who underwent SEMS insertion in our tertiary referral center between August 2010 and June 2021 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Patient demographics (age/gender), disease characteristics (benign versus malignant/location/stage), stenting intent (BTS versus palliative), and outcomes (technical success/stoma/time from stenting to resection/death/study end) were analyzed.

RESULTS

Fifty-three (n = 39, 73.6% male) patients underwent SEMS insertion. Indications included colorectal carcinoma (n = 48, 90.6%), diverticular stricture (n = 3), and gynecological malignancy (n = 2). In five (9.4%) patients (four BTS and one palliative), SEMSs deployment was not completed because of the inability to pass the guidewire. All underwent emergency surgery. In the BTS cohort (n = 29, median 70.4 [range 40.3-91.8] years), 10 patients underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The permanent stoma rate was 20.7% (n = 6). There was no 30- or 90-d mortality. In the palliative cohort (n = 24, median age 77.1 [range 54.4-91.9]), 16 (66.7%) were deceased at the study end. The median time from stenting to death was 5.2 (2.3-7.9) months.

CONCLUSIONS

SEMS placed under endoscopic visualization alone, palliatively and as a BTS, had acceptable stoma, morbidity, and mortality rates. These results show that SEMS insertion can be safely performed without fluoroscopy.

Endoscopic Management of Anastomotic Leakage after Esophageal Surgery - Ten Year Analysis in a Tertiary University Center

Background/Aims

Anastomotic leakage after esophageal surgery remains a feared complication. During the last decade, management of this complication changed from surgical revision to a more conservative and endoscopic approach. However, the treatment remains controversial as the indications for conservative, endoscopic, and surgical approaches remain non-standardized.

Methods

Between 2010 and 2020, all patients who underwent Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for underlying malignancy were included in this study. The data of 28 patients diagnosed with anastomotic leak were further analyzed.

Results

Among 141 patients who underwent resection, 28 (19.9%) developed an anastomotic leak, eight (28.6%) of whom died. Thirteen patients were treated with endoluminal vacuum therapy (EVT), seven patients with self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) four patients with primary surgery, one patient with a hemoclip, and three patients were treated conservatively. EVT achieved closure in 92.3% of the patients with a large defect and no EVT-related complications. SEMS therapy was successful in clinically stable patients with small defect sizes.

Conclusions

EVT can be successfully applied in the treatment of anastomotic leakage in critically ill patients, while SEMS should be limited to clinically stable patients with a small defect size. Surgery is only warranted in patients with sepsis with graft necrosis.

Endoscopic vacuum therapy versus stent treatment of esophageal anastomotic leaks (ESOLEAK): study protocol for a prospective randomized phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Intrathoracic anastomotic leaks represent a major complication after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. There are two promising endoscopic treatment strategies in the case of leaks: the placement of self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) or endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT). Up to date, there is no prospective data concerning the optimal endoscopic treatment strategy. This is a protocol description for the ESOLEAK trial, which is a first small phase 2 randomized trial evaluating the quality of life after treatment of anastomotic leaks by either SEMS placement or EVT.

METHODS

This phase 2 randomized trial will be conducted at two German tertiary medical centers and include a total of 40 patients within 2 years. Adult patients with histologically confirmed esophageal cancer, who have undergone Ivor Lewis esophagectomy and show an esophagogastric anastomotic leak on endoscopy or present with typical clinical signs linked to an anastomotic leak, will be included in our study taking into consideration the exclusion criteria. After endoscopic verification of the anastomotic leak, patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio into two treatment groups. The intervention group will receive EVT whereas the control group will be treated with SEMS. The primary endpoint of this study is the subjective quality of life assessed by the patient using a systematic and validated questionnaire (EORTC QLQ C30, EORTC QLQ-OES18 questionnaire). Important secondary endpoints are healing rate, period of hospitalization, treatment-related complications, and overall mortality.

DISCUSSION

The latest meta-analysis comparing implantation of SEMS with EVT in the treatment of esophageal anastomotic leaks suggested a higher success rate for EVT. The ESOLEAK trial is the first study comparing both treatments in a prospective manner. The aim of the trial is to find suitable endpoints for the treatment of anastomotic leaks as well as to enable an adequate sample size calculation and evaluate the feasibility of future interventional trials. Due to the exploratory design of this pilot study, the sample size is too small to answer the question, whether EVT or SEMS implantation represents the superior treatment strategy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03962244 . Registered on May 23, 2019. DRKS-ID DRKS00007941.

Comparison of safety between self-expanding metal stents as a bridge to surgery and emergency surgery based on pathology: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To explore the long-term oncological safety of using self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) as a bridge to surgery for acute obstructive colorectal cancer by comparing the pathological results of emergency surgery (ES) with elective surgery after the placement of SEMS.

METHODS

Studies comparing SEMS as a bridge to surgery with emergency surgery for acute obstructive colorectal cancer were retrieved through the databases of Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane libraries, and a meta-analysis was conducted based on the pathological results of the two treatments. Risk ratios (OR) or mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for the outcomes under random effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 27 studies were included, including 3 randomized controlled studies, 2 prospective studies, and 22 retrospective studies, with a total of 3737 patients. The presence of perineural invasion (RR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.48, 0.71, P < 0.00001), lymphovascular invasion (RR = 0.68, 95% CI 0.47, 0.99, P = 0.004) and vascular invasion (RR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.45, 0.99, P = 0.04) in SEMS group were significantly higher than those in ES group, and there was no significant difference in lymphatic invasion (RR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.77, 1.09, P = 0.33). The number of lymph nodes harvested in SEMS group was significantly higher than that in ES group (MD = - 3.18, 95% CI - 4.47, - 1.90, P < 0.00001). While no significant difference was found in the number of positive lymph nodes (MD = - 0.11, 95% CI - 0.63, 0.42, P = 0.69) and N stage [N0 (RR = 1.03, 95% CI 0.92, 1.15, P = 0.60), N1 (RR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.87, 1.14, P = 0.91), N2 (RR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.77, 1.15, P = 0.53)].

CONCLUSIONS

SEMS implantation in patients with acute malignant obstructive colorectal cancer may lead to an increase in adverse tumor pathological characteristics, and these characteristics are mostly related to the poor prognosis of colorectal cancer. Although the adverse effect of SEMS on long-term survival has not been demonstrated, their adverse effects cannot be ignored. The use of SEMS as the preferred treatment for patients with resectable obstructive colorectal cancer remains to be carefully weighed, especially when patients are young or the surgical risk is not very high.

Long-term tumour outcomes of self-expanding metal stents as 'bridge to surgery' for the treatment of colorectal cancer with malignant obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To explore the long-term oncological results of self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) as a surgical transition compared with those of simple emergency surgery.

METHODS

A systematic review of studies involving long-term tumour outcomes comparing SEMS with emergency surgery was conducted. All studies included information on 3-year and 5-year survival rates, 3-year and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates, and local and overall recurrence rates; the results were expressed as odds ratios.

RESULTS

Overall, 24 articles and 2508 patients were included, including 5 randomised controlled trials, 3 prospective studies, and 16 retrospective studies. The 3-year survival rate (odds ratio (OR) = 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69-1.12, P = 0.05), 5-year survival rate (OR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.70-1.17, P = 0.67), 3-year DFS rate (OR = 1.14, 95% CI 0.91-1.42, P = 0.65), 5-year DFS rate (OR = 1.35, 95% CI 0.91-2.02, P = 0.17), overall recurrence rate (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.77-1.41, P = 0.14), and local recurrence rate (OR 1.37, 95% CI 0.84-2.23, P = 0.92) were determined. There was no significant difference between the randomised and observational studies in the subgroup analysis, and the 5-year survival rate was higher in studies with a stent placement success rate of ≥ 95%.

CONCLUSION

SEMS implantation was a viable alternative in malignant left colon obstruction as a transition to surgery; its long-term survival results, including 5-year DFS and overall survival, were equivalent to those of emergent surgery.

Biliary strictures complicating living donor liver transplantation: Problems, novel insights and solutions

Biliary stricture complicating living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is a relatively common complication, occurring in most transplant centres across the world. Cases of biliary strictures are more common in LDLT than in deceased donor liver transplantation. Endoscopic management is the mainstay for biliary strictures complicating LDLT and includes endoscopic retrograde cholangiography, sphincterotomy and stent placement (with or without balloon dilatation). The efficacy and safety profiles as well as outcomes of endoscopic management of biliary strictures complicating LDLT is an area that needs to be viewed in isolation, owing to its unique set of problems and attending complications; as such, it merits a tailored approach, which is yet to be well established. The diagnostic criteria applied to these strictures are not uniform and are over-reliant on imaging studies showing an anastomotic narrowing. It has to be kept in mind that in the setting of LDLT, a subjective anastomotic narrowing is present in most cases due to a mismatch in ductal diameters. However, whether this narrowing results in a functionally significant narrowing is a question that needs further study. In addition, wide variation in the endotherapy protocols practised in most centres makes it difficult to interpret the results and hampers our understanding of this topic. The outcome definition for endotherapy is also heterogenous and needs to be standardised to allow for comparison of data in this regard and establish a clinical practice guideline. There have been multiple studies in this area in the last 2 years, with novel findings that have provided solutions to some of these issues. This review endeavours to incorporate these new findings into the wider understanding of endotherapy for biliary strictures complicating LDLT, with specific emphasis on diagnosis of strictures in the LDLT setting, endotherapy protocols and outcome definitions. An attempt is made to present the best management options currently available as well as directions for future research in the area.

Management of occluded self-expanding biliary metal stents in malignant biliary disease

BACKGROUND

Occlusion of self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) in malignant biliary obstruction occurs in up to 40% of patients. This study aimed to compare the different techniques to resolve stent occlusion in our collective of patients.

METHODS

Patients with malignant biliary obstruction and occlusion of biliary metal stent at a tertiary referral endoscopic center were retrospectively identified between April 1, 1994 and May 31, 2014. The clinical records were further analyzed regarding the characteristics of patients, malignant strictures, SEMS, management strategies, stent patency, subsequent interventions, survival time and case charges.

RESULTS

A total of 108 patients with biliary metal stent occlusion were identified. Seventy-nine of these patients were eligible for further analysis. Favored management was plastic stent insertion in 73.4% patients. Second SEMS were inserted in 12.7% patients. Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage and mechanical cleansing were conducted in a minority of patients. Further analysis showed no statistically significant difference in median overall secondary stent patency (88 vs. 143 days, P = 0.069), median survival time (95 vs. 192 days, P = 0.116), median subsequent intervention rate (53.4% vs. 40.0%, P = 0.501) and median case charge (€5145 vs. €3473, P = 0.803) for the treatment with a second metal stent insertion compared to plastic stent insertion. In patients with survival time of more than three months, significantly more patients treated with plastic stents needed re-interventions than patients treated with second SEMS (93.3% vs. 57.1%, P = 0.037).

CONCLUSIONS

In malignant biliary strictures, both plastic and metal stent insertions are feasible strategies for the treatment of occluded SEMS. Our data suggest that in palliative biliary stenting, patients especially those with longer expected survival might benefit from second SEMS insertion. Careful patient selection is important to ensure a proper decision for either management strategy.

The Feasibility of 18-mm-Diameter Colonic Stents for Obstructive Colorectal Cancers

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the characteristics and the feasibility of 18-mm-diameter stents for obstructive colorectal cancer, comparing the clinical courses with 22- mm-diameter stents.

METHODS

We retrospectively compared 33 consecutive cases treated with 18-mm-diameter stents (bridge to surgery [BTS] in 25, palliative therapy [PAL] in 8) with 27 consecutive cases treated with 22-mm-diameter stents (BTS in 21, PAL in 6) for obstructive colorectal cancer between May 2013 and November 2015 in our institution.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the 18-mm and 22-mm groups in technical success rates (97 and 96%, respectively) and clinical success rates (100 and 100%, respectively). As a BTS, the rates of complications and stoma formation were not significantly different between groups. For PAL, although the rates of complications and stent patency were similar, stent occlusion occurred in 1 patient (12.5%) in the 18-mm group.

CONCLUSIONS

The 18-mm-diameter stents were similarly effective when compared with 22-mm-diameter stents. Because 18-mm-diameter stents are easy to handle and produce less mechanical stress, they have the potential to decrease the perforation rate and mitigate the stent's impact on the tumors. 18-mm-diameter stents can be useful and safe, especially as a BTS.

Double-step invagination technique-A novel approach to retrieve embedded esophageal self-expanding metal stent

Self-expanding metal stenting is an established treatment modality in the management of esophageal growth and stricture. Reactive tissue ingrowth at the uncovered portion of the self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) anchors it in position, preventing its migration. When removal of such an embedded SEMS is clinically indicated, the procedure of endoscopic retrieval is fraught with serious complications. Temporary deployment of a larger fully covered "rescue" SEMS within the embedded SEMS has been reported to be useful in the extraction of the embedded SEMS. When the regression of embedding tissue, is only partially achieved by such "rescue" fully covered SEMS, further extraction of the embedded SEMS can prove to be technically challenging. Here we report two cases where a novel technique, namely the "double-step invagination technique," was useful in retrieving such embedded esophageal SEMS.

Anastomotic Leakage after Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery: Endoscopic Treatment

Anastomotic leakages substantially influence the outcome of patients after major surgery of the upper gastrointestinal tract. Endoscopy is important for making a diagnosis and for managing anastomotic leakages. By means of endoscopic inspection of the anastomotic site, not only the size and position of dehiscences but also the blood supply of the anastomotic region and an imminent leakage can be assessed. To close anastomotic leakages, several therapeutic methods are available, i.e. stenting, clipping, and the application of glue. In the majority of cases, the endoscopic application of a sponge for permanent suction (endoscopic vacuum-assisted closure therapy) is promising.

Self-expanding metal stents for the palliation of malignant gastric outlet obstruction in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy of self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) for the palliation of malignant gastric outlet obstruction in patients with and without peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of 62 patients who underwent SEMS placement for treatment of malignant gastroduodenal obstruction at our hospital over a six-year period. Stents were deployed through the scope under combined fluoroscopic and endoscopic guidance. Technical success was defined as successful stent placement and expansion. Clinical success was defined as an improvement in the obstructive symptoms and discharge from hospital without additional parenteral nutrition. According to carcinomatosis status, patients were assigned into groups with or without evidence of peritoneal disease.

RESULTS

In most cases, obstruction was caused by pancreatic (47%) or gastric cancer (23%). Technical success was achieved in 96.8% (60/62), clinical success in 79% (49/62) of all patients. Signs of carcinomatosis were identified in 27 patients (43.5%). The diagnosis was confirmed by pathology or previous operation in 7 patients (11.2%) and suspected by CT, MRI or ultrasound in 20 patients (32.2%). Presence of carcinomatosis was associated with a significantly lower clinical success rate compared to patients with no evidence of peritoneal disease (66.7% vs 88.6%, P = 0.036). There was no significant difference in overall survival between patients with or without PC (median 48 d vs 70 d, P = 0.21), but patients showed significantly longer survival after clinical success of SEMS placement compared to those experiencing clinical failure (median 14.5 d vs 75 d, P = 0.0003).

CONCLUSION

Given the limited therapeutic options and a clinical success rate of at least 66.7%, we believe that SEMS are a reasonable treatment option in patients with malignant gastric outlet obstruction with peritoneal carcinomatosis.

Socioeconomic Inequalities in the Utilization of Colorectal Stents for the Treatment of Malignant Bowel Obstruction

BACKGROUND

Colorectal stents are increasingly employed as a bridge to surgery or for palliative relief of malignant large bowel obstruction.

AIM

To explore determinants of inpatient colorectal stent utilization (CRSU).

METHODS

An analysis of the 2012 National Inpatient Sample was performed. International Classification of Diseases, 9th revision, codes were used to identify discharges associated with CRSU and patient/hospital factors for inclusion in a logistic regression model.

RESULTS

We identified 217,055 inpatient colonoscopies, approximating 1.1 million inpatient colonoscopies nationwide. Colorectal stents were placed in 1.4 % of all procedures. Across all racial groups, Medicare was the most common payer. Patients with commercial insurance had lower CRSU compared with Medicare patients [adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.83, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.75-0.92]. No gender disparities were identified (OR 0.96, 95 % CI 0.89-1.03). In addition, no racial differences in CRSU existed between Caucasians versus African-Americans (OR 0.94, 95 % CI 0.83-1.06) and Caucasians versus Hispanics (OR 0.96, 95 % CI 0.83-1.1). Compared with patients living in less affluent neighborhoods, those residing in more affluent areas had higher CRSU (OR 1.65, 95 % CI 1.46-1.86). This displayed a linear relationship with the odds of CRSU increasing as household income increased. Less affluent patients also had the highest total charges and longest wait time to CRSU. CRSU was highest among patients treated in larger medical centers (OR 1.7, 95 % CI 1.51-1.93) and teaching hospitals (OR 3.9, 95 % CI 3.2-4.8).

CONCLUSION

Individuals from less affluent neighborhoods have lower colorectal stent utilization. This disparity is independent of race and likely related to poorer access to healthcare resources.

Stents for colorectal obstruction: Past, present, and future

Since the development of uncovered self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) in the 1990s, endoscopic stents have evolved dramatically. Application of new materials and new designs has expanded the indications for enteral SEMS. At present, enteral stents are considered the first-line modality for palliative care, and numerous types of enteral stents are under development for extended clinical usage, beyond a merely palliative purpose. Herein, we will discuss the current status and the future development of lower enteral stents.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiography for biliary anastomotic strictures after liver transplantation

Biliary complications after liver transplantation (LT) are an important cause of morbidity and mortality. In most cases, an anastomosis of the bile duct is performed as a duct-to-duct reconstruction, which makes endoscopic therapy with endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) feasible. Biliary anastomotic strictures (AS) are the most common cause of biliary complications. The early detection of an AS, which can sometimes be challenging given that its clinical presentation is often subtle, is of key importance to obtain high treatment success. In this review, we focus on the management of AS after LT with a special emphasis on ERC.

Treatment of esophageal variceal hemorrhage with self-expanding metal stents as a rescue maneuver in a swiss multicentric cohort

Acute esophageal variceal bleeding in patients with portal hypertension remains a complication with a high mortality today. In cases refractory to standard therapy including endoscopic band ligation and pharmacological therapy, traditionally balloon tamponade has been used as salvage therapy. However, these techniques show several important limitations. Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) have been proposed as an alternative rescue treatment. The use of variceal stenting in 7 patients with a total of 9 bleeding episodes in three different Swiss hospitals is demonstrated. While immediate bleeding control is achieved in a high percentage of cases, the 5-day and 6-week mortality rate remain high. Mortality is strongly influenced by the severity of the underlying liver disease. Accordingly, our data represent a high-risk patient collective. Thanks to their safety and easy handling, SEMS are an interesting alternative to balloon tamponade as a bridging intervention to definitive therapy including the pre-hospital setting.

Covered nitinol stents for the treatment of esophageal strictures and leaks

AIM: To compare 2 different types of covered esophageal nitinol stents (Ultraflex and Choostent) in terms of efficacy, complications, and long-term outcome.

METHODS: A retrospective review of a consecutive series of 65 patients who underwent endoscopic placement of an Ultraflex stent (n = 33) or a Choostent (n = 32) from June 2001 to October 2009 was conducted.

RESULTS: Stent placement was successful in all patients without hospital mortality. No significant differences in patient discomfort and complications were observed between the Ultraflex stent and Choostent groups. The median follow-up time was 6 mo (inter-quartile range 3-16 mo). Endoscopic reintervention was required in 9 patients (14%) because of stent migration or food obstruction. No significant difference in the rate of reintervention between the 2 groups was observed (P = 0.8). The mean dysphagia score 1 mo after stent placement was 1.9 ± 0.3 for the Ultraflex stent and 2.1 ± 0.4 for the Choostent (P = 0.6). At 1-mo follow-up endoscopy, the cover membrane of the stent appeared to be damaged more frequently in the Choostent group (P = 0.34). Removal of the Choostent was possible up to 8 wk without difficulty.

CONCLUSION: Ultraflex and Choostent proved to be equally reliable for palliation of dysphagia and leaks. Removal of the Choostent was easy and safe under mild sedation.

Clinical application of metallic stents in treatment of esophageal carcinoma

AIM: To evaluate the effects of self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) in patients with malignant esophageal obstruction and to analyze their prognosis and complications.

METHODS: Seventy-four metallic stents were placed under fluoroscopic guidance in 66 patients with esophageal obstruction secondary to carcinoma, of whom, 6 cases were complicated by fistula.

RESULTS: After seventy-two stents were successfully used in 66 cases without any severe complications (technical successful rate was 97%), the dysphagia score improved from 3.3±0.6 to 0.8±0.5 (P<0.01), and life quality improved significantly in all these patients. All fistulae were sealed immediately after coated stents were inserted in the six patients. New stents were placed in two patients: the stent migrated more than 2 cm, in one patient and the stent slipped into stomach in the other. Minor bleeding was found only in 28 patients during the operation. Reobstruction was found in 12 patients, but was successfully cured under endoscopy. The survival rate was 78%, 57% and 11% for 6 mo, 1 year and 2 years respectively.

CONCLUSION: Placement of SEMS is a simple, safe, quick and efficient surgical method for treating esophageal carcinoma obstruction. It may be used mainly as a palliative treatment of esophageal obstruction secondary to carcinoma.