scholarly journals Evaluation of a 12-mm diameter covered self-expandable end bare metal stent for malignant biliary obstruction

2018 ◽  
Vol 06 (10) ◽  
pp. E1164-E1170
Author(s):  
Kazunori Nakaoka ◽  
Senju Hashimoto ◽  
Naoto Kawabe ◽  
Takuji Nakano ◽  
Toshiki Kan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Biliary Obstruction ◽  
Hazard Analysis ◽  
Bare Metal Stent ◽  
Malignant Biliary Obstruction ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Metallic Stents ◽  
Bare Metal ◽  
Metal Stent

Abstract Background and study aims Biliary metallic stents are used to drain unresectable malignant distal biliary obstructions. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a novel 12-mm-diameter covered, self-expandable end bare metal stent (12-mm CSEEMS). Patients and methods We evaluated 99 patients with unresectable malignant distal biliary obstructions treated with covered biliary metallic stents. Of the 99 patients, 33 underwent 12-mm CSEEMS placement between June 2015 and April 2017 (12-mm-CSEEMS group) and 66 underwent 10-mm fully-covered self-expandable metal stent (FCSEMS) placement between January 2010 and July 2015 (10-mm-FCSEMS group). The overall survival (OS), the recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO), cause of RBO, time to RBO (TRBO) and adverse events in 12-mm-CSEEMS group and 10-mm-FCSEMS group were evaluated retrospectively. Results The OS tended to be longer in the 12-mm-CSEEMS group (log rank, P = 0.081) and TRBO was significantly longer in the 12-mm-CSEEMS group (log rank, P = 0.001) than in the 10-mm-FCSEMS group. Both univariate (HR, 0.449; 95 % CI, 0.27967 – 0.72215; P = 0.001) and multivariate (HR, 0.458; 95 % CI, 0.28395 – 0.73744; P = 0.001) Cox hazard analysis found that risk of RBO was significantly lower in 12-mm CSEEMS than in 10-mm FCSEMS. There were no significant differences between the 12-mm-CSEEMS group and 10-mm-FCSEMS group regarding the cause of RBO and adverse events. Conclusions The 12-mm CSEEMS showed a low risk of RBO compared with 10-mm FCSEMS and was considered to be effective and safe for draining unresectable malignant distal biliary obstruction.

scholarly journals Late Adverse Events After Implantation of Sirolimus-Eluting Stent and Bare-Metal Stent

2014 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 168-179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masahiro Natsuaki ◽  
Takeshi Morimoto ◽  
Yutaka Furukawa ◽  
Yoshihisa Nakagawa ◽  
Kazushige Kadota ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Bare Metal Stent ◽  
Bare Metal ◽  
Metal Stent ◽  
Sirolimus Eluting Stent

scholarly journals TCT-184 Late Adverse Events After Implantation of Sirolimus-eluting Stent and Bare-metal Stent: 4-7 years follow-up of the CREDO-Kyoto Registry Cohort-2

2013 ◽  
Vol 62 (18) ◽  
pp. B60 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masahiro Natsuaki ◽  
Takeshi Morimoto ◽  
Yutaka Furukawa ◽  
Yoshihisa Nakagawa ◽  
Kazushige Kadota ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Bare Metal Stent ◽  
Bare Metal ◽  
Metal Stent ◽  
Sirolimus Eluting Stent

Randomized comparison between bare-metal stent plus colchicine versus drug-eluting stent alone in prevention of clinical adverse events after percutaneous coronary intervention

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camila Correa-Sadouet ◽  
A Matías Rodríguez-Granillo ◽  
Camila Gallardo ◽  
Juan Mieres ◽  
Lucía Fontana ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Stent Implantation ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Bare Metal Stent ◽  
Drug Eluting Stent ◽  
Bare Metal ◽  
Metal Stent ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary ◽  
Drug Eluting

The use of colchicine is associated with a significant reduction of cardiac adverse events in patients with coronary artery disease. Past small randomized trials with oral immunosuppressive or anti-inflammatory therapies have demonstrated a reduction of adverse clinical events after bare metal stent implantation. The potential role of adjunctive colchicine after bare-metal stent implantation, compared with drug-eluting stent alone, is unknown. The primary end point of the study will be to compare cost–effectiveness at 1 year of follow-up of coronary intervention with bare-metal stent implantation plus 1 mg of colchicine during 3 months versus percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent implantation alone. ClinicalTrials.gov  identifier: NCT04382443

Distal bare metal stent implantation during thoracic endovascular aortic repair is beneficial to treat complicated type B aortic dissection: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Vascular ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 170853812096840
Author(s):  
Xuanzhu Kong ◽  
Li Peng ◽  
Fengrui Wu ◽  
Jiaxue Bi ◽  
Hongrui Pan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Aortic Dissection ◽  
Statistical Method ◽  
Bare Metal Stent ◽  
Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair ◽  
Endovascular Aortic Repair ◽  
Bare Metal ◽  
Type B ◽  
Metal Stent ◽  
Type B Aortic Dissection

Objective To explore whether thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) plus distal bare metal stent (BMS) implantation leads to favorable clinical outcomes compared with standard TEVAR in treating acute complicated type B aortic dissection. Methods Relevant publications were found through a precise search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE. Count data were calculated as the odd ratio (OR)and 95% confidence interval (CI) using the Mantel–Haenszel statistical method, quantitative data were calculated as mean difference and 95% CI using Inverse Variance statistical method. When the data heterogeneity was large, with an I2 > 50%, a random-effects model and sensitivity analysis were performed. The analysis tool we used was the software Revman 5.3 and G*power 3.1. Results There were 7 publications involving 958 patients who were enrolled ultimately. The incidence of unplanned secondary intervention and postoperative adverse events in the TEVAR + BMS were lower than standard TEVAR (OR, 0.42, (95% CI, 0.23 to 0.75); OR, 0.57, (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.90)), and the pooled number needed to treat was 15 for unplanned secondary intervention and 15 for postoperative adverse events. There were no significant difference in the aortic-related or all-cause 30-day mortality (OR, 0.81, (95% CI, 0.25 to 2.61); OR, 0.47, (95% CI, 0.18 to 1.22)), aortic-related, all-cause mortality at least 6 months or incidence of the postoperative endoleak (OR, 0.47, (95% CI, 0.17 to 1.32); OR, 0.42, (95% CI, 0.17 to 1.06); OR, 0.81, (95% CI, 0.32 to 2.05)). Conclusion There is no significant outcome difference except for reduced reintervention but this does not seem to adversely affect survival. It is unclear whether this justifies the additional cost of placing it in every complicated type B aortic dissection regardless of anatomy after standard TEVAR alone. Besides, more data are needed to verify the adjunctive distal bare metal stents’ performance at different dissection stages.

726 EVALUATION OF THE IMPACT OF BARE-METAL STENT TIPS ON OVERALL SURVIVAL IN PATIENTS WITH HEPATOCELLULAR CARINOMA (HCC)

2012 ◽  
Vol 56 ◽  
pp. S286
Author(s):  
E. Knüppel ◽  
M. Schultheiss ◽  
W. Euringer ◽  
E. Panther ◽  
D. Bettinger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Bare Metal Stent ◽  
Bare Metal ◽  
Metal Stent ◽  
The Impact
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document