Is a small-caliber or large-caliber endoscope more suitable for colonic self-expandable metallic stent placement? A randomized controlled study

Objectives: The colonic self-expandable metallic stent (C-SEMS) with a 9-French (Fr) delivery system allows for a small-caliber endoscope (SCE) to be used to treat malignant colonic obstruction. Despite the lack of evidence, the SCE has become popular because it is considered easier to insert than the large-caliber endoscope (LCE). We aimed to determine whether the SCE is more suitable than the LCE for C-SEMS placement. Methods: Between July 2018 and November 2019, 50 consecutive patients who were scheduled to undergo C-SEMS for colon obstruction were recruited in this study. Patients were randomized to the SCE or LCE group. The SCE and LCE were used with 9-Fr and 10-Fr delivery systems, respectively. The primary outcome was the total procedure time. Secondary outcomes were the technical success rate, complication rate, clinical success rate, insertion time, guidewire-passage time, stent-deployment time, and colonic obstruction-scoring-system score. Results: Forty-five patients (SCE group, n = 22; LCE group, n = 23) were analyzed. The procedure time in the LCE group (median, 20.5 min) was significantly ( p = 0.024) shorter than that in the SCE group (median, 25.1 min). The insertion time in the LCE group (median, 2.0 min) was significantly ( p = 0.0049) shorter than that in the SCE group (median, 6.0 min). A sub-analysis of the procedure difficulties showed that the insertion time in the LCE group (median, 5.0 min) was significantly shorter than that in the SCE group (median, 8.5 min). Conclusion: Both LCE and SCE can be used for C-SEMS; however, LCE is more suitable than SCE as it achieved a faster and equally efficacious C-SEMS placement as that of SCE. Clinical trial registration number: University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN 32748)

Interwoven versus Knitted Self-Expandable Metallic Stents: A Comparison Study of Stent-Induced Tissue Hyperplasia in the Rat Esophagus

This study investigated whether interwoven self-expandable metallic stent (I-SEMS) placement suppresses stent-induced tissue hyperplasia compared with conventional knitted self-expandable metallic stent (K-SEMS) placement in a rat esophageal model. Twelve rats were randomly assigned to the I-SEMS (n = 6) and K-SEMS (n = 6) groups. All rats were sacrificed 4 weeks after the stent placement. The degree of stent-induced tissue hyperplasia on esophagography and histologic examination was compared between the groups. Stent placement was technically successful in all rats. Esophagography revealed significantly greater mean luminal diameter of the stented esophagus in the I-SEMS group than in the K-SEMS group (p < 0.001). Histologic examination revealed a significantly lower percentage of tissue hyperplasia area and a significantly thinner submucosal fibrosis in the I-SEMS group than in the K-SEMS group (all p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in the thickness of the epithelial layers (p = 0.290) and degree of inflammatory cell infiltration (p = 0.506). Formation of stent-induced tissue hyperplasia was evident with both I-SEMS and K-SEMS. Placement of I-SEMSs with a small cell size and high flexibility seems to be effective in suppressing stent-induced tissue hyperplasia compared with placement of K-SEMSs in rat esophageal models.

A pilot study of novel duodenal covered self-expandable metal stent fixation

Migration of duodenal covered self-expandable metal stents (C-SEMSs) is the main cause of stent dysfunction in patients with malignant gastric outlet obstruction (mGOO). Because endoscopic SEMS placement is frequently selected in patients with poor performance status, we concurrently focused on the safety of the treatment. This pilot study included 15 consecutive patients with mGOO who underwent duodenal partially covered SEMS (PC-SEMS) placement with fixation using an over-the-scope-clip (OTSC). Technical feasibility, clinical success for oral intake estimated by the Gastric Outlet Obstruction Scoring System (GOOSS) score, and adverse events including stent migration were retrospectively assessed. All procedures were successful, and clinical success was achieved in 86.7% (13/15). Mean GOOSS scores were improved from 0.07 to 2.53 after the procedure (P < 0.001). Median survival time was 84 days, and all patients were followed up until death. Stent migration occurred in one case (6.7%) at day 17, which was successfully treated by removal of the migrated PC-SEMS using an enteroscope. For fixation using an OTSC, additional time required for the procedure was 8.9 ± 4.1 min and we did not observe OTSC-associated adverse events. Poor performance status was associated with clinical success (P = 0.03), but we could provide the treatment safely and reduce mGOO symptoms even in patients with poor performance status. In conclusion, duodenal PC-SEMS fixation using an OTSC is feasible for preventing stent migration in patients with mGOO including those with poor performance status.

Short-Term and Long-Term Outcomes of Self-Expanding Metallic Stent Versus Decompressing Stoma as the Bridge of Elective Surgery for Left-Sided Obstructive Colon Cancer A Meta-Analysis

Background: Compared to emergency resection, elective surgery is a better choice for the people suffering from left-sided obstructive colon cancer (LOSCC). Both are considered as self-expanding decompressing stoma (DS) construction and metallic stent (SEMS) placement are accessible bridges for elective surgery (BTS). We aimed to perform meta-analysis of LOSCC databases to comparethe pros and cons of the two options. Method: LOSCC patients with curative intent were searched in medical databases, including PUBMED, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library. Results were expressed as risk ratios. The meta-analysis was performed by Revman5.3. Result: Three comparative studies were selected, including 847 LOSCC patients. The complete analysis showed that there is no statistically significant difference regarding primary anastomosis (0R=1.15, 95% CI 0.30-4.41, P=0.84), There was no significant difference in 90-day recurrence rate post resection (OR=0.90, 95% CI 0.68-1.20, P=0.47), and major complication (OR=1.86, 95% CI 0.98-3.54, P=0.06) between SEMS and DS group. In addition, the permanent stomas (OR=0.82; 95% CI 0.60-1.13, P=0.23), overall recurrence (OR=0.82, 95% CI 0.48-1.40, P=0.46), and overall survival of 3-years (OR=1.24, 95% CI 0.69-2.25, P=0.48) showed no statistical difference between SEMS and DS group. Conclusion: The after-effects of both short-term and long-term in patients who were treated by SEMS or DS as BTS for LSOCC were not statistically significant. Considering of the even complicated surgical interventions, prolonged hospital stays, and worse body image of DS construction, SEMS placement seems to be the preferred option in treating LSOCC patients.

Risk Factors of Duodenobiliary Reflux-Related Dysfunction of Covered Biliary Metal Stents after Treatment of Duodenal Stricture in Patients with Malignant Biliary and Duodenal Obstruction

Duodenal obstruction is often accompanied with unresectable malignant distal biliary obstruction in patients who have undergone biliary self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement. Duodenobiliary reflux (DBR) is a major cause of recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) after covered biliary SEMS placement. We analyzed the risk factors for DBR-related SEMS dysfunction following treatment for malignant duodenal obstruction. Sixty-one patients with covered SEMS who underwent treatment for duodenal obstruction were included. We excluded patients with tumor-related stent dysfunction (n = 6) or metal stent migration (n = 1). Fifty-four patients who underwent covered biliary SEMS placement followed by duodenal metal stenting or surgical gastrojejunostomy were included. Eleven patients had DBR-related biliary SEMS dysfunction after treatment of duodenal obstruction. There was no difference between the duodenal metal stenting group and the surgical gastrojejunostomy group. Duodenal obstruction below the papilla of Vater and a score of ≤2 on the Gastric Outlet Obstruction Scoring System after treatment for duodenal obstruction were associated with DBR-related covered biliary SEMS dysfunction. Thus, creating a reliable route for ensuring good oral intake and avoiding DBR in patients with duodenal obstruction below the papilla of Vater are both important factors in preventing DBR-related covered biliary SEMS dysfunction.

Feasibility of Duodenal Covered Self-Expandable Metal Stent Fixation: A Pilot Study (With Video)

Migration of duodenal covered self-expandable metal stents (C-SEMSs) is the main cause of stent dysfunction in patients with malignant gastric outlet obstruction (mGOO). Because endoscopic SEMS placement is frequently selected in patients with poor performance status, we concurrently focused on the safety of the treatment. This pilot study included 15 consecutive patients with mGOO who underwent duodenal C-SEMS placement with fixation using an over-the-scope-clip (OTSC). Technical feasibility, clinical success for oral intake estimated by the Gastric Outlet Obstruction Scoring System (GOOSS) score, and adverse events including stent migration were assessed. All procedures were successful, and clinical success was achieved in 86.7% (13/15). Mean GOOSS scores were improved from 0.07 to 2.53 after the procedure (P < 0.001). Stent migration occurred in one case (6.7%) with no other adverse events. For fixation using an OTSC, additional time required for the procedure was 8.9 ± 4.1 minutes. Poor performance status was associated with clinical success (P = 0.03), but we could provide the treatment safely and reduce mGOO symptoms even in patients with poor performance status. In conclusion, duodenal C-SEMS fixation using an OTSC is feasible for preventing stent migration in patients with mGOO including those with poor performance status.

Endoscopic Vacuum Therapy in Patients with Transmural Defects of the Upper Gastrointestinal Tract: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

A transmural defect of the upper gastrointestinal (UGI) tract is a life-threatening condition associated with high morbidity and mortality. Recently, endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) was used for managing UGI defects and showed promising results. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to synthesize evidence on the efficacy of EVT in patients with transmural defects of the UGI tract. We searched the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases for publications on the effect of EVT on successful closure, mortality, complications, and post-EVT strictures. Methodological quality was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa quality assessment scale. This meta-analysis included 29 studies involving 498 participants. The pooled estimate rate of successful closure with EVT was 0.85 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.81–0.88). The pooled estimate rates for mortality, complications, and post-EVT strictures were 0.11, 0.10, and 0.14, respectively. According to the etiology of the transmural defect (perforation vs. leak and fistula), no significant difference was observed in successful closure (odds ratio [OR]: 1.45, 95% CI: 0.45–4.67, p = 0.53), mortality (OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.24–2.46, p = 0.66), complications (OR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.17–5.15, p = 0.94), or post-EVT stricture rates (OR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.12–4.24, p = 0.70). The successful closure rate was significantly higher with EVT than with self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) placement (OR: 3.14, 95% CI: 1.23–7.98, p = 0.02). EVT is an effective and safe treatment for leaks and fistulae, as well as for perforations in the UGI. Moreover, EVT seems to be a better treatment option than SEMS placement for UGI defects.

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

Main recommendations 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.