How much progress have we made?: a 20-year experience regarding esophageal stents for the palliation of malignant dysphagia

Summary Esophageal stents are widely used for the palliation of malignant esophageal obstruction. Advances in technology have made esophageal stenting technically feasible and widespread for such obstruction, but complications remain frequent. We present outcomes of a large cohort undergoing esophageal stent placement for malignant esophageal obstruction at a tertiary care cancer center. Patients who underwent placement of esophageal stents for malignancy-related esophageal obstruction between 1 January 2001 and 31 July 2020 were identified. Exclusion criteria included stents placed for benign stricture, fistulae, obstruction of proximal esophagus (proximal to 24 cm from incisors), or post-surgical indications. Patient charts were reviewed for demographics, procedure and stent characteristics, complications, and follow-up. A total of 242 patients underwent stent placement (median age: 64 years, 79.8% male). The majority, 204 (84.3%), had esophageal cancer. During the last two decades, there has been an increasing trend in the number of esophageal stents placed. Though plastic stents were previously used, these are no longer utilized. Complications are frequent and include early complications of pain in 68 (28.1%) and migration in 21 (8.7%) and delayed complications of recurrent symptoms of dysphagia in 46 (19.0%) and migration in 26 (10.7%). Over the study period, there has not been a significant improvement in the rate of complications. During follow-up, 92 (38%) patients required other enteral nutrition modalities after esophageal stent placement. No patient, treatment, or stent characteristics were significantly associated with stent complication or outcome. Esophageal stent placement is an increasingly popular method for palliation of malignant dysphagia. However, complications, particularly pain, migration, and recurrent symptoms of dysphagia are common. Almost 40% of patients may also require other methods of enteral access after esophageal stent placement. Given the high complication rates and suboptimal outcomes, removable stents should be considered as first-line in the case of poor palliative response.

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.

Stenting of the esophagus in the course of the malignant dysphagia in elderly patients

Esophageal cancer is a disease with difficult clinical management, and palliative therapy is the only predominant treatment. This retrospective study analyses the results of clinical management of elderly patients (>75 years of age) who were treated with esophageal stenting for malignant dysphagia due to primary esophageal cancer, including squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), as well as secondary esophageal malignant strictures due to non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients with esophago-respiratory fistula (ERF) were also included in the study. This study included 166 patients aged 75–88 (mean age, 78) years. Nine (5.4%) patients had upper malignant esophageal stenosis, 48 (28.1%) had the middle, 43 (25.9%) in the lower part of the esophagus, 49 (29.5%) patients had EAC-related stenosis, and 17 (10.2%) patients reported lung cancer-related esophageal stenosis. Dysphagia was rated at 2.8 (range, 2–3) before stenting and at 1.2 (range, 1–2) after the stenting procedure. Seven (4%) patients experienced stenting migration, 12 (7.2%) had granulation tissue overgrowth and prosthesis obstruction, two (1.2%) developed respiratory failure, and one (0.6%) patient died. Twelve (7.2%) patients were treated for ERF with double-stenting, and three (1.8%) patients developed a secondary fistula after the stent implantation. The mean survival of patients with esophageal cancer and ERF was 101.8 days and 62.5 days, respectively. Esophageal stenting has proven a safe procedure in patients over 75 years of age. It has a low rate of stenting obstruction and migration. Patients with ERF are a particularly difficult group to treat, show very poor outcomes and short survival rates.