Endoscopically placed venting gastrostomy can be a safe and effective palliative intervention in benign and malignant gastrointestinal obstruction

IntroductionChronic gastrointestinal obstruction can precipitate a constellation of symptoms including nausea, vomiting, abdominal distension and pain that negatively impact on health-related quality of life. Decompression via venting gastrostomy can offer symptomatic relief but safety and efficacy data are sparse. This study characterises the diverse venting percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (vPEG) cohort at our tertiary referral centre and defines the safety and efficacy of this procedure.MethodsPatients undergoing vPEG between May 2012 and June 2020 were identified from a prospectively maintained database and demographic, procedure-related and mortality data were extracted. Retrospective analysis of case notes provided data on patient symptoms. Last follow-up was May 2021.Results27 patients (median age 63, range 18–90 years) underwent vPEG insertion. The majority of vPEGs were for patients with obstruction secondary to locally advanced or metastatic malignancy (n=21/27, 77.8%). Six procedures were performed for benign disease (n=6/27, 22.2%). No patients developed the recognised serious complications of bleeding, perforation or peritonitis from vPEG insertion. Symptoms of nausea (p=0.006), vomiting (p<0.001), abdominal distension (p<0.001) and abdominal pain (p=0.002) were improved following vPEG. Pain beyond the expected postprocedural discomfort was associated with a lower number of days survived postprocedure (p=0.026).ConclusionvPEG can be a safe and efficacious palliative intervention for benign and malignant chronic gastrointestinal obstruction. Severe postprocedural pain should be promptly investigated to exclude a potential complication. A defined clinical strategy for assessing and managing these patients would facilitate wider recognition of the benefits of vPEG and improve the safety profile in centres with more limited experience.

Palliative treatment for malignant gastrointestinal obstruction with peritoneal carcinomatosis: enteral stenting versus surgery

Background and study aims Management of malignant gastrointestinal obstruction (MGIO) is more challenging in the presence of peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC). Outcomes data to guide the management of MGIO with PC are lacking. We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes and adverse events between endoscopic and surgical palliation and identify predictors of stent success in patients with MGIO with PC. Patients and methods Consecutive inpatients with MGIO with PC between 2000 and 2018 who underwent palliative surgery or enteral stenting were included. Clinical success was defined as relief of obstructive symptoms. Results Fifty-seven patients with enteral stenting and 40 with palliative surgery were compared. The two groups did not differ in rates of technical success, 30-day mortality, or recurrence. Clinical success from a single intervention (63.2 % versus 95 %), luminal patency duration (27 days vs. 145 days), and survival length (148 days vs. 336 days) favored palliative surgery (all P < 0.05) but the patients in the surgery group had a trend toward better Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) status. The rate of adverse events (AEs) (10.5 % vs. 50 %), the severity of AEs, and length of hospital stay (4.5 days vs. 9 days) favored enteral stenting (P < 0.05). The need for more than one stent was associated with a higher likelihood of stent failure. Conclusions Our study suggests that enteral stenting is safer and associated with a shorter hospital stay than palliative surgery, although unlike other MGIOs, clinical success is lower in MGIO with PC. Identification of the right candidates and potential predictors of clinical success in ECOG-matched large-scale studies is needed to validate these results.

Malignant Gastrointestinal Obstruction: Options for Decompression and Nutrition

Malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) is a relatively common condition affecting patients with advanced malignancy. Therapeutic interventions should be aimed at maintaining quality of life. Given the lack of prospective controlled studies in this patient population, patient management is often based on local practice patterns and anecdotal experience. To foster a collaborative approach among the members of the patient care team involving internal medicine, oncology, palliative care, clinical nutrition, surgery, gastroenterology, and interventional radiology physicians, it is important to improve our understanding of MBO. The purpose of this article is to describe the clinical presentation, pathophysiology, as well as medical, surgical, and nonsurgical palliative options available to patients with MBO for purposes of decompression and nutrition.

Covered Metal Stent after Dysfunction of Uncovered Stents for Palliation of Gastrointestinal Malignant Obstruction

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) have been used for the palliative treatment of malignant gastrointestinal tract obstruction. However, restenosis or incomplete expansion of a first stent is a frequent complication, and the effectiveness of reintervention with placement of a second stent is still controversial. <b><i>Objective:</i></b> To evaluate the clinical outcomes of covered SEMS (cSEMS) placement after dysfunction of uncovered SEMS (uSEMS) by the stent-in-stent technique. <b><i>Patients and Methods:</i></b> We retrospectively studied a consecutive series of patients receiving palliative treatment for malignant gastrointestinal obstruction with cSEMS placement after uSEMS dysfunction in a tertiary center from January 2013 to August 2018. Technical and clinical success, time of patency, and adverse events were analyzed. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Twelve patients were included; their mean age was 60 ± 9 years. Eleven patients had gastric outlet obstruction, and 1 patient had compression of the transverse colon due to gastric neoplasia. In 5 cases, there was absence of early clinical success with uSEMS and stent dysfunction in 7 cases (median patency time: 81 days). There was 100% technical success and 91.7% clinical success after cSEMS placement. There were no adverse events nor need for reintervention. The median patency time after placement of both stents was 163 days (vs. 71 days with the initial stent). <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> cSEMS placement after uSEMS dysfunction is technically feasible and a clinically effective treatment for patients with recurrent malignant gastrointestinal obstruction, with good stent patency in the medium/long term. This approach seems to be safe and without increase in adverse effects.