Lumen-apposing metal stents for approved and off-label indications: a single-centre experience

Lumen-apposing metal stents for anastomosis creation throughout the gastrointestinal tract: A large single-center experience

Objectives

The introduction of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) has revolutionized the field of therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of LAMS in creating an endoscopic ultrasound-guided anastomosis between two segments of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract.

Methods

Data from all consecutive LAMS procedures for anastomosis creation between two segments of the GI, conducted between October 2019 and February 2024, were retrospectively analyzed for technical success (defined as correct deployment of the LAMS in the target), clinical success (defined as achievement of the intended clinical goal), and adverse events.

Results

A total of 145 LAMS procedures were performed in 136 patients. Indications for LAMS procedures included the need for endoscopic access to or reversal of surgically excluded segments of the GI tract (n = 73, 50.3%), and the alleviation of any GI outflow obstruction (n = 72, 49.7%). The overall technical and clinical success rates were very high (97.2% and 95.2%, respectively). Adverse events were observed in 20/145 (13.8%) cases, including 11 (7.6%) minor events (AGREE <3) and nine (6.2%) major events (AGREE ≥3). Major events included stent migration (n = 1), persisting fistula (n = 3), and bleeding (n = 4). All adverse events were successfully managed, and there were no procedure-related deaths. Loss of LAMS patency occurred in 4/145 (2.8%) cases and could be endoscopically managed in all cases.

Conclusions

The creation of anastomoses with LAMS between two segments of the GI tract appears to be effective and safe, with a low reintervention rate due to loss of LAMS patency.

Lumen-apposing metal stents provide early and late clinical benefits for the management of benign gastrointestinal strictures: Is there a role for definitive therapy?

Objectives

This study aimed to characterize the clinical outcomes, safety, and efficacy of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) in treating benign gastrointestinal strictures.

Methods

A single-center retrospective review of all patients who underwent LAMS placement for benign strictures from June 2017 to July 2023. Primary outcomes were technical success, early clinical success, late clinical success (LCS), and sustained post-LAMS clinical success (SPLCS). Secondary outcomes included stent dwell time, stenosis changes, adverse events, reintervention rates, and symptomatology evaluation.

Results

Thirty-five patients underwent placement of 42 LAMS (74% female, mean age: 54.2 ± 11.7 years). Anastomotic strictures accounted for 64% of cases (N = 27, 45% at the gastrojejunal anastomosis). The median STD was 91.0 days (interquartile range [IQR]: 55.0-132.0). Technical success was obtained in all cases. Early clinical successand LCS were achieved in 80% of cases overall. SPLCS was achieved in 45% (n = 15) of cases. The overall reintervention rate was 63%, with a median time to reintervention being 50.5 days (IQR: 24-105). adverse events occurred in 28% (n = 12) overall, with a 24% migration rate (n = 10). Follow-up was completed in 83% of cases with a median duration of 629 days (range: 192.0-1297.0). Overall symptom improvement occurred in 79% (n = 27) during indwelling LAMS versus 58% and 56% at 30- and 60-days post-removal, respectively.

Conclusions

LAMS for benign gastrointestinal strictures are associated with high technical and early clinical success/LCS rates, positive quality-of-life metrics, and a tolerable adverse event rate. Overall, recurrence of symptoms and high reintervention rates post-LAMS removal reinforce the difficulty in managing benign gastrointestinal strictures but also argue for LAMS as a definitive therapy in select cases.

Endoscopic stenting for malignant gastric outlet obstruction: focusing on comparison of endoscopic stenting and surgical gastrojejunostomy

Malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) is a condition characterized by blockage or narrowing where the stomach empties its contents into the small intestine due to primary malignant tumors or metastatic diseases. This condition leads to various symptoms such as nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and weight loss. To manage malignant GOO, different treatment options have been employed, including surgical gastrojejunostomy (SGJ), gastroduodenal stenting (GDS) using self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS), and endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastrojejunostomy (EUS-GJ). This review focuses on comparing the clinical outcomes of endoscopic stenting (GDS and EUS-GJ) with SGJ for malignant GOO. Studies have shown that GDS with SEMS provides comparable clinical outcomes and safety for the palliation of obstructive symptoms. The choice between covered and uncovered SEMS remains controversial, as different studies have reported varying results. EUS-GJ, performed via endoscopic ultrasound guidance, has shown promising efficacy and safety in managing malignant GOO, but further studies are needed to establish it as the primary treatment option. Comparative analyses suggest that GDS has higher recurrence and reintervention rates compared to EUS-GJ and SGJ, with similar overall procedural complications. However, bleeding rates were lower with GDS than with SGJ. Randomized controlled trials are required to determine the optimal treatment approach for malignant GOO.

Single-session endoscopic ultrasound-directed transgastric endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with a dedicated over-the-scope fixation device: Feasibility study (with video)

OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic ultrasound-directed transgastric endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP; EDGE) is proposed as a less invasive alternative to laparoscopy-assisted ERCP. However, postponing ERCP for 1-2 weeks to reduce the risk of lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) migration may not be practical in urgent cases such as cholangitis, leading to increased procedural burden. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and safety of a single-session EDGE utilizing a dedicated over-the-scope fixation device.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from three referral centers was performed, including consecutive single-session EDGE procedures with the Stentfix device, utilizing only 20 × 10 mm LAMS. The primary outcome was LAMS migration, and key secondary outcomes included adverse events and technical success.

RESULTS

Twenty patients (mean age 59 [standard deviation (SD) ± 11.3] years, 65.0% female) with a predominantly classic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass history (90.0%, mini-bypass 10.0%) underwent ERCP for indications such as common bile duct stones (60.0%), cholangitis (25.0%), or biliary pancreatitis (15.0%). No LAMS migration occurred, and technical success was achieved in 95.0%. Over a median follow-up of 102 days (interquartile range [IQR] 24.8-182), two adverse events were reported (10.0%), comprising postprocedural pain (grade I) and post-ERCP pancreatitis (grade II).

CONCLUSION

While acknowledging potential contributions from LAMS orientation and stent caliber, our data suggest that utilizing a dedicated over-the-scope stent fixation device may effectively prevent LAMS migration during single-session EDGE without the need for endoscopic suturing.

Indirect comparison of various lumen-apposing metal stents for EUS-guided biliary and gallbladder drainage: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Studies assessing EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) or gallbladder drainage (EUS-GB) using lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) have shown variable results based on the type of LAMS. We performed a meta-analysis of the available data.

METHODS

Multiple online databases were searched for studies using LAMSs (Axios [Boston Scientific, Marlborough, Mass, USA] or Spaxus [Taewoong Medical Co, Gimpo, Korea]) for EUS-BD and EUS-GB. The outcomes of interest were technical success, clinical success, and adverse events. Pooled proportions along with 95% confidence intervals were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 18 observational studies were included: 11 for the Axios stent (433 patients; mean age, 72 years; 54% male) and 7 for the Spaxus stent (242 patients; mean age, 74 years; 50% male). The respective pooled outcomes for the Axios stent (EUS-BD and EUS-GB, respectively) were technical success, 96.2% and 96.2%; clinical success, 92.8% and 92.7%; total adverse events, 10.1% and 23.6%; and bleeding, 3.7% and 4.8%. The respective pooled outcomes for the Spaxus stent (EUS-BD and EUS-GB, respectively) were technical success, 93.8% and 95.9%; clinical success, 90.1% and 94.2%; total adverse events, 12.6% and 9.5%; and bleeding, 3.1% and 1.8%.

CONCLUSIONS

Axios and Spaxus stents demonstrate similar pooled technical and clinical success rates. Adverse events occurred in 23.6% of patients (Axios stent) and 9.5% of patients (Spaxus stent) during EUS-GB.

International Consensus Recommendations for Safe Use of LAMS for On- and Off-Label Indications Using a Modified Delphi Process

INTRODUCTION

The study aimed to develop international consensus recommendations on the safe use of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) for on- and off-label indications.

METHODS

Based on the available literature, statements were formulated and grouped into the following categories: general safety measures, peripancreatic fluid collections, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-biliary drainage, EUS-gallbladder drainage, EUS-gastroenterostomy, and gastric access temporary for endoscopy. The evidence level of each statement was determined using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology.International LAMS experts were invited to participate in a modified Delphi process. When no 80% consensus was reached, the statement was modified based on expert feedback. Statements were rejected if no consensus was reached after the third Delphi round.

RESULTS

Fifty-six (93.3%) of 60 formulated statements were accepted, of which 35 (58.3%) in the first round. Consensus was reached on the optimal learning path, preprocedural imaging, the need for airway protection and essential safety measures during the procedure, such as the use of Doppler, and measurement of the distance between the gastrointestinal lumen and the target structure. Specific consensus recommendations were generated for the different LAMS indications, covering, among others, careful patient selection, the preferred size of the LAMS, the need for antibiotics, the preferred anatomic location of the LAMS, the need for coaxial pigtail placement, and the appropriate management of LAMS-related adverse events.

DISCUSSION

Through a modified international Delphi process, we developed general and indication-specific experience- and evidence-based recommendations on the safe use of LAMS.

Endoscopic-ultrasound-guided biliary drainage with placement of electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stent for palliation of malignant biliary obstruction: Updated meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage using electrocautery-enhanced (ECE) delivery of lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) is gradually being recognized as a viable palliative technique for malignant biliary obstruction after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) failure. However, most of the studies that have assessed its efficacy and safety were small and heterogeneous. Prior meta-analyses of six or fewer studies that were published 2 years ago were therefore underpowered to yield convincing evidence.

AIM

To update the efficacy and safety of ECE-LAMS for treatment of biliary obstruction after ERCP failure.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus databases from the inception of the ECE technique to May 13, 2022. Primary outcome measure was pooled technical success rate, and secondary outcomes were pooled rates of clinical success, reintervention, and adverse events. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model following Freeman-Tukey double-arcsine transformation in R software (version 4.1.3).

RESULTS

Fourteen eligible studies involving 620 participants were ultimately included. The pooled rate of technical success was 96.7%, and clinical success was 91.0%. Adverse events were reported in 17.5% of patients. Overall reintervention rate was 7.3%. Subgroup analyses showed results were generally consistent.

CONCLUSION

ECE-LAMS has favorable success with acceptable adverse events in relieving biliary obstruction when ERCP is impossible. The consistency of results across most subgroups suggested that this is a generalizable approach.

Real-life Indications and Outcome of Electrocautery-enhanced Lumen-apposing Metal Stents in a Tertiary Center

PURPOSE

Electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing stents (EC-LAMS) were originally designed for the drainage of the gallbladder, bile duct, and pancreas pseudocysts. Throughout the years, several off-label indications were established. This study aims to evaluate the indication, safety, efficacy, and outcome of all LAMS implanted in a single tertiary referral center.

METHODS

From April 2016 to April 2022, all patients undergoing LAMS placement in a single tertiary center were included. We present a detailed analysis of indications, success rates, and complications based on a retrospective analysis of our prospectively maintained database.

RESULTS

A total of 86 stents were placed in 77 patients between April 2016 and April 2022. Indications were walled-off pancreatic necrosis (25.6%), bile duct obstructions (16.3%), acute cholecystitis (15.1%), pancreas pseudocysts (15.1%), postoperative collections (10.5%), postoperative pancreatic fistulas (9.3%), and gastro-gastrostomy/jejunostomy (8.1%) to enable to perform an endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in patients with gastric bypass. Technical success was 97.7% (84 out of 86). A total of 10 (11.7%) adverse events were observed. In 3 patients (3.5%), severe complications occurred, which required acute surgery; one displacement was closed through clips. In 7 patients (8.2%), bleedings occurred during necrosectomy or from mucosal erosions at the stent side, respectively, that were treated with endoclips.

CONCLUSIONS

EC-LAMS are safe and show a high technical success rate in all indications. In everyday clinical practice, the main indications are hepato-pancreato-biliary, and therefore an hepato-pancreato-biliary-surgical department should have EC-LAMS in their armamentarium.

Lumen-apposing-metal stent misdeployment in endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainages: A systematic review focusing on issues and rescue management

BACKGROUND

The introduction of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainages has marked a turning point in the field of interventional ultrasound and it is gathering worldwide diffusion in different clinical settings. Nevertheless, the procedure may conceal unexpected pitfalls. LAMS misdeployment is the most frequent cause of technical failure and it can be considered a procedure-related adverse event when it hampers the conclusion of the planned procedure or results in significant clinical consequences. Stent misdeployment can be managed successfully by endoscopic rescue maneuvers to allow the completion of the procedure. To date, no standardized indication is available to guide an appropriate rescue strategy depending on the type of procedure or of misdeployment.

AIM

To evaluate the incidence of LAMS misdeployment during EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS), gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) and pancreatic fluid collections drainage (EUS-PFC) and to describe the endoscopic rescue strategies adopted under the circumstance.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of the literature on PubMed by searching for studies published up to October 2022. The search was carried out using the exploded medical subject heading terms “lumen apposing metal stent”, “LAMS”, “endoscopic ultrasound” and “choledochoduodenostomy” or “gallbladder” or “pancreatic fluid collections”. We included in the review on-label EUS-guided procedures namely EUS-CDS, EUS-GBD and EUS-PFC. Only those publications reporting EUS-guided LAMS positioning were considered. The studies reporting a technical success rate of 100% and other procedure-related adverse events were considered to calculate the overall rate of LAMS misdeployment, while studies not reporting the causes of technical failure were excluded. Case reports were considered only for the extraction of data regarding the issues of misdeployment and rescue techniques. The following data were collected from each study: Author, year of publication, study design, study population, clinical indication, technical success, reported number of misdeployment, stent type and size, flange misdeployed and type of rescue strategy.

RESULTS

The overall technical success rate of EUS-CDS, EUS-GBD and EUS-PFC was 93.7%, 96.1%, and 98.1% respectively. Significant rates of LAMS misdeployment have been reported for EUS-CDS, EUS-GBD and EUS-PFC drainage, respectively 5.8%, 3.4%, and 2.0%. Endoscopic rescue treatment was feasible in 86.8%, 80%, and 96.8% of cases. Non endoscopic rescue strategies were required only in 10.3%, 16% and 3.2% for EUS-CDS, EUS-GBD, and EUS-PFC. The endoscopic rescue techniques described were over-the-wire deployment of a new stent through the created fistula tract in 44.1%, 8% and 64.5% and stent-in-stent in 23.5%, 60%, and 12.9%, respectively for EUS-CDS, EUS-GBD, and EUS-PFC. Further therapeutic option were endoscopic rendezvous in 11.8% of EUS-CDS and repeated procedure of EUS-guided drainage in 16.1% of EUS-PFC.

CONCLUSION

LAMS misdeployment is a relatively common adverse event in EUS-guided drainages. There is no consensus on the best rescue approach in these cases and the choice is often made by the endoscopist relying upon the clinical scenario, anatomical characteristics, and local expertise. In this review, we investigated the misdeployment of LAMS for each of the on-label indications focusing on the rescue therapies used, with the aim of providing useful data for endoscopists and to improve patient outcomes.

Reduction of Lams-Related Adverse Events with Accumulating Experience in a Large-Volume Tertiary Referral Center

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) are increasingly used both for on- and off-label indications. We continuously adapt our step-by-step protocol to optimize the safe deployment of LAMSs for the different indications. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of this approach over time.

METHODS

We conducted a single-center study on consecutive patients who underwent LAMS placement for on- and off-label indications between June 2020 and June 2022. Endpoints included technical success, clinical success and adverse event rates. We compared the results with our previously published early experience with LAMSs (N = 61), between March 2018 and May 2020.

RESULTS

This cohort consisted of 168 LAMSs in 153 patients. Almost half of them (47.6%) were placed for off-label indications (gastro-enterostomy, temporary access to the excluded stomach in patients with previous gastric bypass, drainage of postsurgical collections, stenting of short refractory gastrointestinal strictures). While the technical and clinical success rates were similar to those in our previously published cohort (97% and 93.5% versus 93.4% and 88.5%, respectively), the adverse event rate dropped from 21.3% to 8.9%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrate the impact of a learning curve in LAMS placement, with a clinically relevant drop in LAMS-related adverse events over time.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastrointestinal anastomosis: Current status and future perspectives

OBJECTIVES

Both clinical experience and supporting data have improved drastically in the context of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastrointestinal anastomosis (EUS-GIA). Where outcomes used to be questioned, focus has now moved towards performing comparative studies, optimizing technical approaches, improving patient selection, and developing well-defined treatment algorithms.

METHODS

The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of technical developments within EUS-GIA and to discuss the current status of EUS-GIA and future directions.

RESULTS

EUS-GIA techniques such as EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE), EUS-directed transgastric endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) (EDGE) and EUS-guided treatment afferent loop syndrome have undergone further development, refining technical approaches, improving patient selection and subsequent outcomes. Retrospective evaluations of EUS-GE have shown similar safety when compared to enteral stenting, whilst attaining surgical range efficacy. Whereas, in patients with gastric bypass anatomy, EDGE seems less cumbersome and time consuming than enteroscopy-assisted ERCP, while preventing surgical morbidity associated with laparoscopy-assisted ERCP. Although less evidence is available on EUS-guided treatment of afferent loop syndrome, this technique has been associated with higher clinical success and fewer reinterventions and adverse events when compared to enteral stenting and percutaneous drainage, respectively. Several randomized studies are currently underway evaluating EUS-GE in malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO), whereas more prospective data are still required on EDGE and long-term fistula management.

CONCLUSION

EUS-GIA has become a crucial alternative to established techniques, overcoming technical limitations and subsequently improving patient outcomes. Although we should focus on prospective confirmation of these results in the context of GOO and EDGE, the current evidence already allows for a prominent role for EUS-GIA in our everyday practice.

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic duodenal stent versus endoscopic or surgical gastrojejunostomy to treat malignant gastric outlet obstruction: systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and study aims  Malignant disease accounts for up to 80 % of gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) cases, which may be treated with duodenal self-expanding metal stents (SEMS), surgical gastrojejunostomy (GJ), and more recently endoscopic-ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE). These three treatments have not been compared head-to-head in a randomized trial. Methods  We searched the Embase and MEDLINE databases for studies published January 2015-February 2021 assessing treatment of malignant GOO using duodenal SEMS, endoscopic (EUS-GE) or surgical (laparoscopic or open) GJ. Efficacy outcomes assessed included technical and clinical success rates, GOO recurrence and reintervention. Safety outcomes included procedure-related bleeding or perforation, and stent-related events for the duodenal SEMS and EUS-GE arms. Results  EUS-GE had a lower rate of technical success (95.3%) than duodenal SEMS (99.4 %) or surgical GJ (99.9%) ( P  = 0.0048). For duodenal SEMS vs. EUS-GE vs. surgical GJ, rates of clinical success (88.9 % vs. 89.0 % vs. 92.3 % respectively, P  = 0.49) were similar. EUS-GE had a lower rate of GOO recurrence based on limited data ( P  = 0.0036), while duodenal SEMS had a higher rate of reintervention ( P  = 0.041). Overall procedural complications were similar (duodenal SEMS 18.7 % vs. EUS-GE 21.9 % vs. surgical GJ 23.8 %, P  = 0.32), but estimated bleeding rate was lowest ( P  = 0.0048) and stent occlusion rate was highest ( P  = 0.0002) for duodenal SEMS. Conclusions  Duodenal SEMS, EUS-GE, and surgical GJ showed similar clinical efficacy for the treatment of malignant GOO. Duodenal SEMS had a lower procedure-related bleeding rate but higher rate of reintervention.

Effectiveness and Safety of Lumen-Apposing Metal Stents in Endoscopic Interventions for Off-Label Indications

BACKGROUND

Although released only for drainage of pseudocyst and walled-off necrosis (WON) with ≤ 30% solid debris, the utilization of lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) in "real-world" practice has deviated from approved indications. We evaluated the contemporary use of LAMS and associated clinical, procedural outcomes in the setting of a tertiary referral center in the USA.

METHODS

Data from 303 consecutive patients who underwent LAMS placement were analyzed. Outcomes included technical and clinical success rates and adverse events.

RESULTS

Of 303 patients, 190 (62.7%) received LAMS for off-label indications. The latter included gallbladder drainage (n = 56, 18.5%), gastroenterostomy (n = 52, 17.2%), treatment of gastrointestinal strictures (n = 37, 12.2%), biliary drainage (n = 20, 6.6%), temporary gastric access for endoscopy (n = 13, 4.3%), symptomatic WON with > 30% solid debris (n = 8, 2.6%), and miscellaneous (n = 4, 1.3%). Technical success rates in the on- and off-label arm were 98.2% and 95.8%, respectively (P = .331; 95% CI 0.08 to 1.96). Clinical success rates in the on- and off-label arm were 89.4% and 83.2%, respectively (P = .137; 95% CI 0.28 to 1.19). The rate of adverse events was 20.5% (n = 39) in the off-label arm and 16.8% (n = 19) in the on-label arm (P = .242; 95% CI 0.69 to 2.34).

CONCLUSION

Off-label use of LAMS out-numbered on-label use in our practice. The safety profile between the groups was similar and with the exception of refractory stricture treatment, efficacy was comparable.

Endoscopic Management of Luminal Strictures: Beyond Dilation

Luminal strictures can occur as part of many different gastrointestinal (GI) disorders anywhere along the GI tract and affect all age groups. The end goal of managing any stricture is to re-establish an adequate and durable luminal patency that is sufficient to resolve the presenting clinical symptoms. Treatment options can be generally categorized into medical, endoscopic, and surgical. However, within each of these categories, multiple different options are available. Therefore, choosing the best treatment modality is often challenging and depends on multiple factors including the type, location, and complexity of the stricture, as well as the preference of the treating physician. In this article, we will review the most current literature regarding foregut strictures, particularly esophageal and gastric, beyond dilation.