Dilation of benign strictures in the esophagus and colon with the polyflex stent: a case series study

Endoscopic Management of Colonic Obstruction

Large bowel obstruction is a serious event that occurs in approximately 25% of all intestinal obstructions. It is attributed to either benign, malignant, functional (pseudo-obstruction), or mechanical conditions. Benign etiologies of colonic obstructions include colon volvulus, anastomotic strictures, radiation injury, ischemia, inflammatory processes such as Crohn's disease, diverticulitis, bezoars, and intussusception.

Case Report: Successful Use of Biliary Stent for Iatrogenic Esophageal Perforation Following Balloon Dilation in a 7-Month-Old Infant

Esophageal perforation is a rare but critical emergency that requires early detection and prompt management. In the pediatric population, iatrogenic injury is the most common etiology of esophageal perforation, and the majority of cases come from stricture dilation. Treatment options include medical management, endoscopic therapy, and surgery. Usually, conservative treatment is appropriate in most carefully selected patients, especially in the setting of early diagnosis and with the absence of severe sepsis. A surgical approach is reserved for a large tear with mediastinum contamination, or clinical deterioration after unsuccessful conservative management. With the advancement of the endoscopy technique, endoscopy therapy using esophageal stents is an available choice for adult populations who have a complicated protracted healing course or comorbidities precluding surgical attempts. However, this procedure is seldom implemented in children, especially in young infants, owing to unavailable equipment and experts. We report our successful use of a fully-covered self-expandable metal biliary stent in managing esophageal perforation in a seven-month-old infant. In light of this encouraging achievement, this model can be applied to more children who have the same problem.

Endoscopic Management of Benign Colonic Obstruction and Pseudo-Obstruction

There are a variety of causes of intestinal obstruction, with the most common cause being malignant diseases; however, volvulus, inflammatory bowel disease or diverticulitis, radiation injury, ischemia, and pseudo-obstruction can also cause colonic obstruction. These are benign conditions; however, delayed diagnosis of acute intestinal obstruction owing to these causes can cause critical complications, such as perforation. Therefore, high levels of clinical suspicion and appropriate treatment are crucial. There are variable treatment options for colonic obstruction, and endoscopic treatment is known to be a less invasive and an effective option for such. In this article, the authors review the causes of benign colonic obstruction and pseudo-obstruction and the role of endoscopy in treating them.

A non-degraded biodegradable stent in the closure of a defunctionalized rectovaginal fistula

The case was a 52-year-old female with a rectovaginal fistula secondary to a rectosigmoid resection with low colorectal anastomosis due to adenocarcinoma. The fistula persisted after surgical reintervention with defunctionalization, a hysterectomy and colostomy in the left iliac fossa.

Colonic strictures: dilation and stents

Colonic strictures, both benign and malignant, are commonly encountered in clinical practice. Benign strictures are most commonly treated by balloon dilation and less frequently with stents. Balloon dilation can help forestall or obviate surgery in some patients. Colonic strictures of malignant etiology generally need to be managed by stents and/or surgery. This article reviews endoscopic approaches to the management of colonic strictures.

Plastic and biodegradable stents for complex and refractory benign esophageal strictures

Endoscopic stent placement is a well-accepted and effective alternative treatment modality for complex and refractory esophageal strictures. Among the currently available types of stents, the partially covered self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) has a firm anchoring effect, preventing stent migration and ensuring effective covering of a narrowed segment. However, hyperplastic tissue reaction driven by the uncovered mesh may prevent easy and safe stent removal. As an alternative, a fully covered SEMS decreases the recurrence of dysphagia caused by hyperplastic tissue ingrowth; however, it has a high migration rate. Likewise, although a self-expanding plastic stent (SEPS) reduces reactive hyperplasia, the long-term outcome is disappointing because of the high rate of stent migration. A biodegradable stent has the main benefit of not requiring stent removal in comparison with SEMS and SEPS. However, it still has a somewhat high rate of hyperplastic reaction, and the long-term outcome does not satisfy expectations. Up to now, the question of which type of stent should be recommended for the effective treatment of complex and refractory benign strictures has no clear answer. Therefore, the selection of stent type for endoscopic treatment should be individualized, taking into consideration the endoscopist's experience as well as patient and stricture characteristics.

Self-expandable metal stents in the treatment of benign anastomotic stricture after rectal resection for cancer

AIM

To evaluate the use of self-expandable metallic stents to treat patients with symptomatic benign anastomotic stricture after colorectal resection.

METHOD

Ten patients with a benign symptomatic anastomotic stricture after colorectal resection were treated with endoscopic placement of a self-expandable metal stent.

RESULTS

The stent was placed successfully in all 10 patients without any major morbidity. At a mean follow-up of 18 months the stenosis was resolved successfully in 7 out 10 patients (70%). The remaining three patients were subsequently treated successfully with balloon dilatation.

CONCLUSION

Self-expandable metal stents represent a valid alternative to balloon dilatation to treat patients with benign symptomatic anastomotic stricture after colorectal resection for cancer.

Treatment of anastomotic stenosis and leakage after colorectal resection for cancer with self-expandable metal stents

BACKGROUND

Self-expandable metallic stents can be used to treat patients with symptomatic anastomotic complications after colorectal resection.

METHODS

Twenty patients with symptomatic anastomotic stricture after colorectal resection were treated with endoscopic placement of a self-expandable metal stent. Ten patients had "simple" anastomotic stricture. In the remaining 10 patients, a leak was associated with the stricture.

RESULTS

The anastomotic leakage healed without evidence of residual stricture or major fecal incontinence in 8 of 10 patients. Overall, the anastomotic stricture was resolved in 14 of the 20 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Self-expandable metal stents represent a valid adjunctive to treat patients with symptomatic anastomotic complications after colorectal resection for cancer. They have a complementary role to balloon dilatation in case of simple anastomotic stricture, and they improve the rate of healing when the stricture is associated with a leak.

Evidence-based recommendations on upper gastrointestinal tract stenting: a report from the stent study group of the korean society of gastrointestinal endoscopy

Endoscopic stents have evolved dramatically over the past 20 years. With the introduction of uncovered self-expanding metal stents in the early 1990s, they are primarily used to palliate symptoms of malignant obstruction in patients with inoperable gastrointestinal (GI) cancer. At present, stents have emerged as an effective, safe, and less invasive alternative for the treatment of malignant GI obstruction. Clinical decisions about stent placement should be made based on the exact understanding of the patient's condition. These recommendations based on a critical review of the available data and expert consensus are made for the purpose of providing endoscopists with information about stent placement. These can be helpful for management of patients with inoperable cancer or various nonmalignant conditions in the upper GI tract.

A retrospective analysis of early and late outcome of biodegradable stent placement in the management of refractory anastomotic colorectal strictures

BACKGROUND

Benign colorectal strictures are treated conventionally by endoscopic dilation. Experience using SEMS for benign colonic strictures is limited, and outcomes to date have been disappointing. Refractory colorectal strictures remain challenging to be treated with surgery. Polydioxanone-based stent are biodegradable (BD) stent CE approved for esophageal strictures. This study was designed to investigate retrospectively the safety and the efficacy of these stents for the management of strictures refractory to multiple sessions of dilation.

METHODS

Patients with postsurgical benign strictures located within 20 cm from anal verge, refractory to mechanical or pneumatic dilation (at least 3 sessions) were included in this analysis. Clinical success was defined as the absence of occlusive symptoms and the ability to pass through the stricture with a regular size colonoscope. All patients were predilated before stent placement. Stents were released under fluoroscopic control. All patients were under stool softeners for 3 months. Follow-up was scheduled with endoscopic and fluoroscopic controls within 90 days from stent deployment and afterwards by telephone interview and/or ambulatory consultation.

RESULTS

Eleven patients (7 males, mean age 62.3 ± 8.5 years) were included. Technical success was achieved in all the patients. Stent migration was observed in four patients within the first 2 weeks after stent placement. Stent migration was followed by recurrence of stricture and obstructive symptoms in all the cases. Among the seven patients who completed the process of stent biodegradation, five of them had complete resolution of the stricture and relief of symptoms. Two of 11 patients required surgical treatment during the follow-up period (mean 19.8 (range 42-15) months). The overall success rate of the BD stent was 45 %.

CONCLUSIONS

This retrospective analysis of a limited number of patients demonstrated that nondedicated esophageal BD stents are associated with high risk of migration and clinical success in less than 50 % of patients. Dedicated stents with large diameter and antimigration findings could potentially improve the outcome of patients with refractory benign colorectal strictures.

A comparison of the temporary placement of 3 different self-expanding stents for the treatment of refractory benign esophageal strictures: a prospective multicentre study

Background

Refractory benign esophageal strictures (RBESs) have been treated with the temporary placement of different self-expanding stents with conflicting results. We compared the clinical effectiveness of 3 types of stents: self-expanding plastic stents (SEPSs), biodegradable stents, and fully covered self-expanding metal stents (FCSEMSs), for the treatment of RBES.

Methods

This study prospectively evaluated 3 groups of 30 consecutive patients with RBESs who underwent temporary placement of either SEPSs (12 weeks, n = 10), biodegradable stents (n = 10) or FCSEMSs (12 weeks, n = 10). Data were collected to analyze the technical success and clinical outcome of the stents as evaluated by recurrent dysphagia, complications and reinterventions.

Results

Stent implantation was technically successful in all patients. Migration occurred in 11 patients: 6 (60%) in the SEPS group, 2 (20%) in the biodegradable group and 3 (30%) in the FCSEMS group (P = 0.16). A total of 8/30 patients (26.6%) were dysphagia-free after the end of follow-up: 1 (10%) in the SEPS group, 3 (30%) in the biodegradable group and 4 (40%) in the FCSEMS group (P = 0.27). More reinterventions were required in the SEPS group (n = 24) than in the biodegradable group (n = 13) or the FCSEMS group (n = 13) (P = 0.24). Multivariate analysis showed that stricture length was significantly associated with higher recurrence rates after temporary stent placement (HR = 1.37; 95% CI = 1.08-1.75; P = 0.011).

Conclusions

Temporary placement of a biodegradable stent or of a FCSEMS in patients with RBES may lead to long-term relief of dysphagia in 30 and 40% of patients, respectively. The use of SEPSs seems least preferable, as they are associated with frequent stent migration, more reinterventions and few cases of long-term improvement. Additionally, longer strictures were associated with a higher risk of recurrence.

Stent placement for esophageal strictures: an update

The use of stents for esophageal strictures has evolved rapidly over the past 10 years, from rigid plastic tubes to flexible self-expanding metal (SEMS), plastic (SEPS) and biodegradable stents. For the palliative treatment of malignant dysphagia both SEMS and SEPS effectively provide a rapid relief of dysphagia. SEMS are preferred over SEPS, as randomized controlled trials have shown more technical difficulties and late migration with plastic stents. Despite specific characteristics of recently developed stents, recurrent dysphagia due to food impaction, tumoral and nontumoral tissue overgrowth, or stent migration, remain a major challenge. The efficacy of stents with an antireflux valve for patients with distal esophageal cancer varies between different stent designs. Concurrent treatment with chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy seems to be safe and effective. In the future, it can be expected that removable stents will be used as a bridge to surgery to maintain luminal patency during neoadjuvant treatment. For benign strictures, new stent designs, such as fully covered SEMS and biodegradable stents, may potentially reduce complications during stent removal.

Enteral stents

The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) Technology Committee provides reviews of existing, new, or emerging endoscopic technologies that have an impact on the practice of GI endoscopy. Evidence-based methodology is used, with a MEDLINE literature search to identify pertinent clinical studies on the topic and a MAUDE (U.S. Food and Drug Administration Center for Devices and Radiological Health) database search to identify the reported complications of a given technology. Both are supplemented by accessing the "related articles" feature of PubMed and by scrutinizing pertinent references cited by the identified studies. Controlled clinical trials are emphasized, but in many cases, data from randomized, controlled trials are lacking. In such cases, large case series, preliminary clinical studies, and expert opinions are used. Technical data are gathered from traditional and Web-based publications, proprietary publications, and informal communications with pertinent vendors. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are drafted by 1 or 2 members of the ASGE Technology Committee, reviewed and edited by the committee as a whole, and approved by the Governing Board of the ASGE. When financial guidance is indicated, the most recent coding data and list prices at the time of publication are provided. For this review, the MEDLINE database was searched through August 2010 for articles related to enteral, esophageal, duodenal, and colonic stents. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are scientific reviews provided solely for educational and informational purposes. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are not rules and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating, requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment or payment for such treatment.

A comparison of temporary self-expanding plastic and biodegradable stents for refractory benign esophageal strictures

BACKGROUND & AIMS

It is a challenge to manage refractory benign esophageal strictures (RBES). We compared the efficacy and safety of self-expanding plastic stents (SEPSs) with placement of biodegradable stents for the treatment of RBES.

METHODS

We studied 2 groups of consecutive patients with RBES who received temporary placement (6 weeks) of SEPSs (n = 20) or biodegradable stents (n = 18). Data were collected with respect to clinical outcome, complications, recurrent dysphagia, and reinterventions.

RESULTS

SEPSs were removed in 16 (80%) patients. Stent placement was not successful in 1 patient, while stent removal was not performed in another 3 patients. Six (30%) patients with an SEPS were dysphagia-free after a median follow-up of 385 days (range, 77-924 days). Ten (50%) developed recurrent dysphagia. Major complications occurred in 2 patients (10%; 1 with hemorrhage and 1 with perforation). Six patients (33%) with a biodegradable stent were dysphagia-free after a median follow-up of 166 days (range 21-559 days) (P = .83 compared with SEPS). Twelve patients (67%) had recurrent dysphagia. Major complications occurred in 4 patients (22%; 2 with hemorrhage, 2 with severe retrosternal pain) with a biodegradable stent (P = .30 compared with SEPS). Reinterventions were less frequently indicated after biodegradeble stent than after SEPS placement (15 [mean, 0.8 ± 0.6 per stent placed] vs 21 [mean, 1.3 ± 0.4 per stent placed], respectively; P = .03).

CONCLUSIONS

Placement of SEPSs or biodegradable stents provides long-term relief of dysphagia in 30% and 33%, respectively, of patients with RBES. Biodegradable stents require fewer procedures than SEPSs, offering an advantage. Although stent placement is a viable strategy in patients with RBES, the ideal strategy still needs to be defined.

Expandable stents for benign esophageal disease

Partially covered self-expandable esophageal stents have been associated with unacceptable complications when used for benign esophageal disorders. With the introduction of removable or potentially removable fully covered stents and biodegradable stents, interest in using expandable stents for benign indications has been revived. Although expandable stents can offer a minimally invasive alternative to surgery, they can be associated with serious complications; hence, this approach should be considered in carefully selected patients, preferably on a protocol basis.

Comparative study of balloon and metal olive dilators for endoscopic management of benign anastomotic rectal strictures: clinical and cost-effectiveness outcomes

BACKGROUND

Postoperative anastomotic strictures frequently complicate colorectal resection. Currently, various endoscopic techniques are being employed in their management, but the establishment of an optimal therapeutic strategy is still pending. The purpose of our study is to compare through-the-scope (TTS) balloon dilators versus Eder-Puestow metal olive dilators in the treatment of postoperative benign rectal strictures, considering the clinical outcome and cost-effectiveness of each method.

METHODS

A total of 39 patients with benign anastomotic rectal stenosis were retrospectively studied. In group A, 15 patients underwent dilation with Eder-Puestow metal olives, while in group B 19 patients were treated by means of TTS balloon dilators. The technical and clinical success of dilation, complications, number of repeated sessions required, disease-free time intervals, and the overall cost of each procedure were evaluated.

RESULTS

Dilations were technically successful in all patients. No major complications occurred in either group. The number of dilations needed, rate of stricture recurrence, and duration of stenosis-free time intervals were not statistically significantly different between the two groups. Both methods proved more effective in older patients, given the greater number of dilations required in younger patients of both groups and higher frequency of stricture relapse in younger balloon-dilated patients (median 64.00 years) compared with older ones (median 75.00 years) (p = 0.001). An indisputable advantage of the Eder-Puestow technique, compared with TTS balloon dilators, is the low cost of equipment (median 22.30 compared with 680 , respectively; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic dilation of postoperative benign rectal strictures is equally effective and safe, especially in older patients, when performed by Eder-Puestow bougies or TTS balloon dilators. However, metal olivary tips seem to surpass balloon dilators when considering the obvious economical benefits of the first method.

Systematic review: the role of self-expanding plastic stents for benign oesophageal strictures

BACKGROUND

Treatment of refractory or recurrent benign oesophageal strictures is demanding and surgery may be the only available option. The role of self-expanding plastic stents (SEPS) in the treatment of these strictures is still controversial because of the conflicting results of various studies.

AIM

To analyse with regard to SEPS: technical and clinical success, factors associated with outcome, and safety.

METHODS

Pooled-data analysis of a systematic review of the literature. Clinical success was defined as no need for further endoscopic or surgical treatment after SEPS removal.

RESULTS

Data of 10 studies with 130 treated patients were included. SEPS insertion was technically successful in 128 of 130 patients (98%, 95% CI = 96-100%). Clinical success was achieved in 68 patients (52%, 95% CI = 44-61%) and this was found to be lower in those with a cervical localization of the stricture (33% vs. 54%; P < 0.05). Early (<4 weeks) migration of the stent was reported in 19 (24%, 95% CI = 14-32%) cases, while post-insertion endoscopic re-intervention was required in 25 (21%, 95% CI = 14-28%). Major clinical complications occurred in 12 patients (9%, 95% CI = 4-14%), resulting in death of one (0.8%) patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Our pooled-data analysis showed a favourable risk/benefit ratio when SEPS are applied in patients with recurrent or refractory benign oesophageal strictures. This supports the use of SEPS before referring patients to surgery, and they are a valuable alternative to repeat endoscopic dilation.

Role of esophageal stents in benign and malignant diseases

These recommendations provide an evidence-based approach to the role of esophageal stents in the management of benign and malignant diseases. These guidelines have been developed under the auspices of the American College of Gastroenterology and its Practice Parameters Committee and approved by the Board of Trustees. The following guidelines are based on a critical review of the available scientific literature on the topic identified in Medline and PubMed (January 1992-December 2008) using search terms that included stents, self-expandable metal stents, self-expandable plastic stents, esophageal cancer, esophageal adenocarcinoma, esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, esophageal stricture, perforations, anastomotic leaks, tracheoesophageal fistula, and achalasia. These guidelines are intended for use by health-care providers and apply to adult, but not pediatric, patients. As with other practice guidelines, these guidelines are not intended to replace clinical judgment but rather to provide general guidelines applicable to the majority of patients. Clinicians need to integrate recommendations with their own clinical judgment, and with individual patient circumstances, values, and preferences. They are intended to be flexible, in contrast to standards of care, which are inflexible policies designed to be followed in every case. Specific recommendations are based on relevant published information. The quality of evidence and strength of recommendations have been assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system, which is a system that has been adopted by multiple national and international societies. The GRADE system is based on a sequential assessment of quality of evidence, followed by assessment of the balance between benefits vs. downsides (harms, burden, and costs) and subsequent judgment regarding the strength of recommendation.

Esophageal stenting in children: indications, application, effectiveness, and complications

BACKGROUND

Use of esophageal stents is uncommon in children, and there are few reports. We report the first experience in predominantly small children and infants with retrievable, flexible stents designed for tracheobronchial use.

OBJECTIVE

Evaluation of initial experience with placement of esophageal stents for benign esophageal disorders in children.

DESIGN

A retrospective study.

SETTING

A pediatric, academic, tertiary-referral center.

PATIENTS

This study involved 7 pediatric patients.

INTERVENTIONS

Covered tracheobronchial stents were endoscopically placed in pediatric patients with benign esophageal conditions. Removal involved using forceps to pull the purse-string suture into the endoscope channel and collapsing the top of the stent for easy removal.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

To evaluate the safety and feasibility of performing endoscopic stent placement in children and to establish criteria for early stent removal.

RESULTS

Six of 7 patients benefitted from stenting. There were no complications of placement. Novel techniques were developed for difficult retrievals. One patient did not benefit from esophageal stent placement, because the stent migrated downward from the uppermost part of the esophagus. One patient had some gagging, which led to early removal of the stent. A stent was removed emergently in 1 patient for respiratory distress.

LIMITATION

Small number of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Retrievable, covered stents are easily placed and removed from the esophagus in small children. They should be considered for severe unrelenting strictures, especially when associated with esophageal leaks. A need exists for development of esophageal stents designed for pediatric use.

Stenting of strictures close to the upper esophageal sphincter with the Polyflex stent

Stent insertion in strictures in the upper cervical esophagus present special difficulties, such as patient discomfort and worry due to continuous neck globus sensation and a metallic taste. Additionally, the endoscopist needs to have great skill to properly adjust the proximal stent end. We present the experience of stenting high cervical esophageal strictures with a self-expanding plastic stent (Polyflex), in three tumoral and one postoperative benign stenosis. Dysphagia disappeared and the endoprosthesis was well tolerated. The Polyflex stent seems to be suitable for insertion in the upper esophagus.

Esophageal dysphagia

Esophageal dysphagia can arise from a variety of causes such as motility disorders, mechanical and inflammatory diseases. Adequate management includes a detailed history, evaluation with upper endoscopy, barium radiography and manometry. Treatment is usually tailored to the underlying disease process and in some cases, as in inoperable cancer, palliative management may be necessary.

Stent placement for benign colonic stenosis: case report, review of the literature, and animal pilot data

BACKGROUND

Permanent metal stent placement for malignant intestinal obstruction has been proven to be efficient. Temporary stents for benign conditions of the colon and rectum are less studied. This is a case study, review of the literature, and observation from an animal model on placement of stents in the colorectum for benign disease.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A 55-year-old man presented with recurrent obstructions from a benign stricture of the distal sigmoid colon. After failed balloon dilations, a polyester coated stent was placed. The purpose of the stent was to improve symptoms and avoid surgery. The stent was expelled after 5 days. We conducted a literature review of stents placed for benign colorectal strictures and an animal study to evaluate stent migration.

RESULTS

In the literature, there were 53 reports of uncovered metal stents, four covered metal stents, and six polyester stents. Patency rates were 71%, and migration rate was 43%. Migration occurred earlier with polyester stents (mean=8 days) versus covered (32 days) or uncovered metal stents (112 days). Severe complications were seen in 23% of patients. Four 45-kg pigs underwent rectosigmoid transection with a 21-mm anastomosis and endoscopic placement of a Polyflex stent. Two stents were secured with suture. Stents without fixation were expelled within 24 h of surgery. Stents with fixation were expelled between postoperative days 2 and 14.

CONCLUSION

Stents for the treatment of benign colorectal strictures are safe, with comparable patency rates between stent types. Metal stents can cause severe complications. In a pig model, covered polyester stents tend to migrate early even with fixation. Further investigation needs to focus on new stent designs and/or better fixation.