A Prospective Phase II Evaluation of Esophageal Stenting for Neoadjuvant Therapy for Esophageal Cancer: Optimal Performance and Surgical Safety

Long-term nutrition in patients candidate to neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatments

To improve outcomes, to decrease the rate of local recurrence and development of distant metastases neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies are employed in cancer patients in forms of radiation, chemo-, endocrine-, targeted-, and immunotherapy or their combination. Nutrition therapy plays important role in all phases of the cancer journey. From neoadjuvant therapy to prehabilitation, early postoperative nutrition, and long-term nutrition care during the adjuvant phase and survivorship determines the survival and quality of life of cancer patients. During the neoadjuvant phase patients may be in poor nutritional condition which can be aggravated by the applied oncological treatment. Beside this apparent threat this period also gives an excellent opportunity to maintain or even improve the nutritional status of the patients by nutrition therapy. After surgery the burdening effects of the operation may jeopardize the execution of adjuvant therapy. After early postoperative feeding a long-term nutrition strategy should be developed for cancer patients in order to avoid nutritional deterioration during the usually lengthy postoperative therapy. In this narrative review we discuss how preoperative nutritional status and medical nutrition therapy influence the results of surgery and after the operation what is the available evidence about nutritional status and outcome and the potentials to influence them by nutrition therapy.

Developing sarcopenia during neoadjuvant therapy is associated with worse survival in esophageal adenocarcinoma patients

BACKGROUND

Sarcopenia in cancer patients has been associated with mixed postoperative outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the development of sarcopenia during the neoadjuvant period is predictive of postoperative mortality in esophageal adenocarcinoma patients.

METHODS

We queried a prospective database to retrieve the sarcopenic status of patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma who underwent cross-sectional imaging of the third lumbar vertebra at diagnosis and within 2 months of undergoing an esophagogastrectomy between 2014 and 2022.

RESULTS

Of the 71 patients included in the study, 36 (50.7%) presented with sarcopenia at diagnosis. Of the 35 non-sarcopenic patients, 14 (40%) developed sarcopenia during the neo-adjuvant period. Patients who were not sarcopenic at diagnosis but developed sarcopenia preoperatively had significantly worse overall survival than patients sarcopenic at diagnosis and not sarcopenic preoperatively and patients experiencing no change in sarcopenic status (median 18 vs 47 vs 31 months; P = .02). Diagnostic and preoperative sarcopenic status alone were not significantly associated with overall survival (P = .48 and P = .56, respectively). Although 37 (52.1%) patients died, the cause of death was often not cancer-related (54.1%) and included acute respiratory failure, pneumonia, and cardiac arrest. No significant survival difference was observed when stratified by >10% weight loss (P = .9) or large loss in body mass index (P = .8).

CONCLUSION

Developing sarcopenia during the neo-adjuvant period may be associated with worse overall survival in patients requiring esophagogastrectomy.

Preoperative Esophageal Stenting and 5-Year Survival in Patients Undergoing Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: a Population-Based Nationwide Study from Finland

BACKGROUND

Preoperative esophageal stenting is proposed to have a negative effect on outcomes. The aim was to compare a 5-year survival in patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer with and without preoperative esophageal stent in a population-based nationwide cohort from Finland. The secondary outcome was 90-day mortality.

METHODS

This study included curatively intended esophagectomies for esophageal cancer in Finland between 1999 and 2016, with follow-up until December 31, 2019. Cox proportional hazards models provided hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of overall 5-year and 90-day mortality. Model 1 was adjusted for age, sex, year of the surgery, comorbidities, histology, pathological stage, and neoadjuvant therapy. Model 2 included also albumin level and BMI.

RESULT

Of 1064 patients, a total of 134 patients underwent preoperative stenting and 930 did not. In both adjusted models 1 and 2, higher 5-year mortality was seen in patients with preoperative stent with HRs of 1.29 (95% CI 1.00-1.65) and 1.25 (95% CI 0.97-1.62), respectively, compared to no stenting. The adjusted HR of 90-day mortality was 2.49 (95% CI 1.27-4.87) in model 1 and 2.49 (95% CI 1.25-4.99) in model 2. When including only neoadjuvant-treated patients, those with preoperative stent had a 5-year survival of 39.2% compared to 46.4% without stent (adjusted HR 1.34, 95% CI 1.00-1.80), and a 90-day mortality rate of 8.5% and 2.5% (adjusted HR 3.99, 95% CI 1.51-10.50).

DISCUSSION

This nationwide study reports worse 5-year and 90-day outcomes in patients with preoperative esophageal stent. Since residual confounding remains possible, observed difference could be only an association rather than the cause.

Safe oesophageal stent deployment using a checklist system instead of fluoroscopy

BACKGROUND

Stenting is the management of choice for many benign and malignant oesophageal conditions and in the interest of safety stent insertion has traditionally been performed under fluoroscopic guidance. But this incurs additional expense, time, radiation risk and for the foreseeable future, an increased risk of Covid infection to patients and healthcare personnel. We describe a protocol that obviates the need for fluoroscopic guidance, relying instead on a systematic checklist to ensure safe positioning of the guidewire and the accurate positioning of the stent. The aim of this retrospective study was to review our experience of stent insertion employing a checklist system and compare our outcomes with outcomes using fluoroscopy in the literature.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of a prospectively collected dataset of all patients undergoing oesophageal stent insertion between December 2007 and October 2019. The primary end points were patient safety parameters and complications of stent insertion.

RESULTS

Total of 163 stents were deployed of which 93 (57%) were in males and the median age was 67.9 years (25-92 years). Partially covered self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) were used in 80% of procedures (130/163). One hundred nineteen stents (73%) were for malignant strictures and 127 (78%) were deployed for strictures in the lower third of the oesophagus. There was no stent misplacement, injury, perforation or death associated with the procedure. Vomiting was the main post-operative complication (14%). Severe odynophagia necessitated stent removal in 3 patients. Stent migration occurred in 17 (10%) procedures with a mean time to stent migration of 6.4 weeks (range 1-20 weeks).

CONCLUSIONS

Oesophageal stent placement without fluoroscopy is safe provided that a strict checklist is adhered to. The outcomes are comparable to the results of fluoroscopic stent placement in the literature, with considerable saving in time, cost, personnel, and risks of radiation and Covid exposure.

Outcomes of Esophageal Stent Therapy for the Management of Anastomotic Leaks

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to present the optimal patient selection for esophageal stenting after esophageal resection to investigate possible factors leading to treatment success or treatment failure in these patients.

METHODS

This was a prospective, observational study of patients from January 2005 to May 2019 with an esophageal anastomotic leak that were treated with a self-expandable stent (SES).

RESULTS

A total of 34 patients were treated. All achieved technical success (100%); 33 (97%) achieved clinical success. No patient had to have reoperative surgery based on their leak management. The stenting in-hospital mortality was 0% with 1 patient (2%) with a 90-day mortality from possible leak-related death. Patients had their stents removed with a median of 106 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Stenting for an anastomotic leak after resection offers a safe and effective method of treatment and is successful in the majority of cases. Critical to success is optimal patient selection, adequate leak drainage, and optimal stent selection and placement.

Use of esophageal stents to relieve dysphagia during neoadjuvant therapy prior to esophageal resection: a systematic review

Esophageal cancer stenting offers symptomatic relief for patients suffering from dysphagia. There are limited data to support their use to relieve dysphagia and improve nutrition during neoadjuvant therapy with some concern that they may negatively impact oncological outcomes. The aim of this systematic review was to quantify the impact of esophageal stents on outcomes prior to resection with curative intent. A literature search was performed using Embase, Medline, PubMed, PubMed Central, the Cochrane library for articles pertaining to esophageal stent use prior to or during neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy in patients planned for curative esophagectomy. Data extracted included basic demographics, clinical, nutritional and oncologic outcomes. A total of 9 studies involving 465 patients were included. Esophageal stent use resulted in a significant improvement in mean dysphagia scores in the immediate post stent period but failed to demonstrate any positive changes in weight, body mass index (BMI) or albumin. Only 33% of stented patients ultimately progressed to potential curative surgical resection and stents were associated with reduced R0 resection rates and lower overall survival. This systematic review shows that, although esophageal stenting is associated with improvements in dysphagia during neoadjuvant therapy, their effect on improving patient nutritional status is less clear and they may be associated with poorer long-term oncological outcomes. Stents should be used with caution in patients who are being considered for potentially curative resection of esophageal malignancies and other strategies of nutritional supplementation should be considered.

Preoperative esophageal stenting and short-term outcomes of surgery for esophageal cancer in a population-based study from Finland and Sweden

Population-based studies examining whether preoperative esophageal stenting influences the short-term outcomes after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer are lacking. This nationwide cohort combining data from Finland and Sweden was conducted to cover this gap. Patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer (T ≥ 3 and/or N ≥ 1, M0) who underwent esophagectomy between 2007 and 2014 were identified from nationwide registries in Finland and Sweden. The study exposure was preoperative stenting. The primary outcomes were 30- and 90-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were length of hospital stay and 30- and 90-day readmission rates. Multivariable Cox and linear regression analyses provided hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) adjusted for age, sex, comorbidity, tumor histology, year of surgery, and country. Of all 1029 participating patients who underwent surgery for locally advanced esophageal cancer, 127 (12.3%) had an esophageal stent inserted preoperatively. The absolute 30-day mortality rates were higher in stented patients (3.9%) than in those without a stent (1.6%), but the HR was not statistically significantly increased (HR 2.42; 95% CI 0.85-6.92). Similarly, the absolute 90-day mortality rates were increased after preoperative stenting (11.8%) compared to no stenting (7.0%), but again the HR was not statistically significantly increased (HR 1.68; 95% CI 0.95-2.98). Preoperative stenting did not influence length of hospital stay or readmission rates. The possibly increased short-term mortality after preoperative stenting in patients who undergo esophagectomy for esophageal cancer indicated in this study suggests a cautious approach to preoperative stenting until future research or meta-analyses provide a more definite answer.

Enteral nutrition and quality of life in patients undergoing chemoradiotherapy for esophageal carcinoma: a comparison of nasogastric tube, esophageal stent, and ostomy tube feeding

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

This study prospectively recruited esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients who received esophageal stent, nasogastric tube (NGT), or jejunostomy/gastrostomy feeding to compare the changes in nutritional status and quality of life during chemoradiation therapy (CRT).

METHODS

In total, 81 patients were analyzed (stent, 7; surgical ostomy, 26; NGT, 19; oral intake, 29). An NGT was inserted when, despite medication, dysphagia or pain worsened with oral feeding during CRT. Serial body weight and daily narcotic demand were recorded. Changes in serum albumin level and quality of life were also assessed. In subgroup analysis comparing NGT and prophylactic surgical ostomy feeding, 5 patients with total occlusion in the ostomy group were excluded.

RESULTS

Patients in all groups had similar decreases in mean body weight with an overall change of -6.41% ± 5.21% at the end of CRT. The stent group had significantly worse pain, decreased albumin (-1.03 ± .9 mg/dL), and decreased quality of life across CRT compared with the other groups. In subgroup analysis the stent group had significantly higher weight loss, whereas the NGT group had higher narcotic demand and slightly worse quality of life. Two patients (7.7%) had ileus days after jejunostomy creation. Five patients (23.8%) among those received prophylactic ostomy creation and scarcely used it.

CONCLUSIONS

These preliminary results raise concerns that use of esophageal stents may be less suitable in patients undergoing CRT. Tube feeding by means of transnasal or percutaneous routes appear to be comparably effective during CRT, but both have advantages and disadvantages. We suggest a careful endoscopic evaluation to select the population more appropriate for NGT feeding on an as-needed basis during CRT.

Nutritional optimization during neoadjuvant therapy prior to surgical resection of esophageal cancer-a narrative review

This narrative review aims to evaluate the evidence for the different nutritional approaches employed during neoadjuvant therapy in patients with locoregional esophageal cancer. Patients with esophageal cancer are often malnourished and difficult to optimize nutritionally. While evidence suggests that neoadjuvant therapy can offer a survival advantage, associated toxicity can exacerbate poor nutritional status. There is currently no accepted standard of care regarding optimal nutritional approach. A systematic literature search was undertaken. Studies describing the utilization of an additional nutritional intervention in patients with esophageal cancer receiving neoadjuvant therapy prior to esophagectomy were included. Primary outcome measure was 30-day postoperative mortality after esophagectomy. Secondary outcome measures were loss of weight during neoadjuvant therapy, completion rate of intended neoadjuvant therapy, complications from nutritional intervention, 30-day postoperative morbidity after esophagectomy and quality of life during neoadjuvant treatment. Given the heterogeneity of retrieved articles results was presented as a narrative review. Twenty-five studies were included of which 16 evaluated esophageal stenting, four feeding jejunostomy, three gastrostomy, one nasogastric feeding, and one comparative study of esophageal stenting to feeding jejunostomy. 30-day postoperative mortality was only reported in two of the 26 included studies limiting comparison between nutritional strategies. All studies of esophageal stents reported improvements in dysphagia with reported weight change ranging from -5.4 to +6 kg and one study reported 30-day postoperative mortality after esophagectomy (10%). In patients undergoing esophageal stenting for their neoadjuvant treatment overall migration rate was 29.9%. Studies of laparoscopically inserted jejunostomy were all retrospective reviews that demonstrated an increase in weight ranging from 0.4 to 11.8 kg and similarly no study reported 30-day postoperative mortality. Only one comparative study was included that compared esophageal stents to jejunostomy. This study reported no significant difference between the two groups in respect to complication rates (stents 22% vs. jejunostomy 4%, P = 0.11) or increase in weight (stents 4.4 kg vs. jejunostomy 4.2 kg, P = 0.59). Quality of life was also poorly reported. This review demonstrates the uncertainty on the optimal nutritional approach for patients with resectable esophageal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant treatment prior to esophagectomy. A prospective, multicenter, observational cohort study is needed to determine current practice and inform a prospective clinical trial.

A bridging stent to surgery in patients with esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer has a dramatic negative impact on patient survival: A retrospective cohort study through data acquired from a prospectively maintained national database

This study aimed to assess the impact of esophageal stenting on postoperative complications and survival in patients with obstructing esophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. All patients treated without neoadjuvant therapy that had an R0-resection performed for esophageal and GEJ cancer between January 2003 and December 2010 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Data on stenting, postoperative mortality, morbidity, recurrence-free survival, complications, and length of hospital stay were collected. Kaplan-Meier plots for survival and recurrence-free survival curves were constructed for R0 resected patients. Data were compared between the stent and no-stent group by nonparametric tests. Two hundred seventy three consecutive R0 resected patients with esophageal or GEJ cancer were identified. Of these patients, 63 had a stent as a bridge to surgery. The male/female ratio was 2.64 (198/75) with a median age in the stent group (SG) of 65.1 versus 64.3 in the no stent group (NSG). Patients were comparable with respect to gender, age, smoking, TNM-classification, oncological treatment, hospital stay, tumor location, and histology. The median survival in the SG was 11.6 months compared with 21.3 months for patients treated without a bridging stent (P < 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in 30-day mortality between the two groups, but NSG patients exhibited a significantly better two-year survival (P = 0.017). The median recurrence-free survival was 9.1 months for the SG compared with 15.2 months for the NSG. The use of a stent as a bridging procedure to surgery in patients treated without neaoadjuvant therapy for an esophageal or GEJ cancer that later underwent R0 resection decreased the two year survival and the recurrence-free survival.

Robotic esophagectomy

Robotic esophagectomy is an increasingly used modality. Patients who are candidates for traditional, open esophagectomy are typically also candidates for robotic esophagectomy. Knowledge of and training on the robotic platform is critical for success. Patient and port positioning is described. Either a hand-sewn or stapled intrathoracic anastomosis may be performed. Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) appears to be associated with decreased respiratory complications versus open esophagectomy. Robotic esophagectomy may be performed with excellent perioperative outcomes, though long-term oncologic data regarding the operation are not yet available.

Palliative Endoscopic Therapy of Esophageal Cancer

Background

This is a review of endoscopic therapy in the setting of palliative management of patients suffering from esophageal cancer (EC). Unfortunately, many cases of EC present in a stage of disease in which curative therapy is not possible. The maintenance of quality of life includes the ability to swallow and of oral feeding, pain control, and the prevention of bleeding.

Methods

A review of the current literature was performed.

Results

Many endoscopic methods are available for the management of dysphagia, of which dilation, endoluminal tumor destruction, stenting, and brachytherapy are the most common.

Conclusion

Surgical palliation should be avoided as much as possible since the alternatives show at least the same efficacy and have fewer complications.

Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease-related Symptom Assessment in Subjects with Malignant Dysphagia Receiving Esophageal Stents

Concerns remain over the ability to stent across of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) for esophageal adenocarcinoma and the effects of gastroesophageal (GE) reflux. Thus, the aim of this study was to demonstrate minimal quality-of-life (QOL) side effects in patients undergoing esophageal stenting across the LES. An Institutional Review Board–approved prospective clinical trial evaluated the results of the Gastrointestinal Symptom questionnaire that includes a validated GE reflux disease (GERD) assessment (GERD-HRQL) and a dysphagia assessment. Consecutive patients were enrolled in this clinical trial, with 81 per cent male, 19 per cent female, median age of 62 years, with adenocarcinoma of the GE junction as their diagnosis. The median dysphagia score was 3 (only liquids can be tolerated) prestent and was improved to a median score of 0 (ability to eat all foods) poststent ( P = 0.01). The median GERD score was 0 (none) prestent and did not change with a median score of 0 (none) poststent ( P = 0.2). All GERD-related questions were unchanged prestent and poststent in all categories, specifically: frequency of GERD, time of day of reflux, pain behind breastbone, and pain medications. There was also no difference in regurgitation frequency (median prestent 1 vs poststent 0, P = 0.08), texture (prestent 2 [semisolid] vs poststent 1 [liquid]). There was only a statistical change in the ability to belch (prestent 0 [no ability] to poststent 1 [ability]), P = 0.02) and the ability to vomit. Esophageal stenting across the GE junction for dysphagia relief in esophageal malignancies does not adversely effect a patient's QOL in regard to reflux-related symptoms.

Evaluation of quality of life following placement of self-expanding plastic stents as a bridge to surgery in patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy for esophageal cancer

PURPOSE

To determine whether self-expanding plastic stent (SEPS) placement significantly improves quality of life and maintains optimal nutrition while allowing full-dose neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) in patients with esophageal cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A prospective, dual-institution, single-arm, phase II (http://ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00727376) evaluation of esophageal cancer patients undergoing NAT prior to resection. All patients had a self-expanding polymer stent placed prior to NAT. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OG25, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Anorexia, and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General surveys were administered prior to stenting, within 1 week post-stent placement, and at the completion of neoadjuvant therapy.

RESULTS

Fifty-two patients were enrolled; 3 (5.8%) had stent migrations requiring replacement. There were no instances of esophageal erosion or perforation. All patients received some form of neoadjuvant therapy. Thirty-six (69%) received chemoradiation; 34 (93%) of these patients received the planned dose of chemotherapy, and 27 (75%) received the full planned dose of radiotherapy. There were 16 (31%) patients receiving chemotherapy alone; 12 (74%) of patients in the chemotherapy-alone group completed the planned dose of therapy.

CONCLUSION

Placement of SEPS appears to provide significant improvement in quality of life related to dysphagia and eating restriction in patients with esophageal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant therapy. Consideration of SEPS instead of percutaneous feeding tube should be initiated as a first line in dysphagia palliation and NAT nutritional support.

Update on clinical impact, documentation, and management of complications associated with esophagectomy

The assessment and monitoring of complications associated with esophageal resection suffers from the absence of an internationally recognized system for documenting the incidence and severity of complications. The impact of complications is significant, with direct effects being identified on mortality, length of stay, postoperative quality of life, and long-term survival. Newer systems of assessing surgical complication severity and the resources required to treat complications include the Accordion and Clavien grading systems. New endoscopic and interventional approaches to treating anastomotic leak and stricture and chyle leak can selectively decrease length of stay and costs of managing complications.

Acute GI obstruction

Acute gastrointestinal obstruction occurs when the normal flow of intestinal contents is interrupted. The blockage can occur at any level throughout the gastrointestinal tract. The clinical symptoms depend on the level and extent of obstruction. Various benign and malignant processes can produce acute gastrointestinal obstruction, which often represents a medical emergency because of the potential for bowel ischemia leading to perforation and peritonitis. Early recognition and appropriate treatment are thus essential. The typical clinical symptoms associated with obstruction include nausea, vomiting, dysphagia, abdominal pain and failure to pass bowel movements. Abdominal distention, tympany due to an air-filled stomach and high-pitched bowel sounds suggest the diagnosis. The diagnostic process involves imaging including radiography, ultrasonography, contrast fluoroscopy and computer tomography in less certain cases. In patients with uncomplicated obstruction, management is conservative, including fluid resuscitation, electrolyte replacement, intestinal decompression and bowel rest. In many cases, endoscopy may aid in both the diagnostic process and in therapy. Endoscopy can be used for bowel decompression, dilation of strictures or placement of self-expandable metal stents to restore the luminal flow either as a final treatment or to allow for a delay until elective surgical therapy. When gastrointestinal obstruction results in ischemia, perforation or peritonitis, emergency surgery is required.

Endoscopic Therapy of Neoplasia Related to Barrett's Esophagus and Endoscopic Palliation of Esophageal Cancer

Background

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the most important identifiable risk factor for the progression to esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Methods

This article reviews the current endoscopic therapies for BE with high-grade dysplasia and intramucosal cancer and briefly discusses the endoscopic palliation of advanced esophageal cancer.

Results

The diagnosis of low-grade or high-grade dysplasia (HGD) is based on several cytologic criteria that suggest neoplastic transformation of the columnar epithelium. HGD and carcinoma in situ are regarded as equivalent. The presence of dysplasia, particularly HGD, is also a risk factor for synchronous and metachronous adenocarcinoma. Dysplasia is a marker of adenocarcinoma and also has been shown to be the preinvasive lesion. Esophagectomy has been the conventional treatment for T1 esophageal cancer and, although debated, is an appropriate option in some patients with HGD due to the presence of occult cancer in over one-third of patients.

Conclusions

Endoscopic ablative modalities (eg, photodynamic therapy and cryoablation) and endoscopic resection techniques (eg, endoscopic mucosal resection) have demonstrated promising results. The significant morbidity and mortality of esophagectomy makes endoscopic treatment an attractive potential option.

Nutrition therapy issues in esophageal cancer

Esophageal cancer has traditionally been a disease with poor long term outcomes in terms of both survival and quality of life. In combination with surgical and pharmacologic therapy, nutrition support has been demonstrated to improve patient tolerance of treatment, quality of life, and longterm outcomes. An aggressive multi-disciplinary approach is warranted with nutrition support remaining a cornerstone in management. Historically, nutrition support has focused on adequate caloric provision to prevent weight loss and allow for tolerance of treatment regimens. Alterations in metabolism occur in these patients making their use of available calories inefficient and the future of nutritional support may lie in the ability to alter this deranged metabolism. The purpose of this article is to review the current literature surrounding the etiology, treatment, and role of nutrition support in improving outcomes in esophageal cancer.

A new fully covered metal stent for the treatment of benign and malignant dysphagia: a prospective follow-up study

BACKGROUND

Fully covered self-expandable metal stents (FCSEMSs) are increasingly being used for malignant and benign strictures. Particularly in the latter, FCSEMSs are known for their high migration rates. A new FCSEMS with a dog-bone shape and internal covering was developed to reduce migration risk.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate recurrent dysphagia and safety of the new FC stent in benign and malignant esophageal disorders.

DESIGN

Prospective follow-up study.

SETTING

Tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS

Between November 2009 and February 2011, 48 consecutive patients (mean age 61 years, range 28-81 years) underwent FC stent placement for malignant (n = 33) or benign (n = 15) dysphagia.

INTERVENTION

FC stent placement.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Recurrent dysphagia and complications.

RESULTS

Indications for FC stent placement included esophageal cancer (n = 28), extrinsic malignant compression (n = 4), recurrent malignancy after esophagectomy (n = 1), and refractory benign esophageal stricture (n = 15). In malignant strictures, recurrent dysphagia occurred in 5 patients (15%) because of stent migration (n = 3), tissue overgrowth (n = 1), and acute edema (n = 1). In benign strictures, stents were prematurely removed in 9 (60%) patients because of stent migration (n = 5), tissue overgrowth (n = 3), and pain (n = 1). Recurrent dysphagia occurred in all patients after stent removal. Major complications occurred in 10 patients (30%) with malignant strictures and in 3 patients (20%) with benign strictures and included severe pain and/or vomiting (n = 8), fistula formation (n = 2), bleeding (n = 2), and aspiration pneumonia (n = 1).

LIMITATION

Nonrandomized study design.

CONCLUSION

Although the new FC stent effectively treats malignant dysphagia, it is associated with substantial major complications. In patients with refractory benign esophageal strictures, recurrent dysphagia occurs rapidly after removal of the new FC stent.

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.

The use of biodegradable (SX-ELLA) oesophageal stents to treat dysphagia due to benign and malignant oesophageal disease

BACKGROUND

Biodegradable (BD) oesophageal stents have been available commercially only since 2008 and previous published research is limited. Our aim was to review the use of BD stents to treat dysphagia in benign or malignant oesophageal strictures.

METHODS

Patients were identified from a prospective interventional radiological database. BD stents were inserted radiologically under fluoroscopic control.

RESULTS

Between July 2008 and February 2011, 25 attempts at placing SX-ELLA biodegradable oesophageal stents were made in 17 males and five females, with a median age of 69 (range = 54-80) years. Two patients required more than one BD stent. Indications were benign strictures (n = 7) and oesophageal cancer (n = 17). One attempt was unsuccessful for a technical success rate of 96% with no immediate complications. Clinical success rate was 76%. Median dysphagia score before stent insertion was 3 (range = 2-4) compared to 2 (range = 0-3) after stent insertion (p = 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

BD stents provide good dysphagia relief for the life time of the stent. They may help avoid the use of feeding tubes in patients having radical chemoradiotherapy or awaiting oesophagectomy. They do not require removal or interfere with radiotherapy planning via imaging. However, the reintervention rate is high after the stent dissolves.

Surgery in esophageal and gastric cancer patients: what is the role for nutrition support in your daily practice?

Cancers of the esophagus and stomach have a major impact on patients' nutritional status by virtue of these organs' inherent digestive functions. Many patients with these cancers will require surgical intervention, which imposes further metabolic demands and compounds preexisting nutritional disorders. Patients with esophagogastric cancer are likely to have lost weight by the time the diagnosis is made. This fact alone is of clinical importance, because it is well known that patients who have lost weight will have higher operative mortality and morbidity rates than patients who maintain their weight. Initial assessment of patients with esophagogastric cancer should include a routine evaluation of nutritional status. This will allow the identification of patients who are at risk of complications, particularly in the postoperative setting. These patients should be targeted for specific nutritional support.

Esophageal stenting in the setting of malignancy

Esophageal cancer is often diagnosed at an advanced stage, with many patients found to have locoregional or metastatic disease at time of diagnosis. Because of this, cure may be unlikely, leading treatment efforts to focus more on symptom palliation and improving patient quality of life. The majority of patients with advanced disease suffer from some degree of dysphagia. Palliative efforts are therefore directed at relieving dysphagia, allowing patients to manage their oropharyngeal secretions, reduce aspiration risk, and maintain caloric intake orally. A variety of endoscopic treatment modalities have been utilized with these objectives in mind, with options determined by the location and size of the tumor, as well as the patient's expected prognosis. In this article, we review the use of endoscopically-placed stents for palliation in patients with advanced esophageal cancer. We discuss the history of stent use in such cases, as well as more recent developments in stent technology. We give an overview of some of the more commonly used stents in practice, discuss the technique of insertion, and survey the short- and long-term outcomes of stent placement.