Randomised comparison of the FerX Ella antireflux stent and the ultraflex stent: proton pump inhibitor combination for prevention of post-stent reflux in patients with esophageal carcinoma involving the esophago-gastric junction

Endoscopic Palliative Therapies for Esophageal Cancer

Endoscopic palliation of dysphagia for patients with inoperable esophageal cancer is complex, highly dependent on local expertise, and best done in a multidisciplinary fashion. Systemic therapy is the standard of care because it has been shown to improve survival. Esophageal stenting has traditionally been the most used endoscopic modality. Some modalities such as laser and photodynamic therapy are rarely used. There has been an increasing amount of data on cryotherapy, especially for patients with mild-to-moderate dysphagia on systemic chemotherapy. This article will discuss the latest evidence guiding the palliation of esophageal cancer.

Anti-reflux versus conventional self-expanding metal stents in the palliation of esophageal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and study aims  Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) are an effective palliative endoscopic therapy to reduce dysphagia in esophageal cancer. Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a relatively common complaint after non-valved conventional SEMS placement. Therefore, valved self-expanding metal stents (SEMS-V) were designed to reduce the rate of GERD symptoms. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the two stents. Material and methods  This was a systematic review and meta-analysis including only randomized clinical trials (RCT) comparing the outcomes between SEMS-V and non-valved self-expanding metal stents (SEMS-NV) following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. Data were analyzed with Review Manager Software. Quality of evidence was evaluated using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation guidelines. Results  Ten randomized clinical trials including a total of 467 patients, 234 in the SEMS-V group and 233 in the SEMS-NV group, were included. There were no statistically significant differences regarding GERD qualitative analysis (RD -0.17; 95 % CI -0.67, 0.33; P  = 0.5) and quantitative analysis (SMD -0.22; 95 % CI -0.53, 0.08; P  = 0.15) technical success (RD -0.03; 95 % CI -0.07, 0.01; P  = 0.16), dysphagia improvement (RD -0.07; 95 % CI -0.19, 0.06; P  = 0.30), and adverse events (RD 0.07; 95 % CI -0.07, 0.20; P  = 0.32). Conclusions  Both SEMS-V and SEMS-NV are safe and effective in the palliation of esophageal cancer with similar rates of GERD, dysphagia relief, technical success, adverse events, stent migration, stent obstruction, bleeding, and improvement of the quality of life.

Recent Updates in Gastrointestinal Stent Placement from the Esophagus to the Colon: A Radiological Perspective

Fluoroscopic-guided stent placement has become an advantageous treatment option for diverse gastrointestinal disorders. In addition to palliative stent placement in patients with inoperable cancers, stenting has gradually expanded to other conditions, including as a bridge to surgery, as well as in patients' benign lesions and anastomotic strictures or leaks. This narrative review describes the indications, efficacy and safety of stent placement from the esophagus to the colon, including current recommendations, recent updates, and novel stents.

Comparison of fully-covered vs partially covered self-expanding metallic stents for palliative treatment of inoperable esophageal malignancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

This study aimed to compare clinical outcomes following placement of fully covered self-expanding metallic stents (FCSEMS) vs partially covered self-expanding metallic stents (PCSEMS) for palliative treatment of inoperable esophageal cancer.

Methods

We searched PubMed, ScienceDirect, Embase, and CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) databases from inception up to 10th July 2019. Studies comparing clinical outcomes with FCSEMS vs PCSEMS in patients with inoperable esophageal cancer requiring palliative treatment for dysphagia were included.

Results

Five studies were included in the review. Two hundred twenty-nine patients received FCSEMS while 313 patients received PCSEMS in the five studies. There was no difference in the rates of stent migration between FCSEMS and PCSEMS (Odds ratio [OR] 0.63, 95%CI 0.37–1.08, P = 0.09; I² = 0%). Meta-analysis indicated no significant difference in technical success between the two groups (OR 1.32, 95%CI 0.30–5.03, P = 0.78; I² = 12%). Improvement in dysphagia was reported with both FCSEMS and PCSEMS in the included studies. There was no difference between the two stents for obstruction due to tissue growth (OR 0.81, 95%CI 0.47–1.39, P = 0.44; I² = 2%) or by food (OR 0.41, 95%CI 0.10–1.62, P = 0.20; I² = 29%). Incidence of bleeding (OR 0.57, 95%CI 0.21–1.58, P = 0.28; I² = 0%) and chest pain (OR 1.06, 95%CI 0.44–2.57, P = 0.89; I² = 0%) was similar in the two groups. Sensitivity analysis and subgroup analysis of RCTs and non-RCTs produced similar results. The overall quality of studies was not high.

Conclusion

Our results indicate that there is no difference in stent migration, and stent obstruction, with FCSEMS or PCSEMS when used for palliative treatment of esophageal malignancy.

Silicone-covered biodegradable magnesium stent for treating benign esophageal stricture in a rabbit model

BACKGROUND

Stent insertion can effective alleviate the symptoms of benign esophageal strictures (BES). Magnesium alloy stents are a good candidate because of biological safety, but show a poor corrosion resistance and a quick loss of mechanical support in vivo.

AIM

To test the therapeutic and adverse effects of a silicone-covered magnesium alloy biodegradable esophageal stent.

METHODS

Fifteen rabbits underwent silicone-covered biodegradable magnesium stent insertion into the benign esophageal stricture under fluoroscopic guidance (stent group). The wall reconstruction and tissue reaction of stenotic esophagus in the stent group were compared with those of six esophageal stricture models (control group). Esophagography was performed at 1, 2, and 3 weeks. Four, six, and five rabbits in the stent group and two rabbits in the control groups were euthanized, respectively, at each time point for histological examination.

RESULTS

All stent insertions were well tolerated. The esophageal diameters at immediately, 1, 2 and 3 wk were 9.8 ± 0.3 mm, 9.7 ± 0.7 mm, 9.4 ± 0.8 mm, and 9.2 ± 0.5 mm, respectively (vs 4.9 ± 0.3 mm before stent insertion; P < 0.05). Magnesium stents migrated in eight rabbits [one at 1 wk (1/15), three at 2 wk (3/11), and four at 3 wk (4/5)]. Esophageal wall remodeling (thinner epithelial and smooth muscle layers) was found significantly thinner in the stent group than in the control group (P < 0.05). Esophageal injury and collagen deposition following stent insertion were similar and did not differ compared to rabbits with esophageal stricture and normal rabbits (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Esophageal silicone-covered biodegradable magnesium stent insertion is feasible for BES without causing severe injury or tissue reaction. Our study suggests that insertion of silicone-covered magnesium esophageal stent is a promising approach for treating BES.

A phase III, multicenter, prospective, single-blinded, noninferiority, randomized controlled trial on the performance of a novel esophageal stent with an antireflux valve (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Self-expanding metal stents (SEMSs) when deployed across the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) can lead to reflux with risks of aspiration. A SEMS with a tricuspid antireflux valve (SEMS-V) was designed to address this issue. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of this stent.

METHODS

A phase III, multicenter, prospective, noninferiority, randomized controlled trial was conducted on patients with malignant dysphagia requiring SEMSs to be placed across the GEJ. Patients were randomized to receive SEMSs with no valve (SEMS-NV) or SEMS-V. Postdeployment dysphagia score at 2 weeks and Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease-Health Related Quality of Life (GERD-HRQL) questionnaire score at 4 weeks were measured. Patients were followed for 24 weeks.

RESULTS

Sixty patients were randomized (SEMS-NV: 30 patients, mean age 67 ± 13 years; SEMS-V: 30 patients, mean age 65 ± 12 years). Baseline dysphagia scores (SEMS-NV, 2.5 ± .8; SEMS-V, 2.5 ± .8) and GERD-HRQL scores (SEMS-NV, 11.1 ± 8.2; SEMS-V, 12.8 ± 8.3) were similar. All SEMSs were successfully deployed. A similar proportion of patients in both arms improved from advanced dysphagia to moderate to no dysphagia (SEMS-NV, 71%; SEMS-V, 74%; 95% confidence interval, 1.93 [-17.8 to 21.7]). The dysphagia scores were also similar across all follow-up time points. Mean GERD-HRQL scores improved by 7.4 ± 10.2 points in the SEMS-V arm and by 5.2 ± 8.3 in the SEMS-NV group (P = .96). The GERD-HRQL scores were similar across all follow-up time points. Aspiration pneumonia occurred in 3.3% in the SEMS-NV arm and 6.9% in the SEMS-V arm (P = .61). Migration rates were similar (SEMS-NV, 33%; SEMS-V, 48%; P = .29). Two SEMS-V spontaneously fractured. There was no perforation, food impaction, or stent-related death in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

The SEMS-V was equally effective in relieving dysphagia as compared with the SEMS-NV. Presence of the valve did not increase the risks of adverse events. GERD symptom scores were similar between the 2 stents, implying either that the valve was not effective or that all patients on proton pump inhibitors could have masked the symptoms of GERD. Studies with objective evaluations such as fluoroscopy and/or pH/impedance are recommended. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02159898.).

Efficacy and safety of standard and anti-reflux self-expanding metal stent: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Self-expanding metal stents are the main palliative treatment modality for unresectable esophageal cancer. Gastroesophageal reflux is a common adverse outcome after placement of esophageal stent for cancer involving the gastroesophageal junction and the gastric cardia. Anti-reflux stents with valve have been designed to prevent the acid reflux. The superiority of anti-reflux stent over standard stent in preventing gastroesophageal reflux has not been established well. This study compares the anti-reflux stent and the standard stent in terms of their efficacy to prevent acid reflux.

AIM

To compare the standard and the anti-reflux stents in terms of their efficacy, safety, and complications.

METHODS

The meta-analysis included 8 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to compare pooled outcomes of total 395 patients. Primary outcomes include improvement in reflux symptoms and dysphagia score. Secondary outcomes include complications of stent migration, occlusion, and bleeding.

RESULTS

A total of eight RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. Compared to the standard stent, the anti-reflux stent showed a trend towards reduction in the dysphagia score without reaching a statistical significance [Standardized mean difference (SMD): -0.33 (-0.71, 0.05); P = 0.09, I²: 37%]. There was no statistical difference in the gastrointestinal reflux (GER) scores between the two types of stents [SMD: -0.17 (-0.78, 0.45); P = 0.008, I²: 74%]. Compared to standard stent, anti-reflux stent showed no difference in the risk of stent migration [OR: 1.37 (0.66, 2.83); P = 0.40, I²: 0 %], bleeding [OR: 1.43 (0.40, 5.13); P = 0.59, I²: 0 %], and obstruction [OR: 1.66 (0.60, 4.60); P = 0.33, I²: 0 %].

CONCLUSION

Traditional self-expanding standard esophageal stent and anti-reflux stent with valve are similar in terms of outcomes and complications.

Regulating migration of esophageal stents - management using a Sengstaken-Blakemore tube: A case report and review of literature

Stent migration, which causes issues in stent therapy for esophageal perforations, can counteract the therapeutic effects and lead to complications. Therefore, techniques to regulate stent migration are important and lead to effective stent therapy. Here, in these cases, we placed a removable fully covered self-expandable metallic stent (FSEMS) in a 52-year-old man with suture failure after surgery to treat Boerhaave syndrome, and in a 53-year-old man with a perforation in the lower esophagus due to acute esophageal necrosis. At the same time, we nasally inserted a Sengstaken-Blakemore tube (SBT), passing it through the stent lumen. By inflating a gastric balloon, the lower end of the stent was supported. When the stent migration was confirmed, the gastric balloon was lifted slightly toward the oral side to correct the stent migration. In this manner, the therapy was completed for these two patients. Using a FSEMS and SBT is a therapeutic method for correcting stent migration and regulating the complete migration of the stent into the stomach without the patient undergoing endoscopic rearrangement of the stent. It was effective for positioning a stent crossing the esophagogastric junction.

Treatment for unresectable or metastatic oesophageal cancer: current evidence and trends

Approximately half of the patients diagnosed with oesophageal cancer present with unresectable or metastatic disease. Treatment for these patients aims to control dysphagia and other cancer-related symptoms, improve quality of life and prolong survival. In the past 25 years, modestly improved outcomes have been achieved in the treatment of patients with inoperable non-metastatic cancer who are medically not fit for surgery or have unresectable, locally advanced disease. Concurrent chemoradiotherapy offers the best outcomes in these patients. In distant metastatic oesophageal cancer, several double-agent or triple-agent chemotherapy regimens have been established as first-line treatment options. In addition, long-term results of multiple large randomized phase III trials using additional targeted therapies have been published in the past few years, affecting contemporary clinical practice and future research directions. For the local treatment of malignant dysphagia, various treatment options have emerged, and self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement is currently the most widely applied method. Besides the continuous search for improved SEMS designs to minimize the risk of associated complications, efforts have been made to develop and evaluate the efficacy of antireflux stents and irradiation stents. This Review outlines the current evidence and ongoing trends in the different modern-day, multidisciplinary interventions for patients with unresectable or metastatic oesophageal cancer with an emphasis on key randomized trials.

Complications of stent placement in patients with esophageal cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background

Palliative treatments and stents are necessary for relieving dysphagia in patients with esophageal cancer. The aim of this study was to simultaneously compare available treatments in terms of complications.

Methods

Web of Science, Medline, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Embase were searched. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the Chi² test and was quantified by I². The results of this study were summarized in terms of Risk Ratio (RR). The random effects model was used to report the results. The rank probability for each treatment was calculated using the p-score.

Results

Out of 17855 references, 24 RCTs reported complications including treatment related death (TRD), bleeding, stent migration, aspiration, severe pain and fistula formation. In the ranking of treatments, thermal ablative therapy (p-score = 0.82), covered Evolution® stent (p-score = 0.70), brachytherapy (p-score = 0.72) and antireflux stent (p-score = 0.74) were better treatments in the network of TRD. Thermal ablative therapy (p-score = 0.86), the conventional stent (p-score = 0.62), covered Evolution® stent (p-score = 0.96) and brachytherapy (p-score = 0.82) were better treatments in the network of bleeding complications. Covered Evolution® (p-score = 0.78), uncovered (p-score = 0.88) and irradiation stents (p-score = 0.65) were better treatments in network of stent migration complications. In the network of severe pain, Conventional self-expandable nitinol alloy covered stent (p-score = 0.73), polyflex (p-score = 0.79), latex prosthesis (p-score = 0.96) and brachytherapy (p-score = 0.65) were better treatments.

Conclusion

According to our results, thermal ablative therapy, covered Evolution® stents, brachytherapy, and antireflux stents are associated with a lower risk of TRD. Moreover, thermal ablative therapy, conventional, covered Evolution® and brachytherapy had lower risks of bleeding. Overall, fewer complications were associated with covered Evolution® stent and brachytherapy.

Self-Expandable Metallic Stent Placement for the Palliation of Esophageal Cancer

Esophageal stents have been used to palliate patients with dysphagia caused by esophageal cancer. Early rigid plastic prostheses have been associated with a high risk of complications. However, with the development of self-expanding stents, it has developed into a widely accepted method for treating malignant esophageal strictures and esophagorespiratory fistulas (ERFs). The present review covers various aspects of self-expanding metallic stent placement for palliating esophageal cancer, including its types, placement procedures, indications, contraindications, complications, and some of innovations that will become available in the future.

Post-surgical gastrointestinal reflux disease: Status quo and treatment

Reflux is a common and tricky morbidity after gastrointestinal surgery which is caused by the destruction of physiological anti-reflux barriers, greatly affecting patients' postoperative quality of life. Gastroenterologists are now actively trying very hard to explore feasible, effective, and safe anti-reflux approaches. Conservative medical treatment, typically with proton pump inhibitors, is easily accepted by patients, however, its long-term adverse events are noteworthy. In the surgical aspect, laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery is gaining more and more popularity, after the first case of fundoplication. Besides, other operations, such as bariatric surgery, pediatric surgery, and pulmonary transplantation, are also frequently complicated by post-operative digestive reflux. Herein we systematically review the status quo and treatment modalities for post-surgical reflux disease, with the hope to facilitate surgeons to cope with this challenging issue appropriately.

Antireflux versus conventional self-expanding metallic Stents (SEMS) for distal esophageal cancer: results of a multicenter randomized trial

INTRODUCTION

Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) are commonly used in the palliation of dysphagia in patients with inoperable esophageal carcinoma. However, they predispose to gastroesophageal reflux when deployed across the gastroesophageal junction. The aims of this study were to: 1) assess the influence of the antireflux valve on trans-prosthetic reflux (primary outcome); and 2) compare the results of SEMS with and without antireflux valve in terms of reflux symptoms, quality of life (QOL), improvement of dysphagia and adverse events (secondary outcomes).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Thirty-eight patients were enrolled in nine centers. Carcinomas were locally advanced (47 %) or metastatic. After randomization, patients received either a covered SEMS with antireflux valve (n = 20) or a similar type of SEMS with no antireflux device but assigned to standard proton pump inhibitor therapy and postural advice (n = 18). Trans-prosthetic reflux was assessed at day 2 using a radiological score based on barium esophagography performed after Trendelenburg maneuver and graded from 0 (no reflux) to 12 (maximum). Monthly telephone interviews were conducted for Organisation Mondiale de la Santé (OMS) scoring from 0 (excellent) to 5 (poor), QOL assessment (based on the Reflux-Qual Simplifié scoring system) from 0 (poor) to 100 (excellent), dysphagia scoring from 0 (no dysphagia) to 5 (complete dysphagia) and regurgitation scoring from 0 (no regurgitation) to 16 (maximum).

RESULTS

No difference was noted in terms of age, sex, size of lesion, prosthesis length or need for dilation prior to SEMS placement. No difficulty in placing SEMS nor complications were noted. Radiological scores of reflux were found to be significantly lower in patients with an antireflux stent compared to the conventional stent and associated measures. The regurgitation scores were significantly decreased in patients with antireflux stents during the first 2 months after stent placement and thereafter, they were similar in the two groups. QOL and dysphagia were improved in both groups. Survival rates were comparable in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

No difference was observed between the two types of SEMS regarding the palliation of dysphagia and improvement of QOL. However, SEMS with an antireflux valve were more effective in preventing trans-prosthetic gastroesophageal reflux but at the cost of an increased likehood of minor adverse events (migrations and/or obstruction of the SEMS).

Gastrointestinal stenting: Current status and imaging features

The use of stents in the gastrointestinal tract has been subjected to major changes. Initially, the use of stents was restricted to malignant strictures in patients with metastatic disease. But thanks to reduction of the morbidity and mortality rates, they are now used with curative intention and in patients with benign diseases after careful selection. However, for patients presenting with colon obstruction due to an advanced colon carcinoma, the mortality and morbidity are still high. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of indications, techniques and further developments of the stents in the gastrointestinal tract and to highlight the predominant role of multidetector row computed tomography (MDCT) in the detection of potential 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.

Interventions for dysphagia in oesophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

Most patients with oesophageal and gastro-oesophageal carcinoma are diagnosed at an advanced stage and require palliative intervention. Although there are many kinds of interventions, the optimal one for the palliation of dysphagia remains unclear. This review updates the previous version published in 2009.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review was to systematically analyse and summarise the efficacy of different interventions used in the palliation of dysphagia in primary oesophageal and gastro-oesophageal carcinoma.

SEARCH METHODS

To find new studies for this updated review, in January 2014 we searched, according to the Cochrane Upper Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Diseases model, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL; and major conference proceedings (up to January 2014).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included in which patients with inoperable or unresectable primary oesophageal cancer underwent palliative treatment. Different interventions like rigid plastic intubation, self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) insertion, brachytherapy, external beam radiotherapy, chemotherapy, oesophageal bypass surgery, chemical and thermal ablation therapy, either head-to-head or in combination, were included. The primary outcome was dysphagia improvement. Secondary outcomes included recurrent dysphagia, technical success, procedure related mortality, 30-day mortality, adverse effects and quality of life.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data collection and analysis were performed in accordance with the methods of the Cochrane Upper Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Diseases Review Group.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 3684 patients from 53 studies. SEMS insertion was safer and more effective than plastic tube insertion. Thermal and chemical ablative therapy provided comparable dysphagia palliation but had an increased requirement for re-interventions and for adverse effects. Anti-reflux stents provided comparable dysphagia palliation to conventional metal stents. Some anti-reflux stents might have reduced gastro-oesophageal reflux and complications. Newly-designed double-layered nitinol (Niti-S) stents were preferable due to longer survival time and fewer complications compared to simple Niti-S stents. Brachytherapy might be a suitable alternative to SEMS in providing a survival advantage and possibly a better quality of life, and might provide better results when combined with argon plasma coagulation or external beam radiation therapy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Self-expanding metal stent insertion is safe, effective and quicker in palliating dysphagia compared to other modalities. However, high-dose intraluminal brachytherapy is a suitable alternative and might provide additional survival benefit with a better quality of life. Some anti-reflux stents and newly-designed stents lead to longer survival and fewer complications compared to conventional stents. Combinations of brachytherapy with self-expanding metal stent insertion or radiotherapy are preferable due to the reduced requirement for re-interventions. Rigid plastic tube insertion, dilatation alone or in combination with other modalities, and chemotherapy alone are not recommended for palliation of dysphagia due to a high incidence of delayed complications and recurrent dysphagia.

Antireflux stents versus conventional stents for management of stenosis of distal esophageal and gastric cardia: An systematic review

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of anti-reflux stents versus conventional stents for the management of stenosis of distal esophageal and gastric cardia in patients with esophageal cancer.

METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs)that evaluated anti-reflux stents versus conventional stents in the treatment of stenosis of distal esophageal and gastric cardia in patients with esophageal cancer were electronically searched from the PubMed (1978-2011), EMbase (1966-2011), CBM (1978-2011), Cochrane Library (2011, Issue 11) and CNKI (1979-2011) databases, and relevant published and unpublished data and their references (either in English or Chinese), were also searched manually. The data were extracted and the methodological quality of the incorporated studies was evaluated by two reviewers independently. The RevMan 5.1 software was used for meta-analysis.

RESULTS: Five RCTs involving 234 patients were included. Meta-analysis showed that anti-reflux stents and conventional stents had no significant differences in terms of the incidences of pain (RR = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.16, 1.06), stent migration (RR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.50, 2.11), obstruction (RR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.52, 1.99), gastroesophageal reflux (RR = 1.68, 95% CI: 0.52, 5.48), bleeding (RR = 1.39, 95% CI: 0.44, 4.40), and perforation of the esophagus and stomach (RR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.25, 2.00).

CONCLUSION: The overall curative efficacy of anti-reflux stents for the stenosis of distal esophageal and gastric cardia in patients with esophageal cancer is not better than that of conventional stents. Because of the generally low quality and a small number of studies in the incorporated research, the above conclusion remains to be validated by carrying out more randomized controlled trials with multiple center samples and enough follow-up time.

Double layered self-expanding metal stents for malignant esophageal obstruction, especially across the gastroesophageal junction

AIM: To evaluate the clinical outcomes of double-layered self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) for treatment of malignant esophageal obstruction according to whether SEMS crosses the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ).

METHODS: Forty eight patients who underwent the SEMS insertion for malignant esophageal obstruction were enrolled. Patients were classified as GEJ group (SEMS across GEJ, 18 patients) and non-GEJ group (SEMS above GEJ, 30 patients) according to SEMS position. Double layered (outer uncovered and inner covered stent) esophageal stents were placed.

RESULTS: The SEMS insertion and the clinical improvement were achieved in all patients in both groups. Stent malfunction occurred in seven patients in the GEJ group and nine patients in the non-GEJ group. Tumor overgrowth occurred in five and eight patients, respectively, food impaction occurred in one patient in each group, and stent migration occurred in one and no patient, respectively. There were no significant differences between the two groups. Reflux esophagitis occurred more frequently in the GEJ group (eight vs five patients, P = 0.036) and was controlled by proton pump inhibitor. Aspiration pneumonia occurred in zero and five patients, respectively, and tracheoesophageal fistula occurred in zero and two patients, respectively.

CONCLUSION: Double-layered SEMS are a feasible and effective treatment when placed across the GEJ for malignant esophageal obstruction. Double-layered SEMS provide acceptable complications, especially migration, although reflux esophagitis is more common in the GEJ group.

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.

Technical feasibility and safety of a new, implantable reflux control system to prevent gastroesophageal reflux in patients with stents placed through the lower esophageal sphincter (with video)

BACKGROUND

When an esophageal stent is placed through the lower esophageal sphincter (LES), gastroesophageal reflux symptoms may persist despite high-dose proton pump inhibitor therapy. A recently developed, short segment, uncovered nitinol stent with a tricuspid-like valve can be placed inside a previously placed esophageal stent.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the technical feasibility and safety of a reflux control system (RCS) in distally placed esophageal stents.

DESIGN

A prospective case series.

SETTING

Two tertiary-care referral centers.

PATIENTS

This study involved 10 patients who had an "open" stent placed through the LES and 1 patient with severe bile reflux after esophagojejunostomy.

INTERVENTION

Placement of an RCS with fluoroscopic and (in selected cases) endoscopic guidance, from April to October 2010.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Technical success of RCS placement and complications.

RESULTS

Placement of an RCS was successful on the first attempt in all patients; complete expansion to the wall of the host stent was confirmed by fluoroscopy in all cases. In 3 patients, the host stent migrated in <1 month with the RCS still inside. In 8 patients, the RCS was in place for a median of 134 days (range 33-225 days). Three patients died because of malignant disease progression. Eight RCSs were removed endoscopically, together with the host stent without complications. RCS migration did not occur.

LIMITATIONS

Small number of patients, nonrandomized design, lack of pH measurements.

CONCLUSION

Placement of an RCS in a host stent is technically feasible and safe. An RCS can be considered in symptomatic patients with open esophageal stents to prevent gastroesophageal reflux.

Endoscopic management of difficult or recurrent esophageal strictures

Esophageal strictures are a common problem in gastroenterological practice. In general, the management of malignant or benign esophageal strictures is different and requires a different treatment approach. In daily clinical practice, stent placement is a commonly used modality for the palliation of incurable malignant strictures causing dysphagia, whereas, if available, intraluminal brachytherapy can be considered in patients with a good performance status. Recurrent dysphagia frequently occurs in malignant cases. In case of tissue in- or overgrowth, a second stent is placed. If stent migration occurs, the stent can be repositioned or a second (preferably partially covered) stent can be placed. Food obstruction of the stent lumen can be resolved by endoscopic cleansing. The cornerstone of the management of benign strictures is still dilation therapy (Savary-Gilliard bougie or balloon). There are a subgroup of strictures that are refractory or recur and an alternative approach is required. In order to prevent stricture recurrence, steroid injections into the stricture followed by dilation can be considered. In case of anastomotic strictures or Schatzki rings, incisional therapy is a safe method in experienced hands. Temporary stent placement is a third option before considering self-bougienage or surgery as a salvage treatment. In this review, the most frequently used endoscopic treatment modalities for malignant and benign stricture management will be discussed based on the available literature, and some practical information for the management in daily clinical practice will be provided.

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.

Expandable stents for malignant esophageal disease

Esophageal cancer is diagnosed in about 400,000 patients each year worldwide, and its incidence is increasing faster than that of any other malignancy. This makes it the ninth most common malignancy and sixth on the list of cancer mortality causes. Most patients with esophageal cancer present at a stage that is too advanced for curative therapy, and many die within a few months. Treatment of dysphagia is the main goal of palliative care in more than 50% of incurable cases. Although many different palliative options for malignant dysphagia are available, expandable stent placement is the most commonly performed treatment modality.

The use of self-expanding stents in esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer palliation: a meta-analysis and meta-regression analysis of outcomes

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to examine the impact of self-expanding stents versus locoregional treatment modalities in the setting of esophageal cancer palliation.

METHODS

The present meta-analysis pooled the effects of outcomes of 1,027 patients enrolled in 16 randomized controlled trials.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis revealed an advantage to the use of stents compared to locoregional modality treatments with respect to the number of patients requiring reinterventions, although the latter treatment arm had a higher 1-year survival. No difference was observed between the use of the antireflux stents and conventional stents in relieving reflux. Previous chemoradiotherapy had no impact on complications, procedural deaths, and overall patient survival. Differences in outcomes among stents were minimal.

CONCLUSIONS

Conventional self-expanding stents and anti-reflux stents are equally effective. Although the risk difference for 1-year survival favoured locoregional palliative treatment modalities, the latter were associated with a higher number of patients requiring reintervention.

Stenting of the upper gastrointestinal tract: current status

Minimally invasive image-guided insertion of self-expanding metal stents in the upper gastrointestinal tract is the current treatment of choice for palliation of malignant esophageal or gastroduodenal outlet obstructions. A concise review is presented of contemporary stenting practice of the upper gastrointestinal tract, and the procedures in terms of appropriate patient evaluation, indications, and contraindications for treatment are analyzed, along with available stent designs, procedural steps, clinical outcomes, inadvertent complications, and future technology. Latest developments include biodegradable polymeric stents for benign disease and radioactive or drug-eluting stents for malignant obstructions.

Long-term clinical outcomes of self-expanding metal stents for treatment of malignant gastroesophageal junction obstructions and prognostic factors for stent patency: effects of anticancer treatments

BACKGROUND

Self-expanding metal stent has emerged as an effective treatment option for malignant gastroesophageal junction obstruction. However, data on the clinicopathologic factors associated with stent patency are still lacking.

AIM

To investigate the long-term clinical outcomes and prognostic factors, including treatment modalities, affecting stent patency in patients with malignant gastroesophageal junction obstruction given self-expanding metal stent insertions.

METHODS

A total 89 patients who underwent self-expanding metal stent insertion for malignant gastroesophageal junction obstruction were enrolled. We analysed technical and clinical success rates, complications, and prognostic factors affecting stent patency.

RESULTS

Self-expanding metal stent insertion was successful in all patients and clinical improvement was achieved in 93.3%. Stent malfunction occurred in 32.9% of patients. The median overall survival time and stent patency time were 143 (95% CI: 99-187) and 190 days (95% CI: 108-272), respectively. In multivariate analysis, radiation therapy after stent placement significantly prolonged stent patency (OR: 0.221; 95% CI: 0.055-0.884; p=0.033). A higher migration rate was observed in those patients given chemotherapy after covered self-expanding metal stent placement (no anticancer treatment: 10.0%, chemotherapy: 42.9%, chemoradiation therapy: 9.1%, p=0.042).

CONCLUSIONS

Self-expanding metal stent is a feasible and effective treatment for malignant gastroesophageal junction obstruction. Radiation therapy after stent placement significantly prolongs overall stent patency and chemotherapy increases the migration rate of covered stents.

Antireflux stent versus conventional stent in the palliation of distal esophageal cancer. A randomized, multicenter clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

Patients with incurable distal esophageal or cardia cancer often need palliative stenting to relieve their dysphagia but stents passing through the cardia can cause reflux and aspiration, leading to a reduced health-related quality of life (HRQL). This study addressed the hypothesis that antireflux stenting improves HRQL compared to conventional stenting.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In a single-blind, multicenter, randomized trial in patients with inoperable esophageal or cardia cancer requiring palliative stenting passing through the cardia, 65 patients were stented. Patients received either an antireflux stent (Esophageal Z-Stent with Dua antireflux valve; n = 28) or a conventional stent (Esophageal Z-stent, Ultraflex or Wallstent; n = 37). Validated questionnaires (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OES18) were used to collect information on HRQL at baseline and 1 and 3 months after stenting. Main outcome measurements were differences in HRQL scores between baseline and 1 and 3 months after stenting.

RESULTS

Scores for most aspects of HRQL were similar in the two groups, and no statistically significant differences were found. Some general symptoms however showed clinically relevant improvement in the antireflux stent group, while esophageal-specific symptoms such as dysphagia seemed clinically better, and symptoms of reflux were clinically reduced in the conventional stent group but not in the antireflux stent group.

CONCLUSION

This study, although limited in size, provided no obvious support for using the antireflux stent in preference to the conventional stent in the palliation of distal esophageal or cardia cancer from an HRQL perspective.

A new metal stent with a controlled-release system for palliation of malignant dysphagia: a prospective, multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Self-expanding metal stents are frequently used for the palliation of malignant dysphagia. Recently, a new stent design, the Evolution stent (Cook Medical, Limerick, Ireland), was developed. The stent has an internal and external silicone coating to resist tissue ingrowth and uncoated dual flanges on both ends to prevent migration. Its controlled-release system may allow full control and precise positioning of the stent.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the safety and clinical effectiveness of the Evolution stent for the palliation of dysphagia in patients with malignant strictures located in the esophagus (n = 33 [75%]) or gastric cardia (n = 11 [25%]).

METHODS

All patients who underwent placement of an esophageal Evolution stent from February to December 2008 received follow-up telephone calls 14 days after treatment and thereafter monthly until death. Data on technical and clinical outcome, complications, and recurrent dysphagia were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 44 patients (32 [73%] men, median age 74 years [range 48-91 years]) were treated with the Evolution stent. The median tumor length was 6 cm (range 1-11 cm). Stent placement was technically successful in 41 patients. Dysphagia improved from a median of 3 (ability to swallow liquids only) to 1 (ability to eat some solid foods) 4 weeks after stent placement. Major complications occurred in 4 (9%) patients, ie, pneumonia (3 patients) and hemorrhage (1 patient). Two (5%) patients died of pneumonia. Minor complications included gastroesophageal reflux and mild retrosternal pain in 11 (25%) and 4 (9%) patients, respectively. Recurrent dysphagia developed in 11 (25%) patients as a result of tissue ingrowth or overgrowth (6 patients; 14%), food impaction (3 patients; 7%), or stent migration (2 patients; 5%).

CONCLUSIONS

The Evolution stent is safe and effective for the palliation of dysphagia from esophageal and gastric cardia cancer. Randomized trials are needed to compare this device with other stent designs.