A late complication of palliative stenting of malignant oesophageal obstruction

A randomized prospective comparison of self-expandable plastic stents and partially covered self-expandable metal stents in the palliation of malignant esophageal dysphagia

OBJECTIVES

Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) provide effective palliation in patients with malignant dysphagia, although severe complications and mortality may result. We performed a prospective controlled trial to compare a new self-expanding polyester mesh stent (Polyflex) with SEMS (Ultraflex).

METHODS

One hundred one patients with unresectable esophageal carcinoma were randomized to placement of a Polyflex (N=47) or a partially covered Ultraflex (N=54) stent. Patients with esophagogastric junction (EGJ) malignancy were excluded.

RESULTS

Placement was successful in 46 (98%) patients with the Polyflex and 54 (100%) patients with the Ultraflex stent. In one patient, the Polyflex stent could not be placed. After 1 wk, dysphagia was improved by at least 1 grade in 100% of the Polyflex group and in 94% of the Ultraflex group. Major complications were observed in 48% of the Polyflex group and 33% of the Ultraflex group. Intraprocedural perforation occurred in 1 Polyflex and 1 Ultraflex patient. Two Polyflex patients had postprocedural hemorrhage. Twenty (44%) patients with a Polyflex stent and 18 (33%) with an Ultraflex stent had recurrent dysphagia because of tumor overgrowth, stent migration, hyperplastic granulomatous reaction, or food bolus impaction. Multivariate analysis showed a significantly higher complication rate with Polyflex than with Ultraflex stents (odds ratio 2.3, 95% CI 1.2-4.4). However, median survival was 134 days with Polyflex and 122 days with Ultraflex stents (P=NS).

CONCLUSIONS

No difference was seen in palliation of dysphagia between the two stents. Significantly more complications, especially late stent migration, were observed in the Polyflex group.

Survival and complications after insertion of self-expandable metal stents for malignant oesophageal stenosis

OBJECTIVE

To report on survival and complications after insertion of self-expandable stents in patients with malignant oesophageal stenosis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Data were gathered retrospectively from the medical records of 92 consecutive patients in the period 1994-2003. The study comprised 68 men and 24 women (median age 72 years, range 46-93 years) with stenosis from cancer of the oesophagus (n=61), the gastric cardia (n=26) and the lung (n=5), located mainly above (n=4) or below (n=62) the carina, or at the gastro-oesophageal junction (n=26). One uncovered stent and six different covered stents were used.

RESULTS

Median and mean survival times after stenting (n=92) were 83 (range 4-1102) and 125 days, respectively. Thirty-day mortality was 19% (n=17), and 7% (n=6) survived more than one year. Survival was neither significantly influenced by division of the patients into diagnostic subgroups nor by comparison of the three most frequently used stents. One, two, three and four stents were received by 76, 11, 4 and 1 patient(s), respectively. There was no stent-related mortality, and complications were bleeding 1 (1%), stent migration 7 (8%), recurrent stenosis 8 (9%) from both tumour overgrowth (n=8) and tumour ingrowth (n=2) when using uncovered stents. Thirteen (14%) patients were re-stented because of recurrent stenosis (n=8) including fistula formation to the left main bronchus (n=2) and stent migration (n=5).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of self-expandable stents in patients with inoperable malignant oesophageal stenosis carried few complications and resulted in relatively long survival in comparison with similar studies.

Distally migrated esophageal self-expanding metal stents: wait and see or remove?

BACKGROUND

Extraction of a migrated esophageal stent may be extremely difficult with a substantial risk of complications including esophageal perforation and hemorrhage.

METHODS

Retrospectively 242 patients were evaluated who underwent implantation of self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) and 13 (5.4%) were identified with distal stent migration. In all cases of stent dislocation into the stomach, extraction of the stent was not attempted and a new stent was inserted.

RESULTS

Twelve patients had dysphagia. One patient underwent surgery because of stent impaction in the colon, 3 had unrecognized passage of the stent per rectum, and 9 had evidence of the stent into the stomach. Further severe complications were not observed in any patient and all stents remained into the stomach.

CONCLUSION

Complications arising from migrated esophageal stents are uncommon. Further studies are warranted to determine which patients with migrated SEMS warrant stent retrieval.