Effectiveness of combined biliary and duodenal stenting in patients with malignant biliary and duodenal obstruction

Percutaneous insertion of long-covered biliary stents in patients with malignant duodenobiliary stricture

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the technical feasibility, safety, and efficacy of a long-covered biliary stent in patients with malignant duodenobiliary stricture.

METHODS

This retrospective study enrolled 57 consecutive patients (34 men, 23 women; mean age, 64 years; range, 32-85 years) who presented with malignant duodenobiliary stricture between February 2019 and November 2020. All patients were treated with a long (18 or 23 cm)-covered biliary stent.

RESULTS

The biliary stent deployment was technically successful in all 57 patients. The overall adverse event rate was 17.5% (10 of 57 patients). Successful internal drainage was achieved in 55 (96.5%) of 57 patients. The median patient survival and stent patency times were 99 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 58-140 days) and 73 days (95% CI, 60-86 days), respectively. Fourteen (25.5%) of the fifty-five patients presented with biliary stent dysfunction due to sludge (n = 11), tumor overgrowth (n = 1), collapse of the long biliary stent by a subsequently inserted additional duodenal stent (n = 1), or rapidly progressed duodenal cancer (n = 1). A univariate Cox proportional hazards model did not reveal any independent predictor of biliary stent patency.

CONCLUSIONS

Percutaneous insertion of a subsequent biliary stent was technically feasible after duodenal stent insertion. Percutaneous insertion of a long-covered biliary stent was safe and effective in patients with malignant duodenobiliary stricture.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

In patients with malignant duodenobiliary stricture, percutaneous insertion of a long-covered biliary stent was safe and effective regardless of duodenal stent placement.

KEY POINTS

• Percutaneous insertion of long-covered biliary stents in patients with malignant duodenobiliary stricture is a safe and effective procedure. • Biliary stent deployment was technically successful in all 57 patients and successful internal drainage was achieved in 55 (96.5%) of 57 patients. • The median patient survival and stent patency times were 99 days and 73 days, respectively, after placement of a long-covered biliary stent in patients with duodenobiliary stricture.

Malignant biliary obstruction due to metastatic non-hepato-pancreato-biliary cancer

Malignant biliary obstruction generally results from primary malignancies of the pancreatic head, bile duct, gallbladder, liver, and ampulla of Vater. Metastatic lesions from other primaries to these organs or nearby lymph nodes are rarer causes of biliary obstruction. The most common primaries include renal cancer, lung cancer, gastric cancer, colorectal cancer, breast cancer, lymphoma, and melanoma. They may be difficult to differentiate from primary hepato-pancreato-biliary cancer based on imaging studies, or even on biopsy. There is also no consensus on the optimal method of treatment, including the feasibility and effectiveness of endoscopic intervention or surgery. A thorough review of the literature on pancreato-biliary metastases and malignant biliary obstruction due to metastatic non-hepato-pancreato-biliary cancer is presented. The diagnostic modality and clinical characteristics may differ significantly depending on the type of primary cancer. Different primaries also cause malignant biliary obstruction in different ways, including direct invasion, pancreatic or biliary metastasis, hilar lymph node metastasis, liver metastasis, and peritoneal carcinomatosis. Metastasectomy may hold promise for some types of pancreato-biliary metastases. This review aims to elucidate the current knowledge in this area, which has received sparse attention in the past. The aging population, advances in diagnostic imaging, and improved treatment options may lead to an increase in these rare occurrences going forward.

Endoscopic Double Stenting for the Management of Combined Malignant Biliary and Duodenal Obstruction

Periampullary cancers are often diagnosed at advanced stages and can cause both biliary and duodenal obstruction. As these two obstructions reduce patients’ performance status and quality of life, appropriate management of the disease is important. Combined malignant biliary and duodenal obstruction is classified according to the location and timing of the duodenal obstruction, which also affect treatment options. Traditionally, surgical bypass (gastrojejunostomy and hepaticojejunostomy) has been performed for the treatment of unresectable periampullary cancer. However, it has recently been substituted by less invasive endoscopic procedures due to its high morbidity and mortality. Thus, endoscopic double stenting (transpapillary stenting and enteral stenting) has become the current standard of care. Limitations of transpapillary stenting include its technical difficulty and the risk of duodenal-biliary reflux. Recently, endoscopic ultrasound-guided procedures have emerged as a novel platform and have been increasingly utilized in the management of biliary and duodenal obstruction. As the prognosis of periampullary cancer has improved due to recent advances in chemotherapy, treatment strategies for biliary and duodenal obstruction are becoming more important. In this article, we review the treatment strategies for combined malignant biliary and duodenal obstruction based on the latest evidence.

Double Stenting for Malignant Biliary and Duodenal Obstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Data about the efficacy of palliative double stenting for malignant duodenal and biliary obstruction are limited.

International consensus statements for endoscopic management of distal biliary stricture

Distal biliary strictures (DBS) are common and may be caused by both malignant and benign pathologies. While endoscopic procedures play a major role in their management, a comprehensive review of the subject is still lacking. Our consensus statements were formulated by a group of expert Asian pancreatico-biliary interventional endoscopists, following a proposal from the Digestive Endoscopy Society of Taiwan, the Thai Association for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, and the Tokyo Conference of Asian Pancreato-biliary Interventional Endoscopy. Based on a literature review utilizing Medline, Cochrane library, and Embase databases, a total of 19 consensus statements on DBS were made on diagnosis, endoscopic drainage, benign biliary stricture, malignant biliary stricture, and management of recurrent biliary obstruction and other complications. Our consensus statements provide comprehensive guidance for the endoscopic management of DBS.

Review of Simultaneous Double Stenting Using Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage Techniques in Combined Gastric Outlet and Biliary Obstructions

Concomitant malignant gastric outlet obstruction and biliary obstruction may occur in patients with advanced cancers affecting these anatomical regions. This scenario presents a unique challenge to the endoscopist in selecting an optimal management approach. We sought to determine the efficacy and safety of endoscopic techniques for treating simultaneous gastric outlet and biliary obstruction (GOBO) with endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guidance for biliary drainage. An extensive literature search for peer-reviewed published cases yielded 6 unique case series that either focused on or included the use of EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) with simultaneous gastroduodenal stenting. In our composite analysis, a total of 51 patients underwent simultaneous biliary drainage through EUS, with an overall reported technical success rate of 100% for both duodenal stenting and biliary drainage. EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy or EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy was employed as the initial technique. In 34 cases in which clinical success was ascribed, 100% derived clinical benefit. The common adverse effects of double stenting included cholangitis, stent migration, bleeding, food impaction, and pancreatitis. We conclude that simultaneous double stenting with EUS-BD and gastroduodenal stenting for GOBO is associated with high success rates. It is a feasible and practical alternative to percutaneous biliary drainage or surgery for palliation in patients with associated advanced malignancies.

Current role of palliative interventions in advanced pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is the third leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Unfortunately, at diagnosis, most patients are not candidates for curative resection. Surgical palliation, a procedure performed with the intention of relieving symptoms or improving quality of life, comes to the forefront of management. This article reviews the palliative management of unresectable pancreatic cancer, including obstructive jaundice, duodenal obstruction and pain control with celiac plexus block. Although surgical bypasses for both biliary and duodenal obstructions usually achieve good technical success, they result in considerable perioperative morbidity and mortality, even when performed laparoscopically. The effectiveness of self-expanding metal stents for biliary drainage is excellent with low morbidity. Surgical gastrojejunostomy for duodenal obstruction appears to be best for patients with a life expectancy of greater than 2 mo while endoscopic stenting has been shown to be feasible with good symptom relief in those with a shorter life expectancy. Regardless of the palliative procedure performed, all physicians involved must be adequately trained in end of life management to ensure the best possible care for patients.

Outcomes of endoscopic biliary drainage in pancreatic cancer patients with an indwelling gastroduodenal stent: a multicenter cohort study in West Japan

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Gastroduodenal and biliary obstruction may occur synchronously or asynchronously in advanced pancreatic cancer, and endoscopic double stent placement may be required. EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) often is performed after unsuccessful placement of an endoscopic transpapillary stent (ETS), and EUS-BD may be beneficial in double stent placement. This retrospective multicenter cohort study compared the outcomes of ETS placement and EUS-BD in patients with an indwelling gastroduodenal stent (GDS).

METHODS

We recorded the clinical outcomes of patients at 5 tertiary-care medical centers who required biliary drainage after GDS placement between March 2009 and March 2014.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients were included in this study. Patients' mean age was 68.5 years; 23 (59.0%) were men. The GDS overlay the papilla in 23 patients (59.0%). The overall technical success rate was significantly higher with EUS-BD (95.2%) than with ETS placement (56.0%; P < .01). Furthermore, the technical success rate was significantly higher with EUS-BD (93.3%) than with ETS placement (22.2%; P < .01) when the GDS overlies the papilla. The overall clinical success rate of EUS-BD also was significantly higher than for ETS placement (90.5% vs 52.0%, respectively; P = .01), and there was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse events (ETS, 32.0% vs EUS-BD, 42.9%; P = .65).

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic double stent placement with EUS-BD is technically and clinically superior to ETS placement in patients with an indwelling GDS. EUS-BD should be considered the first-line treatment option for patients with an indwelling GDS that overlies the papilla. ETS placement remains a reasonable alternative when the papilla is not covered by the GDS.

Covered duodenal self-expandable metal stents prolong biliary stent patency in double stenting: The largest series of bilioduodenal obstruction

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Endoscopic biliary and duodenal stenting (DS; double stenting) is widely accepted as a palliation therapy for malignant bilioduodenal obstruction. The aim of the current study was to investigate the patency and adverse events of duodenal and biliary stents in patients with DS.

METHODS

Patients who underwent DS from April 2004 to March 2017 were analyzed retrospectively with regard to clinical outcomes and predictive factors of recurrent biliary and duodenal obstruction (recurrent biliary obstruction [RBO] and recurrent duodenal obstruction [RDO]).

RESULTS

A total of 109 consecutive patients was enrolled. Technical success of DS was achieved in 108 patients (99.1%). Symptoms due to biliary and duodenal obstruction were improved in 89 patients (81.7%). RBO occurred in 25 patients (22.9%) and RDO in 13 (11.9%). The median times to RBO and RDO from DS were 87 and 76 days, respectively. Placement of a duodenal uncovered self-expandable metal stent (U-SEMS) was significantly associated with RBO in the multivariable analysis (P = 0.007). Time to RBO was significantly longer in the duodenal covered self-expandable metal stent group than in the U-SEMS group (P = 0.003). No predictive factors of RDO were detected, and duodenal stent type was not associated with the time to RDO (P = 0.724).

CONCLUSIONS

Double stenting was safe and effective for malignant bilioduodenal obstruction. Duodenal U-SEMS is a risk factor for RBO. The covered self-expandable metal stent is the preferred type of duodenal SEMS in patients with DS (Clinical trial registration number: UMIN000027606).

Endoscopic management of combined malignant biliary and gastric outlet obstruction

Patients with periampullary cancer or gastric cancer often develop malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) and gastric outlet obstruction (GOO), and combined MBO and GOO is not rare in these patients. Combined MBO and GOO is classified by its location and sequence, and treatment strategy can be affected by this classification. Historically, palliative surgery, hepaticojejunostomy and gastrojejunostomy were carried out, but the current standard treatment is combined transpapillary stent and duodenal stent placement. Although a high technical success rate is reported, the procedure can be technically difficult and duodenobiliary reflux with subsequent cholangitis is common after double stenting. Recent development of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided procedures enables the management of MBO as well as GOO under EUS guidance. EUS-guided biliary drainage is now increasingly reported as an alternative to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage in failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), and GOO is one of the major reasons for failed ERCP. In addition to EUS-guided biliary drainage, the feasibility of EUS-guided double-balloon-occluded gastrojejunostomy bypass for MBO was recently reported, and EUS-guided double stenting can potentially become the treatment of choice in the future. However, as each procedure has its advantages and disadvantages, treatment strategy should be selected based on the type of obstruction and the prognosis and performance status of the patient.

Type of Combined Endoscopic Biliary and Gastroduodenal Stenting Is Significant for Biliary Route Maintenance

Objective Some patients with malignant gastric outlet obstruction require combined biliary and gastroduodenal stenting (double stenting). However, biliary stent dysfunction can often disturb biliary route maintenance, thus making the optimal biliary stenting for these patients unclear. The present study was designed to assess the factors associated with the long-term maintenance of biliary drainage routes. Methods The clinical features and long-term outcomes were assessed in patients who underwent double stenting. Patients The outcomes were reviewed in 43 consecutive patients who successfully underwent endoscopic double stenting with metallic stents. Results An univariate analysis of all patients with biliary stent dysfunction showed the separate type of double stenting (two stents placed in a non-crossed position) to be the only predictive factor related to successful biliary re-intervention for stent dysfunction (odds ratio 73.67, p=0.001). A comparison of the clinical features in patients who underwent separate and cross (two stents placed in a crossed position) stenting showed the functional success rate to be higher for the separate (93.3%) than for the cross (61.5%) stent type, with the median times to biliary stent dysfunction differing significantly (330 vs. 298 days, respectively; p=0.048). The success rates of re-intervention in patients with separate and cross type stents were 88.9% and 0.0%, respectively (p=0.001), and the initial biliary route maintenance rates were 96.7% and 53.8%, respectively (p=0.002). Conclusion The separate type of double stenting may enhance successful biliary re-intervention for stent dysfunction and also maintain the initial drainage route longer. The biliary drainage outcomes should therefore be considered when choosing the type of double stenting.

The Choice of Palliative Treatment for Biliary and Duodenal Obstruction in Patients With Unresectable Pancreatic Cancer: Is Surgery Bypass Better?

This study aimed to investigate the clinical significance of palliative operation for carcinoma of pancreas between bypass surgery and interventional therapy. Most patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer cannot undergo resection and show obstructive jaundice at presentation. Methods of palliation in these patients comprise biliary stent or surgical bypass. We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 53 patients who underwent palliative treatment with incurable locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. This retrospective study compared morbidity, mortality, hospital stay, readmission rate, and survival in these patients. A total of 31 patients underwent biliary bypass surgery, and 22 had interventional therapy. There was no significant difference in the patients' basic condition before operation and in the 30-day mortality between surgical palliation and intervention. However, there were some differences in the early complications, survival time, successful biliary drainage, and recurrent jaundice. Through analysis of these clinical data and the published studies, we conclude that surgical bypass is a better effective palliative method for patients than biliary and duodenum stent with locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Patients need to be carefully selected in consideration of operative risk and perceived overall survival.

Palliation double stenting for malignant biliary and duodenal obstruction

The surgical management of patients with malignant biliary and duodenal obstruction is complex. Tumor excision is no longer possible in the majority of patients with malignant obstructive jaundice and duodenal obstruction. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness of intraluminal dual stent placement in malignant biliary and duodenal obstruction. In total, 20 patients with malignant obstructive jaundice and duodenal obstruction, including 6 with pancreatic carcinoma, 11 with cholangiocarcinoma, 1 with duodenal carcinoma and 2 with abdominal lymph node metastasis, were treated with intraluminal stent placement. Bile duct obstruction with late occurrence of duodenal obstruction was observed in 16 cases, and duodenal obstruction followed by a late occurrence of bile duct obstruction was observed in 3 cases, while, in 1 case, bile duct obstruction and duodenal obstruction occurred simultaneously. After X-ray fluoroscopy revealed obstruction in the bile duct and duodenum, stents were placed into the respective lumens. Percutaneous transhepatic placement was employed for the biliary stent, while the duodenal stent was placed perioraly. The clinical outcomes, including complications associated with the procedures and patency of the stents, were evaluated. The biliary and duodenal stents were successfully implanted in 18 patients and the technical success rate was 90% (18/20). A total of 39 stents were implanted in 20 patients. In 2 cases, duodenal stent placement failed following biliary stent placement. Duodenal obstruction remitted in 15 patients, and 1 patient succumbed to aspiration pneumonia 5 days after the procedure. No severe complications were observed in any other patient. The survival time of the 18 patients was 5-21 months (median, 9.6 months), and 6 of those patients survived for >12 months. The present study suggests that X-ray fluoroscopy-guided intraluminal stent implantation is an effective procedure for the treatment of malignant biliary and duodenal obstruction.

Percutaneous biliary covered stent insertion in patients with malignant duodenobiliary obstruction

BACKGROUND

Although the use of polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE)-covered biliary stents has proven to be feasible for the treatment of benign and malignant biliary disease, less is known regarding the outcomes of percutaneous placement of a covered stent in patients with malignant duodenobiliary obstruction.

PURPOSE

To investigate the technical and clinical efficacy of the percutaneous placement of a PTFE-covered biliary stent in patients with malignant duodenobiliary obstruction.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

From April 2007 to September 2012, the medical records of 45 consecutive patients with malignant duodenobiliary obstruction were retrospectively reviewed. All percutaneous biliary stent deployment was performed using PTFE-covered stents, whereas duodenal stent insertion was performed either fluoroscopically or endoscopically using covered or uncovered stents.

RESULTS

Biliary stent deployment was technically successful in all patients. None of the stents migrated after deployment. Procedure-related minor complications, including self-limiting hemobilia, occurred in three (7%) patients. Successful internal drainage was achieved in 39 (87%) of the 45 patients. The median survival time after biliary stent placement was 62 days (95% confidence interval, 8-116 days), and the cumulative stent patency rates at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months were 96%, 92%, 75%, and 38%, respectively. The causes of biliary stent dysfunction included stent occlusion caused by a subsequently inserted duodenal stent (n = 7), food impaction (n = 3), and sludge incrustation (n = 1). One patient developed acute cholecystitis 131 days after biliary stent placement and underwent percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage.

CONCLUSION

Percutaneous insertion of a PTFE-covered stent is a safe and effective method for palliative treatment of patients with malignant duodenobiliary obstruction. If possible, subsequent biliary stent insertion is preferable in order to prevent possible biliary stent dysfunction caused by subsequent insertion of a duodenal stent.

Gastroduodenal stenting with Niti-S stent: long-term benefits and additional stent intervention

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Self-expandable metallic stents have mainly been used for the palliation of malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO). However, their use in long-term survivors and the feasibility, safety and benefit of additional intervention for stent dysfunction remain controversial. The present study examined the long-term benefits of endoscopic gastroduodenal stenting.

METHODS

We reviewed 61 patients treated with Niti-S stents at several hospitals and estimated the efficacy of stent intervention, stent patency, eating period and factors related to poor effectiveness.

RESULTS

All 61 first stent interventions and 14 additional stent interventions (11 second interventions and 3 third interventions) were successfully carried out. Clinical success rates were 83.6% and 85.7%, and median stent patency was 214 days and 146 days (P = 0.47), respectively. Fifty patients could be treated with a first stent only, and 11 patients received additional stents. At the time of study termination or death, 70.0% of the former group and 63.6% of the latter group maintained oral intake (P = 0.71), and each 86% and 100% among the group could maintain oral intake for a period exceeding half of their remaining lives after first stent intervention. Karnofsky performance status ≤50 (P = 0.03), ascites (P = 0.009), and peritoneal dissemination (P = 0.001) appeared to be factors related to poor effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the presence of factors related to poor effectiveness, endoscopic gastroduodenal stenting would be the first treatment of choice for GOO and provide long-term benefits. If stent dysfunction occurs, additional stent intervention enables continued oral intake safely.

A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial of Malignant Gastric Outlet Obstruction: Tailored Partially Covered Stents (Placed Fluoroscopically) versus Standard Uncovered Stents (Placed Endoscopically)

The aim of our study is to compare the efficacy and safety of “outlet-shape” tailored stents with standard stents for the management of distal gastric cancer causing gastric outlet obstructions (GOOs) with varying gastric cavity shapes and sizes. To determine the shape and size of the GOOs, stomach opacifications were performed using contrast media before stenting. Two basic shapes of the residual cavity of the proximal GOO were observed: cup shaped or approximately cup shaped and funnel shaped or approximately funnel shaped. Other shapes were not found. In the GOO tailored group, the size and shape of the proximal ends of the tailored stent were suited for the residual cavity of the proximal GOO. The tailored stents included large cup-shaped stents and large funnel-shaped stents. GOO tailored covered stents led to less restenosis and reintervention rates compared to standard uncovered stents but with the same survival.

Recent advances in diagnosis and treatment of primary duodenal tumors

Compared to tumors from other parts of the gastrointestinal tract, primary tumors of the duodenum are uncommon. Both benign tumors and malignancies are possible, although the majority are malignancies. The treatment of choice is surgical resection, mostly pancreaticoduodenectomy. With the development of endoscopy microsurgery and medical imaging technology, especially the advent of gastroduodenal fiberscopy, capsule endoscopy, endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography (ERCP) and laparoscopy, more duodenal neoplasms have been detected in recent years. Some advances have been achieved in the diagnosis and treatment of duodenal tumors. Endoscopic and segmental resections play a more and more important role in the management of duodenal tumors. In this paper, we describe the clinical features, pathological patterns, diagnosis and treatment of primary duodenal tumors.

Endoscopic bilio-duodenal bypass: outcomes of primary and revision efficacy of combined metallic stents in malignant duodenal and biliary obstructions

BACKGROUND

Self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) can be used for palliation of combined malignant biliary and duodenal obstructions. However, the results of the concomitant stent placement for the duration of the patients' lives, as well as the need for and efficacy of endoscopic revision, are unclear.

AIM

This study evaluated the clinical effectiveness of SEMS placement for combined biliary and duodenal obstructions throughout the patients' lives and the need for endoscopic revision.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective multicenter study of 50 consecutive patients who underwent simultaneous or sequential SEMS placement for malignant biliary and duodenal obstructions. The data were collected to analyze the sustained relief of obstructive symptoms until the patients' death and the efficacy of endoscopic revision, as well as stent patency, adverse events, survival and prognostic factors for stent patency.

RESULTS

Technical and immediate clinical success was achieved in all of the patients. Duodenal stricture occurred before the papilla in 35 patients (70 %), involved the papilla in 11 patients (22 %) and was observed distal to the papilla in four patients (8 %). Initial biliary stenting was performed endoscopically in 42 patients (84 %) and percutaneously in eight patients. After combined stenting, 30 patients (60 %) required no additional intervention until the time of their death. The remaining 20 patients were successfully treated using endoscopic stent reinsertion: nine patients needed biliary revision, three patients needed duodenal restenting and eight patients needed both biliary and duodenal reinsertion. The median duodenal stent patency and median biliary stent patency were 34 and 27 weeks, respectively. The median survival after combined stent placement was 18 weeks. A Cox multivariate analysis showed that duodenal stent obstruction after combined stenting was a risk factor for biliary stent obstruction (hazard ratio 6.85; 95 % confidence interval 1.43-198.98; P = 0.025).

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic bilio-duodenal bypass is clinically effective, and the majority of the patients need no additional intervention until their death. Endoscopic revision is feasible and has a high success rate.

SEMS vs cSEMS in duodenal and small bowel obstruction: High risk of migration in the covered stent group

AIM: To compare clinical success and complications of uncovered self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) vs covered SEMS (cSEMS) in obstruction of the small bowel.

METHODS: Technical success, complications and outcome of endoscopic SEMS or cSEMS placement in tumor related obstruction of the duodenum or jejunum were retrospectively assessed. The primary end points were rates of stent migration and overgrowth. Secondary end points were the effect of concomitant biliary drainage on migration rate and overall survival. The data was analyzed according to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines.

RESULTS: Thirty-two SEMS were implanted in 20 patients. In all patients, endoscopic stent implantation was successful. Stent migration was observed in 9 of 16 cSEMS (56%) in comparison to 0/16 SEMS (0%) implantations (P = 0.002). Stent overgrowth did not significantly differ between the two stent types (SEMS: 3/16, 19%; cSEMS: 2/16, 13%). One cSEMS dislodged and had to be recovered from the jejunum by way of laparotomy. Time until migration between SEMS and cSEMS in patients with and without concomitant biliary stents did not significantly differ (HR = 1.530, 95%CI 0.731-6.306; P = 0.556). The mean follow-up was 57 ± 71 d (range: 1-275 d).

CONCLUSION: SEMS and cSEMS placement is safe in small bowel tumor obstruction. However, cSEMS is accompanied with a high rate of migration in comparison to uncovered SEMS.

Endoscopic double stenting for the treatment of malignant biliary and duodenal obstruction due to pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

The purpose of the present study was to retrospectively evaluate endoscopic double stenting by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-guided biliary drainage (ERCP-BD) and by endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) for the treatment of non-resectable malignant biliary and duodenal obstruction.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Medical records of 11 patients that underwent endoscopic double stenting from January 2008 to September 2012 were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

Technical success rate was 100%, clinical success rate was 100%, early complication rate was 0% and late complication rate was 27.3% (cholangitis: two, perforation: one). Mean survival time from double stenting was 76.5 ± 67.8 days, mean patent period of the duodenal stent was 73.5 ± 69.7 days, and mean patent period of the biliary stent was 62.6 ± 60.4 days. Three (27.3%) patients were discharged (mean duration of hospitalization, 21.3 days). All patients could take food orally, and mean Gastric Outlet Obstruction Scoring System score after double stenting was 2.2 ± 0.9 points. ERCP-BD and EUS-BD were done in three and eight patients, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between ERCP-BD and EUS-BD in terms of success rate and complication rate.

CONCLUSION

Our study revealed that endoscopic double stenting appears to be feasible and useful for the treatment of non-resectable malignant biliary and duodenal obstruction. In terms of selection criteria of ERCP-BD patients and EUS-BD patients, further prospective studies are mandatory.

Palliation of biliary and duodenal obstruction in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer: endoscopy or surgery?

Patients with unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma often develop biliary and/or duodenal obstruction during the course of their disease. Jaundice, pruritis, nausea and vomiting impact negatively on the quality of life and chemotherapy must often be withheld until these symptoms are resolved. In the past, an open surgical palliative bypass was proposed, but the development of endoprosthetic stents has changed the management of these patients. The success rate for placement of duodenal and biliary stents is greater than 90% with low morbidity. Classical surgical bypass surgery includes biliary-digestive and gastro-jejunal anastomoses. Many studies have compared endoscopic and surgical treatment, and there is a clear advantage to endoscopic treatment in terms of quality of life and cost.