Self-expanding plastic esophageal stents versus jejunostomy tubes for the maintenance of nutrition during neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy in patients with esophageal cancer: a retrospective study

In patients undergoing chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer, the inability to eat may severely impair nutritional status. We conducted a retrospective study to compare the efficacy of the Polyflex self-expanding silicone stent (PS) versus a jejunostomy tube (JT) for maintaining nutrition during neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy in patients with esophageal cancer who were scheduled for resectional surgery. Thirty-six patients were treated either with PS placement (12 patients) or JT placement (24 patients) prior to receiving an 8-week course of chemoradiation therapy. Patients were interviewed weekly until cessation of therapy. Patient data were collected on procedural success and complication rates, nutritional status, and dysphagia scores. PS placement was successful in 11 of 12 patients (92%), and those 11 patients were able to resume oral nutrition. Dysphagia scores improved from a mean of 3 to 1 in the PS group ( P  < 0.005) but did not change significantly in the JT group. PS were removed endoscopically without complications prior to the esophagectomies. Albumin levels and weight increased significantly in both the PS and JT groups. There were no significant differences between groups in the procedural success rates (PS 92% vs. JT 100%, P  = 0.33), complication rates (PS 22% vs. JT 4%, P  = 0.11), mean increase in weight (PS 4.4 kg vs. JT 4.2 kg, P  = 0.59), and mean increase in serum albumin (PS 0.62 g/dL vs. JT 0.44 g/dL, P  = 0.05). PS is a safe and effective alternative to a surgical JT for maintaining nutrition in this subset of patients.     

Endoscopic placement of direct percutaneous jejunostomy tubes in patients with complications after esophagectomy

BACKGROUND: Complications after esophagectomy may prevent oral intake, lead to dependence on total parenteral nutrition, and lengthen hospital stay. Direct percutaneous endoscopic placement of a jejunostomy tube allows enteral feeding in the presence of postoperative complications and eliminates the need for total parenteral nutrition. METHODS: A total parenteral nutrition database was used to identify patients who received total parenteral nutrition because of complications after esophagectomy. Records of all patients subsequently referred for percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy placement were reviewed. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients with postesophagectomy complications were referred for percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy placement. A percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy was successfully placed in 21 patients (84%), all of whom were weaned off total parenteral nutrition. Six patients (29%) in whom percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy placement was successful died during hospitalization at a mean of 20 days (range 5-40 days) after the procedure for reasons unrelated to percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy tube insertion. The remaining 15 patients were discharged while receiving nutrition by means of the percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy. Ten of them had subsequent removal of the percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy at a mean of 131 days (range 20-281 days). There were no major percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy-related complications. Minor complications occurred in 4 patients (19%). CONCLUSION: Percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy placement may be considered in patients with complications after esophagectomy. In these patients, percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy placement avoids the need for total parenteral nutrition.     

Performance of a self-expanding silicone stent in palliation of benign airway conditions

INTRODUCTION: The Polyflex stent (Boston Scientific; Boston, MA) is a self-expanding, thin-walled, silicone stent. Its use has been described in the management of patients with malignant airway obstruction, yet reports of its use for treatment of benign airway conditions are rare. Study: We report a retrospective review of our experience with the Polyflex stent in the management of benign airway conditions. RESULTS: A total of 16 stents were deployed in 12 patients. The indications for the stent placement included the following: anastomotic stenosis following lung transplantation (LTR) [four patients]; tracheal stenosis (three patients); tracheobronchomalacia (two patients); tracheobronchopathiaosteochondroplastica (one patient); relapsing polychondritis (one patient); and bronchopleural fistula (one patient). Even though immediate palliation was established in most cases (90%), the incidence of complications was 75%. Stent migration was the most common consequence, with time to the event ranging from < 24 h to 7 months. One stent was expectorated within < 24 h. One patient coughed up a portion of the inner lining of the stent 7 months after its placement. Emergent bronchoscopy was required in four patients for mucous impaction. The complication rate was 100% in patients with LTR-related anastomotic stenosis. CONCLUSION: The use of the Polyflex stent for the treatment of benign airway conditions is associated with a high complication rate. We have abandoned its use under such conditions in our practice.     

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.     

Endoscopic stenting-Where are we now and where can we go？

Self expanding metal stents （SEMS） play an important role in the management of malignant obstructing lesions in the gastrointestinal tract. Traditionally, they have been used for palliation in malignant gastric outlet and colonic obstruction and esophageal malignancy. The development of the polyflex stent, which is a removable self expanding plastic stent, allows temporary stent insertion for benign esophageal disease and possibly for patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to esophagectomy. Potential complications of SEMS insertion include perforation, tumour overgrowth or ingrowth, and stent migration. Newer stents are being developed with the aim of increasing technical and clinical success rates, while reducing complication rates. Other areas of development include biodegradable stents for benign disease and radioactive or drug-eluting stents for malignant disease. It is hoped that, in the future, newer stents will improve our management of these difficult conditions and, possibly, provide prognostic as well as symptomatic benefit in the setting of malignant obstruction.     

Placement of PEG tubes through previously placed self-expanding esophageal metal stents

BACKGROUND: Self-expanding metal stents are frequently used to palliate patients with malignant dysphagia and close tracheoesophageal fistulae. Despite proper stent positioning and deployment, in a subset of patients there is no improvement in dysphagia, closure of tracheoesophageal fistulae, or resolution of anorexia. Such patients may require a PEG tube. It has been suggested that PEG placement through a preexisting esophageal stent is problematic because of the risks of gastrostomy tube impaction within the stent and resultant stent migration. METHODS: Case records were retrospectively reviewed of 9 consecutive patients with indwelling esophageal self-expanding metal stents undergoing attempted PEG. OBSERVATIONS: PEG tube placement was successful in all patients. In 1 patient, the stent migrated distally into the stomach during PEG placement. This was managed endoscopically without further complication. CONCLUSIONS: PEG placement in patients with previously placed esophageal self-expanding metal stents is a relatively safe and feasible procedure, although stent migration may occur.     

New design esophageal stents for the palliation of dysphagia from esophageal or gastric cardia cancer: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND & AIM: Stents are often used for the palliation of inoperable esophageal or gastric cardia cancer. One of the drawbacks of the currently used stents is the high percentage of recurrent dysphagia due to stent migration and tissue growth. New stents have been designed to overcome this unwanted sequela of stent placement. In the present study, we investigated whether results of stent placement could be improved with newer stent designs. METHODS: Between June 2004 and May 2006, 125 patients with dysphagia from inoperable carcinoma of the esophagus or gastric cardia were randomized to placement of an Ultraflex stent (N = 42), Polyflex stent (N = 41), or Niti-S stent (N = 42). Patients were followed by scheduled telephone calls at 14 days after treatment, and then monthly for 6 months or until death. Technical and functional outcome, complications, recurrent dysphagia, and survival were analyzed with, chi(2) tests, Kaplan-Meier curves, and log-rank tests. RESULTS: Stent placement was technically successful in all patients with an Ultraflex stent, in 34/41 (83%) patients with a Polyflex stent, and in 40/42 (95%) patients treated with a Niti-S stent (P= 0.008). Dysphagia score improved from a median of 3 (liquids only) to 1 (ability to eat some solid food) in all patients. There were no differences in complications among the three stent types. Recurrent dysphagia, caused by tissue in- or overgrowth, migration, or food obstruction, was significantly different between patients with an Ultraflex stent and patients with a Polyflex stent or Niti-S stent (22 [52%]vs 15 [37%]vs 13 [31%], P= 0.03). Stent migration occurred more frequently with Polyflex stents, whereas tissue in- or overgrowth was more frequently seen with Ultraflex stents, and to a lesser degree, Niti-S stents. No differences were found in survival (median survival: Ultraflex stent 132 days vs Polyflex stent 102 days vs Niti-S stent 159 days) among the three stent types. CONCLUSIONS: All three stents are safe and offer adequate palliation of dysphagia from esophageal or gastric cardia cancer. Nonetheless, Polyflex stents seem the least preferable in this patient group, as placement of this device is technically demanding and associated with a high rate of stent migrations.     

Removable esophageal stents have poor efficacy for the treatment of refractory benign esophageal strictures (RBES)

With the recent availability of removable esophageal stents, endoscopic stenting has been utilized to treat refractory benign esophageal strictures (RBES). The objective of this study was to review the feasibility and effectiveness of removable esophageal stents to treat RBES. Patients who received removable esophageal stents for the treatment of RBES at the institution between 2004–2010 using its stent implantation logs and endoscopic database were retrospectively identified. Patient demographics, stricture etiology and location, stent and procedure characteristics, and clinical outcomes were obtained. Twenty‐five patients with a mean age of 70 (72% male) underwent initial stent placement; 24 were successful. Overall clinical success was achieved in five of the 19 patients (26%) ultimately undergoing stent removal. RBES etiologies included anastomotic (13), radiation (5), peptic (3), chemotherapy (1), scleroderma (1), and unknown (2). Alimaxx‐E (Merit‐Endotek, South Jordan, UT, USA) stents were placed in 20 patients and Polyflex (Boston Scientific, Natick, MA, USA) stents were used in five patients. Immediate complications included failed deployment (1) and chest pain (7). Five patients died prior to stent removal. Stent migration was found in 53% (10/19) of patients who underwent stent removal: nine required additional therapy and one had symptom resolution. Out of the nine patients without stent migration, five required additional therapy and four had symptom resolution. Although placement of removable esophageal stents for RBES is technically feasible, it is frequently complicated by stent migration and chest pain. In addition, few patients achieved long‐term stricture resolution after initial stenting. In this study, most patients ultimately required repeated stenting and/or dilations to maintain relief of dysphagia.     

Treatment of malignant esophageal obstruction with silicone-coated metallic self-expanding stents.

Six patients with high-grade malignant esophageal obstruction were treated with silicone-coated metallic self-expanding esophageal stents (Z stents). Endoscopic placement of stents was well tolerated. All patients achieved excellent palliation, defined by a decrease of at least two dysphagia grades, which was sustained. Complications occurred during follow-up in four patients and included stent migration, silicone disruption with tumor ingrowth, food impaction, and perforation (discovered at autopsy) at the distal stent site. Three of the four complications were promptly treated by endoscopic or radiologic intervention. Recent modification in stent design and placement technique will hopefully reduce complications. The self-expanding stent has several theoretical advantages over the rigid plastic stent and Nd:YAG laser for palliation of obstructing esophageal malignancy.     

Laparoscopic ischemic conditioning of the stomach prior to esophagectomy

Several complications after esophagectomy with gastric pull‐up are associated with ischemia within the gastric conduit. The aim of this study is to assess the feasibility of laparoscopic ischemic preconditioning of the stomach prior to thoracotomy, esophagectomy, and gastric pull‐up with an intrathoracic anastomosis. A retrospective review of 24 consecutive patients between October 2008 and July 2011 with esophageal adenocarcinoma (stage I–III) undergoing laparoscopic gastric ischemic conditioning prior to esophagectomy was conducted. Conditioning included laparoscopic ligation of the left and short gastric arteries, celiac node dissection, and jejunostomy tube placement. Formal resection and reconstruction was then performed 4–10 days later. Of the 24 patients, 88% received neoadjuvant chemotherapy/radiation therapy. Twenty‐three of the 24 patients underwent successful laparoscopic ischemic conditioning and subsequent esophagectomy. Total mean number of lymph nodes harvested was 21.8 (±8.0), and a mean of 5.3 (±2.4) celiac lymph nodes identified. There were no conversions to an open procedure. Length of stay was 3.8 (±4.8) days with a median length of stay of 2 (1–24) days. Three patients experienced anastomotic leak, six patients experience delayed gastric emptying, and two patients developed anastomotic stricture. There were no surgical site infections. R0 resection was achieved in all patients who underwent laparoscopic ischemic conditioning followed by esophagectomy. Laparoscopic ischemic conditioning of the gastric conduit has been shown to be feasible and safe.     

Salvage or planned esophagectomy after chemoradiation therapy for locally advanced esophageal cancer – a review

Definitive chemoradiation (without esophagectomy) and neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by planned esophagectomy are commonly used treatments for locally advanced esophageal cancer. These two treatment strategies have similar survival outcomes, so the value of planned esophagectomy is debated. However, persistence or recurrence of local disease is not uncommon after definitive chemoradiation. Salvage esophagectomy for isolated local failures of definitive chemoradiation is an option for selected patients. In this article we review the debate over definitive chemoradiation versus neoadjuvant chemoradiation and surgery, and then restate the argument in terms of salvage versus planned esophagectomy. Although both forms of esophagectomy are done in the setting of previous chemoradiation, they are different in several ways. Salvage esophagectomy appears to be a more morbid operation than planned esophagectomy. Surgeons supportive of the salvage esophagectomy strategy face the challenge of reducing its postoperative mortality.     

Safety and efficacy of self‐expanding removable metal esophageal stents during neoadjuvant chemotherapy for resectable esophageal cancer

Patients with esophageal cancer may present with dysphagia and weight loss. Resectable lesions require consideration of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, which improves survival but have side effects, which compound already poor intake. Prevention of malnutrition has historically required interventions such as surgical jejunostomy or percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy, which carry associated morbidity. With established roles in palliation, self‐expanding removable metal stents (SERMS) may provide an alternative intervention in resectable disease. We sought to evaluate outcomes from our unit's introduction of SERMS in dysphagic patients prior to esophagectomy. All dysphagic patients presenting with esophageal cancer and considered for curative surgery between April 2006 and November 2008 were offered preoperative treatment of dysphagia with SERMS during neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Baseline and preoperative outcomes assessed included dysphagia score and nutritional markers. Sixteen patients underwent esophageal stenting during neoadjuvant therapy of whom 7/16 (44%) were female with mean age 63 (53–76). In 12/16 (75%), tumors were located in the lower one third of the esophagus. There was a significant fall in mean dysphagia score from 2.5 (range 1–4) to 1.1 (range 0–3) immediately preoperatively. There was no significant change in serum albumin, weight, or body mass index. Stent‐related morbidity occurred in 4/16 (25%) patients and stomach migration occurred in 7/16 (43.8%). All were resolved endoscopically and there was no stent‐related mortality. Of 10/16 (62.5%) patients ultimately progressing to esophagectomy, 30‐day mortality was 6.3%. Anastomotic leak occurred in one patient (10%) and R1 resection rate was 20%. SERMS are a safe and effective intervention in dysphagic patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy for esophageal cancer. Complications are minor and readily treatable with endoscopy. Objective parameters suggest nutritional status is maintained and symptoms are improved. SERMS do not appear to compromise resection.     

Post-esophagectomy chylothorax successfully treated with the combination of thoracic duct clipping and octreotide administration

We herein describe the case of a 61-year-old man with stage II esophageal cancer who experienced chylothorax after esophagectomy. He was successfully treated with thoracic duct clipping and octreotide administration. Previously the patient had had a head and neck cancer treated with multimodality treatment: neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy, operation, and adjuvant CRT. Then, esophagectomy with lymph node dissection without resection of the thoracic duct was performed via a right thoraco-abdominal approach. On postoperative day 1, enteral nutrition was started. On day 5, the chest tube drainage increased to 2000?ml per day. On day 7, the drainage fluid increased to 3000?ml per day, and its color turned cloudy white. We then performed lymphoscintigraphy and diagnosed the patient as having chylothorax. Immediately we administered intermittent subcutaneous octreotide 100???g?×?3 per day; however, it could not stop the leakage. On day 13, we performed an operation: a fat-rich supplement was administered through the jejunostomy tube before the operation, the thoracic duct injury was readily identified, and we clipped the thoracic duct in the superior mediastinum, followed by 300???g per day octreotide treatment. On day 16, however, 400?ml per day of chyle leaked from the drain again, and we increased the dose of octreotide to 600???g per day. On day 18, the drainage stopped, and the patient was discharged on day 38. Octreotide administration combined with surgical treatment should be considered as a treatment option for chylothorax, which is a rare complication of esophagectomy.     

Usefulness of biodegradable stents constructed of poly-l-lactic acid monofilaments in patients with benign esophageal stenosis

AIM： To report 13 patients with benign esophagea stenosis treated with the biodegradable stent.
METHODS： We developed a Ultraflex-type stent by knitting poly-/-lactic acid rnonofilaments.
RESULTS： Two cases were esophageal stenosis caused by drinking of caustic liquid, 4 cases were due to surgical resection of esophageal cancers, and 7 cases were patients with esophageal cancer who received the preventive placement of biodegradable stents for postendoscopic mucosal dissection （ESD） stenosis. The preventive placement was performed within 2 to 3 d after ESD. In 10 of the 13 cases, spontaneous migration of the stents occurred between 10 to 21 d after placement. In these cases, the migrated stents were excreted with the feces, and no obstructive complications were experienced. In 3 cases, the stents remained at the proper location on d 21 after placement. No symptoms of re-stenosis were observed within the follow-up period of 7 mo to 2 years. Further treatment with balloon dilatation or replacement of the biodegradable stent was not required.
CONCLUSION： Biodegradable stents were useful for the treatment of benign esophageal stenosis, particularly for the prevention of post-ESD stenosis.     

Antireflux stents for palliation of malignant esophagocardial stenosis

Placement of self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) for palliation of malignant stenoses at the gastroesophageal junction is often associated with stent migration and reflux symptoms. SEMS with an antireflux mechanism have been developed to overcome the latter problem. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of antireflux Z-stents. Patients with advanced squamous cell or adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus or cardia suffering from dysphagia received an antireflux Z-stent. Technical success, complications of the procedure, clinical symptoms before and after stent placement, reinterventions and survival were recorded. Follow-up was accomplished by patient interviews and a standardized questionnaire for primary care physicians. Eighteen consecutive patients received an antireflux Z-stent. Seventeen of 18 stents were placed technically successful in a single endoscopic procedure. Mean dysphagia score improved from 2.2 to 0.6. Four patients (22%) had permanent reflux symptoms, an additional nine (50%) were taking proton pump inhibitors on a regular basis. In 10 patients, a re-intervention was necessary mainly due to dislocation of the stent. To ensure adequate nutrition three and two patients received a percutaneous gastrostomy and a jejunostomy, respectively. Median survival from stent insertion was 54 days (range, 3-201). Although placement of an antireflux Z-stent is technically feasible, its application is hampered by frequent stent migration and insufficient prevention of gastroesophageal reflux. Further technical improvements of stents or alternative methods like brachytherapy are required for satisfactory palliation of malignant gastroesophageal stenosis.     

Management of persistent gastroesophageal anastomotic strictures with removable self-expandable polyester silicon-covered (Polyflex) stents: an alternative to serial dilation

BACKGROUND: A benign gastroesophageal anastomotic stricture occurs in up to 42% of patients after transhiatal esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Management of anastomotic strictures may require extended periods of serial endoscopic dilation, with significant risk, cost, and inconvenience for the patient. OBJECTIVE: To determine if placement of removable self-expandable polyester silicon-covered (Polyflex) stents (SEPSs) prolonged the interval between endoscopic interventions in the management of persistent anastomotic stricture. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: National Cancer Institute designated comprehensive cancer center. PATIENTS: Eight patients after a transhiatal esophagectomy referred for management of benign persistent anastomotic strictures. INTERVENTIONS: Serial balloon and bougie dilations and SEPS placement. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENT: The interval between endoscopic interventions and the number of endoscopic interventions before and after SEPS placement. RESULTS: Over a 365-day period, 13 SEPS were placed in 8 patients with benign persistent anastomotic strictures after a transhiatal esophagectomy. A SEPS placement delayed the interval between endoscopic interventions from a mean of 7 days before stent insertion to 62 days after insertion (P < .008). The median number of preinsertion interventions was 4 and was reduced to 1 after insertion (P < .005). LIMITATION: The small number of patients. CONCLUSIONS: A SEPS placement did not result in stricture resolution or stabilization after SEPS removal. The SEPS migration rate was much higher in our patients with postesophagectomy anastomotic strictures than previously reported for other types of strictures. However, a SEPS placement did significantly delay the interval between endoscopic interventions in patients with persistent gastroesophageal anastomotic strictures after transhiatal esophagectomy. SEPS placement should be considered as an alternative to continued serial dilation in patients with persistent anastomotic strictures after transhiatal esophagectomy.     

Management of delayed intrathoracic esophageal perforation with modified intraluminal esophageal stent

In this article, we reviewed our experience of treatment of the delayed intrathoracic nonmalignant esophageal perforation employing modified intraluminal esophageal stent. Between February 1990 and August 2006, eight patients were included in this study. Five patients experienced sepsis. The interval time between perforation and stent placement ranged from 36 h to 27 days (average, 8.6 days). Esophageal stenting and throracotomy for foreign body removal were performed in four patients. The remaining four patients underwent stent placement and thoracostomy. Nutrition was initiated through gastrostomy after 7 to 10 days after the stenting. The stent was removed after the patients resumed oral intake of food and the esophagogram showed that perforation was closed. There was no death in this group. Signs of sepsis remitted 1 week after stent placement. Complications included stress ulcer, stimulative cough, and pneumonia each. Stent removal ranged 32 to 120 days (average 66.7) after its placement. The stent was kept in place for 4 months to prevent formation of esophageal stricture in one patient with caustic esophageal burns. The follow-up was completed in all the patients. The mean follow-up period was 59 months (range 12–180). One patient with caustic esophageal burn underwent cicatricial esophagectomy and gastric transposition 3 years later due to the esophageal stricture. Barium swallow demonstrated that there was a diverticulum-like outpouching in one patient and slight esophageal stricture at T2 and T3 level in another. One patient developed reflux esophagitis 5 years after stent removal. All the patients finally had a normal intake of food. Modified esophageal stenting is an effective method to manage the delayed intrathoracic esophageal perforation. Prevention of stent migration and its convenient adjustment might be the major advantages of this method.     

Primary placement technique of jejunostomy using the entristar™ skin-level gastrostomy tube in patients with esophageal cancer

Background  

We developed a skin-level jejunostomy tube (SLJT) procedure for patients undergoing esophagectomy using a skin-level gastrostomy tube (G-tube) (Entristar™; Tyco Healthcare, Mansfield, Mass), in order to improve their nutrition status and quality of life (QOL). We describe the procedure and the adverse effects of SLJT in patients with esophageal cancer (EC).     

Impact of a self-expanding, plastic esophageal stent on various esophageal stenoses, fistulas, and leakages: a single-center experience in 39 patients

BACKGROUND: In this study, we describe our experience with the use of a self-expanding, covered, plastic esophageal stent (SEPS). The majority of placements were difficult to treat situations, i.e., proximal or extremely proximal stent release or emergency cases in the intensive care unit. METHODS: Thirty-nine patients were treated by insertion of a SEPS by endoscopic or radiologic guidance for the following: malignant stenosis (n = 22), malignant fistula (n = 8), benign stenosis after treatment for malignant disease (n = 6), benign fistula (n = 2), and perforation or leakage after surgery of the esophagus (n = 5). RESULTS: Stent placement was technically feasible in all patients. In patients with a stenosis, esophageal passage was achieved in 92.8%. Fistulas, perforations, and leakages were sealed in 73.3%. In 6 patients (15.4%), the stent was electively removed because of the completion of the therapy. Complications included respiratory insufficiency, mediastinal emphysema, and tracheal impression in one patient each; a new fistula in two patients; bleeding in 3 patients; stent-induced ulcers in two patients; and stent migration in 8 patients. CONCLUSIONS: The therapeutical success and the complication rate after SEPS placement are similar to that reported for self-expanding metal stents. In addition, the SEPS can be readily removed, and the costs are significantly lower.     

A prospective trial of a new self-expanding plastic stent for malignant esophageal obstruction

OBJECTIVE: We studied a new expandable plastic stent in the palliation of malignant esophageal obstruction. METHODS: Eight patients with malignant esophageal obstruction and dysphagia were studied. An expandable covered plastic stent made of polyester netting and covered with a silicone membrane was inserted and released into the stenosis. Relief of dysphagia and functional status were measured. RESULTS: The stent was successfully inserted in all eight patients. The median dysphagia score dropped from 3 (able to eat liquids only) to 1 (some dysphagia with solid food), and seven of the eight patients had an improvement of at least two grades of dysphagia. Mean survival was 87 days (range 17-226). Stent migration occurred in one patient after 50 days; stent occlusion due to tumor ingrowth was not seen. CONCLUSIONS: A low cost (approximately $400) expandable plastic stent has been developed that is safe and effective in the palliation of malignant esophageal obstruction. Large randomized trials comparing this stent to expandable metal stents are warranted.