Journal Article

Endoscopic placement of covered versus uncovered self-expandable metal stents for palliation of malignant gastric outlet obstruction

Chiba, Yasutaka, Shiomi, Hideyuki, Sanuki, Tsuyoshi, Moriyama, Ichiro, Kudo, Yasushi, Yamao, Kentaro, Hashimoto, Shinichi, Nakase, Kojiro, Kazuyuki, Imakiire, Asada, Masanori, Kayahara, Takahisa, Ohana, Masaya, Kitano, Masayuki, Kato, Takao, Azemoto, Nobuaki, Bamba, Shigeki, Takihara, Hiroshi, Yamashita, Yukitaka, Hanada, Keiji, Nebiki, Hiroko, Ogura, Takeshi, Eguchi, Takaaki, Ueki, Toshiharu, Hirao, Ken, Yoshida, Motoyuki, Fujimoto, Yoshifumi, Hoki, Noriyuki, Kamada, Hideki, Kawamoto, Hirofumi, Uza, Norimitsu, Hayashi, Shiro, Kushiyama, Yoshinori, Nishikiori, Hidefumi, Nakai, Yoshitaka, Goto, Daisuke, Okabe, Yoshinobu, Koga, Tetsuya, Serikawa, Masahiro, Kato, Hironari, Noguchi, Chisio, Matsumoto, Kazuya

2021

Overview

ObjectiveStenting is an established endoscopic therapy for malignant gastric outlet obstruction (mGOO). The choice of stent (covered vs uncovered) has been examined in prior randomised studies without clear results.DesignIn a multicentre randomised prospective study, we compared covered (CSEMS) with uncovered self-expandable metal stents (UCSEMS) in patients with mGOO; main outcomes were stent dysfunction and patient survival, with subgroup analyses of patients with extrinsic and intrinsic tumours.ResultsOverall survival was poor with no difference between groups (probability at 3 months 49.7% for covered vs 48.4% for uncovered stents; log-rank for overall survival p=0.26). Within that setting of short survival, the proportion of stent dysfunction was significantly higher for uncovered stents (35.2% vs 23.4%, p=0.01) with significantly shorter time to stent dysfunction. This was mainly relevant for patients with extrinsic tumours (stent dysfunction rates for uncovered stents 35.6% vs 17.5%, p<0.01). Subgrouping was also relevant with respect to tumour ingrowth (lower with covered stents for intrinsic tumours; 1.6% vs 27.7%, p<0.01) and stent migration (higher with covered stents for extrinsic tumours: 15.3% vs 2.5%, p<0.01).ConclusionsDue to poor patient survival, minor differences between covered and uncovered stents may be less relevant even if statistically significant; however, subgroup analysis would suggest to use covered stents for intrinsic and uncovered stents for extrinsic malignancies.

• Publisher: BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and British Society of Gastroenterology,BMJ Publishing Group LTD,BMJ Publishing Group
• Subject: Adult / Age Factors / Aged / Aged, 80 and over / Catheters / Digestive System Neoplasms - complications / Endoscopy / Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal / Female / Gallbladder Neoplasms - complications / Gastric Outlet Obstruction - etiology / Gastric Outlet Obstruction - surgery / gastrointesinal endoscopy / Humans / Implants / Male / Middle Aged / Palliation / Palliative Care / Pancreatic Neoplasms - complications / Patients / Prospective Studies / Prosthesis Failure / Risk Factors / Self Expandable Metallic Stents - adverse effects / Small intestine / Statistical analysis / Stents / Stomach / Stomach Neoplasms - complications / Success / Survival / Survival Rate / Time Factors / Tumors / Ultrasonic imaging