Quantcast

Comparison between uncovered and covered self-expandable metal stent placement in malignant duodenal obstruction.

Research paper by Ji Won JW Kim, Ji Bong JB Jeong, Kook Lae KL Lee, Byeong Gwan BG Kim, Dong Won DW Ahn, Jae Kyung JK Lee, Su Hwan SH Kim

Indexed on: 11 Feb '15Published on: 11 Feb '15Published in: World journal of gastroenterology



Abstract

To compare the clinical outcomes of uncovered and covered self-expandable metal stent placements in patients with malignant duodenal obstruction.A total of 67 patients were retrospectively enrolled from January 2003 to June 2013. All patients had symptomatic obstruction characterized by nausea, vomiting, reduced oral intake, and weight loss. The exclusion criteria included asymptomatic duodenal obstruction, perforation or peritonitis, concomitant small bowel obstruction, or duodenal obstruction caused by benign strictures. The technical and clinical success rate, complication rate, and stent patency were compared according to the placement of uncovered (n = 38) or covered (n = 29) stents.The technical and clinical success rates did not differ between the uncovered and covered stent groups (100% vs 96.6% and 89.5% vs 82.8%). There were no differences in the overall complication rates between the uncovered and covered stent groups (31.6% vs 41.4%). However, stent migration occurred more frequently with covered than uncovered stents [20.7% (6/29) vs 0% (0/38), P < 0.05]. Moreover, the overall cumulative median duration of stent patency was longer in uncovered than in covered stents [251 d (95%CI: 149.8 d-352.2 d) vs 139 d (95%CI: 45.5 d-232.5 d), P < 0.05 by log-rank test] The overall cumulative median survival period was not different between the uncovered stent (70 d) and covered stent groups (60 d).Uncovered stents may be preferable in malignant duodenal obstruction because of their greater resistance to stent migration and longer stent patency than covered stents.

More like this: