McGaw C, Alkaddour A, Vega KJ, Munoz JC. Stent type used does not impact complication rate or placement time but can decrease treatment cost for benign and malignant esophageal lesions. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 8(7): 338-343 [PMID: 27076872 DOI: 10.4253/wjge.v8.i7.338]
Corresponding Author of This Article
Kenneth J Vega, MD, Division of Digestive Diseases and Nutrition, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, 920 Stanton L. Young Boulevard, WP 1345, Oklahoma City, OK 73104, Unites States. kenneth-vega@ouhsc.edu
Research Domain of This Article
Gastroenterology & Hepatology
Article-Type of This Article
Retrospective Study
Open-Access Policy of This Article
This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
World J Gastrointest Endosc. Apr 10, 2016; 8(7): 338-343 Published online Apr 10, 2016. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v8.i7.338
Table 1 Currently available stents in the United States
Stent
Manufacturer
Material
Diameter body/flare (mm)
Length (cm)
Covering
Alimaxx-E
Alveolus
Nitinol
18/22
7/10/12
FC with antimigration struts
Esophageal Z-stent
Cook
Stainless steel
18/25
8/10/12/14
PC
Evolution
Cook
Nitinol
20/25
8/10/12.5/15
PC
Flamingo Wallstent
Boston Scientific
Stainless steel
20/30
12/14
PC
Gianturco-Z
Cook
Stainless steel
18/25
8/10/12/14
FC
Niti-S
Taewong Medical
Nitinol
16/20
8/10/12/14
FC
18/23
20/25
Niti-S; double layered
Taewong Medical
Nitinol
18/26
9/12/15
FC with additional uncovered outer nitinol wires
Niti-S; single layered
Taewong Medical
Nitinol
18/26
9/12/15
FC
Polyflex
Boston Scientific
Polyester
16/20
9/12/15
FC
18/23
21/28
SX-ELLA
Ella-CS
Nitinol
20/25
8.5/11/13.5/15
FC with antimigration ring
Ultraflex
Boston Scientific
Nitinol
18/23
10/12/15
PC
23/28
Wallflex
Boston Scientific
Nitinol
18/23
10/12/15
PC/FC
23/28
Table 2 Overall demographics in patients having self-expanding esophageal metal stents/self-expanding esophageal plastic stents placed for malignant or benign esophageal conditions from January 2005 to April 2012
Table 3 Patient characteristics based on stent type placed
SEMS (n = 30)
SEPS (n = 13)
P value
Mean age (yr ± SD)
59.6 ± 14.87
61.7 ± 9.95
0.645
% male
83.3%
76.9%
0.681
Race/ethnicity, n (%)
AA: 9 (30%)
AA: 6 (46%)
0.704
nHw: 18 (60%)
nHw: 7 (54%)
Other: 3 (10%)
Other: 0
Malignant esophageal lesion, n (%)
25 (83.3%)
10 (76.9%)
0.681
Esophageal lesion location, n (%)
Upper third: 0
Upper third: 1 (7.7%)
0.15
Middle third: 9 (30%)
Middle third: 6 (46.2%)
Lower third: 21 (70%)
Lower third: 6 (46.2%)
Comorbid diseases, n (%)
HTN: 16 (53.3%)
HTN: 6 (46.2%)
0.747
CAD: 7 (23.3%)
CAD: 2 (15.4%)
0.699
COPD: 5 (16.7%)
COPD: 1 (7.7%)
0.649
DM: 11 (36.7%)
DM: 3 (23.1%)
0.491
Table 4 Placement and outcome comparisons between self-expanding esophageal metal stents and self-expanding esophageal plastic stents
SEMS (n = 30)
SEPS (n = 13)
P value
Initial placement procedure time (min, mean ± SD)
33.17 ± 16.88
35.85 ± 27.39
0.696
Dilation required prior to stent placement
0
23%
0.023
Complications, n (%)
7 (23%)
3 (23%)
1
Time to first complication (n)
< 30 d: 6
< 30 d: 2
1
> 30 d: 1
> 30 d: 1
In-hospital mortality (%)
7%
8%
1
Re-intervention required (%)
20%
23%
1
30 d survival after procedure (%)
95%
80%
0.251
Length of stay (d, mean ± SD)
11.47 ± 12.78
12.15 ± 16.21
0.883
Citation: McGaw C, Alkaddour A, Vega KJ, Munoz JC. Stent type used does not impact complication rate or placement time but can decrease treatment cost for benign and malignant esophageal lesions. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 8(7): 338-343