Opinion Review
©The Author(s) 2021. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.
World J Gastrointest Surg. Jul 27, 2021; 13(7): 620-632
Published online Jul 27, 2021. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v13.i7.620
Table 1 Etiology of gastric outlet obstruction[
1 ,
2 ]
Malignant causes Benign causes Pancreatic cancer Peptic ulcer Gastric cancer Hypertrophic pyloric obstruction Cholangiocarcinoma Gastric polyp Gallbladder cancer Caustic ingestion Duodenal cancer Iatrogenic Ampullary cancer Gastric/duodenal tuberculosis Other1 Prepyloric web
Table 2 Gastric outlet obstruction scoring system[
3 ]
Level of oral intake Score No oral intake 0 Liquids only 1 Soft solids 2 Low residue or full diet 3
Table 3 Types of lumen-apposing metal stents[
27 - 29 ]
Stent Flange diameter (mm) Length (mm) Lumen diameter (mm) Electrocautery enhanced option Material AXIOSTM (Boston Scientific Corp., Marlborough, MA, United States) 21, 24, 29 10 10, 15, 20 Yes Silicone-covered, nitinol-braided stent NAGITM (Taewoong Medical Co., Ltd., Goyang, South Korea) 20 10, 20, 30 10, 12, 14, 16 No Silicone-covered, Nitinol stent Niti-S SpaxusTM stent (Taewoong Medical Co., Ltd.) 23, 25, 31 20 8, 10, 16 Yes Silicone-covered, Nitinol stent HANAROTM stent (M.I.Tech, Pyeongtaek, South Korea) 22 - 28 10, 30 10, 12, 14, 16 No Silicone-covered, Nitinol stent
Table 4 Outcomes of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided gastroenterostomy using a lumen-apposing self-expandable metal stent in benign and malignant gastric outlet obstruction[
27 ,
30 ,
35 - 40 ]
Itoi et al [30 ] Tyberg et al [35 ] Chen et al [36 ] Kerdsirichairat et al [38 ] Ge et al [37 ] Jovani et al [39 ] Wannhoff et al [27 ] James et al [40 ] Type of study Single-center, Prospective International, Retrospective Multicenter, Retrospective Single-center, Retrospective Single-center, Retrospective Single-center, Retrospective Single-center, Retrospective Single-center, Retrospective Number of patients (n ) 20 26 74 57 22 73 35 22 Number of malignant obstructions 20 17 49 48 22 64 33 0 Number of benign obstructions 0 9 25 9 0 9 2 22 EUS-GJ technique, n EPASS n = 20 Direct n = 3, Balloon-assisted n = 13, Nasobiliary n = 3, Ultraslim scope n = 5, NOTES n = 2 Direct n = 52 Balloon-assisted n = 22 Direct n = 57 Direct n = 24 Direct n = 73 Direct n = 22, Nasobiliary n = 10, other = 3 Direct n = 9, Orojejunal = 5, Balloon-assisted = 8 Technical success (%) 90 92 94.2 90.9 92.9 100 93 80 95.4 Clinical success (%) NA 85 92.3 90.9 89.5 95.8 97 74.3 NA Adverse events (%) 10 11.5 5.8 9.1 3.5 20.8 7.4 14.3 19 Recurrence/need for Reintervention (%) NA 3.8 5.8 18.2 15.1 8 15 NA 23.8
Table 5 Outcomes of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided gastroenterostomy using a lumen-apposing self-expandable metal stent as compared to surgery[
41 ,
42 ]
Khashab et al [41 ] Perez-Miranda et al [42 ] Type of study Multicenter, retrospective Multicenter, retrospective Group EUS-GJ Surgery EUS-GJ Laparoscopic GJ Number of patients, n (%) 30/93 (32.3) 63/93 (67.7) 25/54 (46.3) 29/54 (53.7) Technique Direct; EPASS; Balloon-assisted Open GJ2 Direct Assisted Laparoscopic GJ Technical success (%) 87 100 88 100 Clinical success (%) 87 90 84 90 Adverse events (%) 16 25 12 41 Recurrence/need for Reintervention (%) 3 14 NA NA
Table 6 Outcomes of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided gastroenterostomy using a lumen-apposing self-expandable metal stent as compared to duodenal stenting[
37 ,
43 ]
Chen et al [43 ] Ge et al [37 ] Type of study Multicenter, retrospective Single center, retrospective Group EUS-GJ Duodenal stenting EUS-GJ Duodenal stenting Number of patients, n (%) 30 (36.5) 52 (63.4) 22 (22) 78 (78) Technique Direct; EPASS; Balloon-assisted Uncovered Wallflex (Boston Scientific) Direct Assisted Uncovered WallFlex; Boston Scientific, or (Evolution; Cook Medical) Technical success (%) 86.7 94.2 100 100 Clinical success (%) 83.3 67.3 95.8 76.3 Adverse events (%) 16.7 11.5 20.8 40.2 Recurrence/need for Reintervention (%) 4.0 28.6 8 32