Fully-covered metal stents with endoscopic suturing vs. partially-covered metal stents for benign upper gastrointestinal diseases: a comparative study.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Self-expandable metallic stents (SEMS) have been increasingly used in benign conditions (e. g. strictures, fistulas, leaks, and perforations). Fully covered SEMS (FSEMS) were introduced to avoid undesirable consequences of partially covered SEMS (PSEMS), but come with higher risk of stent migration. Endoscopic suturing (ES) for stent fixation has been shown to reduce migration of FSEMS. Our aim was to compare the outcomes of FSEMS with ES (FS/ES) versus PSEMS in patients with benign upper gastrointestinal conditions. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively identified all patients who underwent stent placement for benign gastrointestinal conditions at seven US tertiary-care centers. Patients were divided into two groups: FSEMS with ES (FS/ES group) and PSEMS (PSEMS group). Clinical outcomes between the two groups were compared. RESULTS: A total of 74 (FS/ES 46, PSEMS 28) patients were included. On multivariable analysis, there was no significant difference in rate of stent migration between FS/ES (43 %) and PSEMS (15 %) (adjusted odds ratio 0.56; 95 % CI 0.15 - 2.00). Clinical success was similar [68 % vs. 64 %; P  = 0.81]. Rate of adverse events (AEs) was higher in PSEMS group [13 (46 %) vs. 10 (21 %); P  = 0.03). Difficult stent removal was higher in the PSEMS group (n = 5;17 %) vs. 0 % in the FS/ES group; P  = 0.005. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of stent migration of FS/ES and PSEMS are similar. Rates of other stent-related AEs were higher in the PSEMS group. PSEMS was associated with tissue ingrowth or overgrowth leading to difficult stent removal, and secondary stricture formation. Thus, FSEMS with ES for stent fixation may be the preferred modality over PSEMS for the treatment of benign upper gastrointestinal conditions.

Endoscopic suturing for the prevention of stent migration in benign upper gastrointestinal conditions: a comparative multicenter study.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Fully covered self-expandable metal stents (FCSEMSs) have increasingly been used in benign upper gastrointestinal (UGI) conditions; however, stent migration remains a major limitation. Endoscopic suture fixation (ESF) may prevent stent migration. The aims of this study were to compare the frequency of stent migration in patients who received endoscopic suturing for stent fixation (ESF group) compared with those who did not (NSF group) and to assess the impact of ESF on clinical outcome. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective study of patients who underwent FCSEMS placement for benign UGI diseases. Patients were divided into either the NSF or ESF group. Outcome variables, including stent migration, clinical success (resolution of underlying pathology), and adverse events, were compared. RESULTS: A total of 125 patients (44 in ESF group, 81 in NSF group; 56 benign strictures, 69 leaks/fistulas/perforations) underwent 224 stenting procedures. Stent migration was significantly more common in the NSF group (33 % vs. 16 %; P = 0.03). Time to stent migration was longer in the ESF group (P = 0.02). ESF appeared to protect against stent migration in patients with a history of stent migration (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.09; P = 0.002). ESF was also significantly associated with a higher rate of clinical success (60 % vs. 38 %; P = 0.03). Rates of adverse events were similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic suturing for stent fixation is safe and associated with a decreased migration rate, particularly in patients with a prior history of stent migration. It may also improve clinical response, likely because of the reduction in stent migration.