29 402

Cited 82 times in

Comparison of uncovered stent with covered stent for treatment of malignant colorectal obstruction.

Authors
Lee, KM; Shin, SJ; Hwang, JC; Cheong, JY; Yoo, BM; Lee, KJ; Hahm, KB; Kim, JH; Cho, SW
Citation
Gastrointestinal endoscopy, 66(5):931-936, 2007
Journal Title
Gastrointestinal endoscopy
ISSN
0016-51071097-6779
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Insertion of self-expandable metallic stents (SEMS) can provide rapid relief of malignant colorectal obstruction and can be used as a palliative treatment or as a bridge to surgery. A SEMS can be classified as an uncovered or covered stent. Both types of stents have their own merits and demerits.



OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were to compare success rates, durability, and complication rates of uncovered and covered stent groups of malignant colorectal obstruction. DESIGNS AND SETTING: A nonrandomized prospective, single-center study.



METHODS: We studied 80 patients with malignant colorectal obstruction: colon cancer in 70 patients, metastatic lesion of advanced gastric cancer in 8 patients, and cervix cancer in 2 patients. Insertion of uncovered stents was attempted in 39 patients (before surgery in 20, palliative in 19), and covered stents were used in 41 (before surgery in 23, palliative in 18).



INTERVENTION: The stent was inserted into the obstructive sites for preoperative or palliative purposes by using the through-the-scope method. After stent insertion, the patients had regular follow-ups, either as clinical checkups or telephone interviews.



MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENT: Insertion success rate, durability, and complication rate according to stent type.



RESULTS: Technical and clinical success rates of uncovered and covered stents were not different (100%; 95.1%, P > .05, 100%; 97.4%, P > .05). The early stent migration rate was not different in both groups. The late stent migration was more common in the covered stent group than the uncovered stent group (0% vs 40%, respectively, P = .005). Loss of stent function during the long-term follow-up period was more frequent in the covered stent group than in the uncovered stent group (18.8% vs 60%, respectively, P = .018).



LIMITATION: This was a small-sized, nonrandomized, prospective, single-center study. Confirmation of large-scale, multicenter, randomized, prospective outcome is required.



CONCLUSIONS: Insertion of either an uncovered or covered stent is similarly an effective treatment modality of malignant colorectal obstruction for preoperative purposes. However, there are no advantages of covered stents over uncovered stents during the follow-up period in the palliative purpose.
MeSH terms
ColonColonic Neoplasms/complicationsColonic Neoplasms/secondaryColonic Neoplasms/therapy*Equipment DesignFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansIntestinal Obstruction/complicationsIntestinal Obstruction/etiologyIntestinal Obstruction/therapy*MaleMiddle AgedPalliative CarePreoperative CareStents*/adverse effectsStents*/standardsStomach Neoplasms/pathologyTreatment OutcomeUterine Cervical Neoplasms/pathology
DOI
10.1016/j.gie.2007.02.064
PMID
17767930
Appears in Collections:
Journal Papers > School of Medicine / Graduate School of Medicine > Gastroenterology
AJOU Authors
이, 기명신, 성재황, 재철정, 재연유, 병무이, 광재김, 진홍조, 성원
Full Text Link
Export
RIS (EndNote)
XLS (Excel)
XML

qrcode

해당 아이템을 이메일로 공유하기 원하시면 인증을 거치시기 바랍니다.

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Browse