A randomized prospective comparison of self-expandable plastic stents and partially covered self-expandable metal stents in the palliation of malignant esophageal dysphagia

Massimo Conio, Alessandro Repici, Giorgio Battaglia, Giovanni De Pretis, Luigi Ghezzo, Max Bittinger, Helmut Messmann, Jean François Demarquay, Sabrina Blanchi, Michele Togni, Rita Conigliaro, Rosangela Filiberti

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

147 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) provide effective palliation in patients with malignant dysphagia, although severe complications and mortality may result. We performed a prospective controlled trial to compare a new self-expanding polyester mesh stent (Polyflex) with SEMS (Ultraflex). METHODS: One hundred one patients with unresectable esophageal carcinoma were randomized to placement of a Polyflex (N = 47) or a partially covered Ultraflex (N = 54) stent. Patients with esophagogastric junction (EGJ) malignancy were excluded. RESULTS: Placement was successful in 46 (98%) patients with the Polyflex and 54 (100%) patients with the Ultraflex stent. In one patient, the Polyflex stent could not be placed. After 1 wk, dysphagia was improved by at least 1 grade in 100% of the Polyflex group and in 94% of the Ultraflex group. Major complications were observed in 48% of the Polyflex group and 33% of the Ultraflex group. Intraprocedural perforation occurred in 1 Polyflex and 1 Ultraflex patient. Two Polyflex patients had postprocedural hemorrhage. Twenty (44%) patients with a Polyflex stent and 18 (33%) with an Ultraflex stent had recurrent dysphagia because of tumor overgrowth, stent migration, hyperplastic granulomatous reaction, or food bolus impaction. Multivariate analysis showed a significantly higher complication rate with Polyflex than with Ultraflex stents (odds ratio 2.3, 95% CI 1.2-4.4). However, median survival was 134 days with Polyflex and 122 days with Ultraflex stents (P = NS). CONCLUSIONS: No difference was seen in palliation of dysphagia between the two stents. Significantly more complications, especially late stent migration, were observed in the Polyflex group.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2667-2677
Number of pages11
JournalAmerican Journal of Gastroenterology
Volume102
Issue number12
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2007

Fingerprint

Deglutition Disorders
Plastics
Stents
Self Expandable Metallic Stents
Metals
Esophagogastric Junction
Polyesters
Neoplasms
Multivariate Analysis
Odds Ratio
Hemorrhage

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Gastroenterology

Cite this

A randomized prospective comparison of self-expandable plastic stents and partially covered self-expandable metal stents in the palliation of malignant esophageal dysphagia. / Conio, Massimo; Repici, Alessandro; Battaglia, Giorgio; De Pretis, Giovanni; Ghezzo, Luigi; Bittinger, Max; Messmann, Helmut; Demarquay, Jean François; Blanchi, Sabrina; Togni, Michele; Conigliaro, Rita; Filiberti, Rosangela.

In: American Journal of Gastroenterology, Vol. 102, No. 12, 12.2007, p. 2667-2677.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Conio, Massimo ; Repici, Alessandro ; Battaglia, Giorgio ; De Pretis, Giovanni ; Ghezzo, Luigi ; Bittinger, Max ; Messmann, Helmut ; Demarquay, Jean François ; Blanchi, Sabrina ; Togni, Michele ; Conigliaro, Rita ; Filiberti, Rosangela. / A randomized prospective comparison of self-expandable plastic stents and partially covered self-expandable metal stents in the palliation of malignant esophageal dysphagia. In: American Journal of Gastroenterology. 2007 ; Vol. 102, No. 12. pp. 2667-2677.
@article{16e4d0a0e9dc4cb3850245f8da997cea,
title = "A randomized prospective comparison of self-expandable plastic stents and partially covered self-expandable metal stents in the palliation of malignant esophageal dysphagia",
abstract = "OBJECTIVES: Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) provide effective palliation in patients with malignant dysphagia, although severe complications and mortality may result. We performed a prospective controlled trial to compare a new self-expanding polyester mesh stent (Polyflex) with SEMS (Ultraflex). METHODS: One hundred one patients with unresectable esophageal carcinoma were randomized to placement of a Polyflex (N = 47) or a partially covered Ultraflex (N = 54) stent. Patients with esophagogastric junction (EGJ) malignancy were excluded. RESULTS: Placement was successful in 46 (98{\%}) patients with the Polyflex and 54 (100{\%}) patients with the Ultraflex stent. In one patient, the Polyflex stent could not be placed. After 1 wk, dysphagia was improved by at least 1 grade in 100{\%} of the Polyflex group and in 94{\%} of the Ultraflex group. Major complications were observed in 48{\%} of the Polyflex group and 33{\%} of the Ultraflex group. Intraprocedural perforation occurred in 1 Polyflex and 1 Ultraflex patient. Two Polyflex patients had postprocedural hemorrhage. Twenty (44{\%}) patients with a Polyflex stent and 18 (33{\%}) with an Ultraflex stent had recurrent dysphagia because of tumor overgrowth, stent migration, hyperplastic granulomatous reaction, or food bolus impaction. Multivariate analysis showed a significantly higher complication rate with Polyflex than with Ultraflex stents (odds ratio 2.3, 95{\%} CI 1.2-4.4). However, median survival was 134 days with Polyflex and 122 days with Ultraflex stents (P = NS). CONCLUSIONS: No difference was seen in palliation of dysphagia between the two stents. Significantly more complications, especially late stent migration, were observed in the Polyflex group.",
author = "Massimo Conio and Alessandro Repici and Giorgio Battaglia and {De Pretis}, Giovanni and Luigi Ghezzo and Max Bittinger and Helmut Messmann and Demarquay, {Jean Fran{\cc}ois} and Sabrina Blanchi and Michele Togni and Rita Conigliaro and Rosangela Filiberti",
year = "2007",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01565.x",
language = "English",
volume = "102",
pages = "2667--2677",
journal = "American Journal of Gastroenterology",
issn = "0002-9270",
publisher = "Nature Publishing Group",
number = "12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A randomized prospective comparison of self-expandable plastic stents and partially covered self-expandable metal stents in the palliation of malignant esophageal dysphagia

AU - Conio, Massimo

AU - Repici, Alessandro

AU - Battaglia, Giorgio

AU - De Pretis, Giovanni

AU - Ghezzo, Luigi

AU - Bittinger, Max

AU - Messmann, Helmut

AU - Demarquay, Jean François

AU - Blanchi, Sabrina

AU - Togni, Michele

AU - Conigliaro, Rita

AU - Filiberti, Rosangela

PY - 2007/12

Y1 - 2007/12

N2 - OBJECTIVES: Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) provide effective palliation in patients with malignant dysphagia, although severe complications and mortality may result. We performed a prospective controlled trial to compare a new self-expanding polyester mesh stent (Polyflex) with SEMS (Ultraflex). METHODS: One hundred one patients with unresectable esophageal carcinoma were randomized to placement of a Polyflex (N = 47) or a partially covered Ultraflex (N = 54) stent. Patients with esophagogastric junction (EGJ) malignancy were excluded. RESULTS: Placement was successful in 46 (98%) patients with the Polyflex and 54 (100%) patients with the Ultraflex stent. In one patient, the Polyflex stent could not be placed. After 1 wk, dysphagia was improved by at least 1 grade in 100% of the Polyflex group and in 94% of the Ultraflex group. Major complications were observed in 48% of the Polyflex group and 33% of the Ultraflex group. Intraprocedural perforation occurred in 1 Polyflex and 1 Ultraflex patient. Two Polyflex patients had postprocedural hemorrhage. Twenty (44%) patients with a Polyflex stent and 18 (33%) with an Ultraflex stent had recurrent dysphagia because of tumor overgrowth, stent migration, hyperplastic granulomatous reaction, or food bolus impaction. Multivariate analysis showed a significantly higher complication rate with Polyflex than with Ultraflex stents (odds ratio 2.3, 95% CI 1.2-4.4). However, median survival was 134 days with Polyflex and 122 days with Ultraflex stents (P = NS). CONCLUSIONS: No difference was seen in palliation of dysphagia between the two stents. Significantly more complications, especially late stent migration, were observed in the Polyflex group.

AB - OBJECTIVES: Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) provide effective palliation in patients with malignant dysphagia, although severe complications and mortality may result. We performed a prospective controlled trial to compare a new self-expanding polyester mesh stent (Polyflex) with SEMS (Ultraflex). METHODS: One hundred one patients with unresectable esophageal carcinoma were randomized to placement of a Polyflex (N = 47) or a partially covered Ultraflex (N = 54) stent. Patients with esophagogastric junction (EGJ) malignancy were excluded. RESULTS: Placement was successful in 46 (98%) patients with the Polyflex and 54 (100%) patients with the Ultraflex stent. In one patient, the Polyflex stent could not be placed. After 1 wk, dysphagia was improved by at least 1 grade in 100% of the Polyflex group and in 94% of the Ultraflex group. Major complications were observed in 48% of the Polyflex group and 33% of the Ultraflex group. Intraprocedural perforation occurred in 1 Polyflex and 1 Ultraflex patient. Two Polyflex patients had postprocedural hemorrhage. Twenty (44%) patients with a Polyflex stent and 18 (33%) with an Ultraflex stent had recurrent dysphagia because of tumor overgrowth, stent migration, hyperplastic granulomatous reaction, or food bolus impaction. Multivariate analysis showed a significantly higher complication rate with Polyflex than with Ultraflex stents (odds ratio 2.3, 95% CI 1.2-4.4). However, median survival was 134 days with Polyflex and 122 days with Ultraflex stents (P = NS). CONCLUSIONS: No difference was seen in palliation of dysphagia between the two stents. Significantly more complications, especially late stent migration, were observed in the Polyflex group.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=36549027847&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=36549027847&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01565.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01565.x

M3 - Article

C2 - 18042102

AN - SCOPUS:36549027847

VL - 102

SP - 2667

EP - 2677

JO - American Journal of Gastroenterology

JF - American Journal of Gastroenterology

SN - 0002-9270

IS - 12

ER -