Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
Volume 64, Issue 6 , Pages 914-920, December 2006

Use of self-expanding metal stents to treat malignant colorectal obstruction in general endoscopic practice (with videos)

Current affiliations: Gastroenterology Department, Hospital Virgen de la Luz, Cuenca (J.G-C.), Gastroenterology Department, Hospital Josep Trueta, Girona (F.G-H.), Gastroenterology Department, Centro Médico Andersen, Madrid (D.J.), Gastroenterology Department , Hospital Río Carrión, Palencia (F.I.), Gastroenterology Department, Hospital Río Ortega, Valladolid (M.P-M.), Gastroenterology Department, Hospital Xeral, Lugo (L.L-R.), Gastroenterology Department, Hospital Clínico, Salamanca (A.R.), Gastroenterology Department, Hospital La Mancha-Centro, Alcázar de San Juan (P.G-C.), Gastroenterology Department, Hospital General Yagüe, Burgos (L.Y.), Gastroenterology Department, Mutua de Terrassa, Terrassa (J.E.), Gastroenterology Department, Hospital San Jorge, Huesca (J.D.), Gastroenterology Department, Hospital de Basurto, Bilbao (V.O.), Gastroenterology Department, Hospital Virgen de la Concha, Zamora (S.R.), Spain

Received 23 June 2005; accepted 14 June 2006.

Cuenca, Girona, Madrid, Palencia, Valladolid, Lugo, Salamanca, Alcázar de San Juan, Burgos, Terrassa, Huesca, Bilbao, Zamora, Spain

Background

Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) are being increasingly used to solve malignant colorectal obstruction (MCRO). Patients can then either undergo scheduled surgery or have the stent left in place as a definitive palliative treatment. The majority of reports on the use of SEMS in MCRO come from single centers; therefore, its use in general endoscopic practice is not clearly known.

Objective

To study the use of SEMS for MCRO in a wide endoscopic practice.

Design

Retrospective study.

Setting

A survey was carried out among endoscopists in 13 hospitals in Spain (6 tertiary referral centers and 7 community hospitals).

Patients

Those who presented with MCRO.

Interventions

A total of 175 attempts to insert colorectal SEMS were made during a 12-month period (October 2003 to September 2004).

Main Outcome Measures

Technical and clinical success and possible differences according to the type of hospital.

Results

There was a mean of 1.2 attempts/mo per center (range, 2-0.5 attempts/mo per center). Insertion success was achieved in 162 (92.6%) and acceptable colonic decompression in 138 of 175 (78.8%) attempts and in 138 of 162 (85.1%) of successfully inserted stents. SEMS served as a bridge to scheduled surgery in 72 of 175 (41%) and as a palliative definitive treatment in 66 of 175 (37.7%). The major complication was perforation, which occurred in 7 of 175 occasions (4%) and led to death in 2 patients (1%). There were other less severe complications (25 [14%]). No significant differences in outcome of stent placement procedures were found between both categories of centers.

Limitations

Retrospective study involving many centers and the possibility of bias for different assessments of outcomes.

Conclusions

In this study, success rates for SEMS placement and colonic decompression in MCRO were acceptable, without substantial differences according to the type of hospital. This procedure appeared to be feasible in general endoscopic practice.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 Presented at Digestive Disease Week, May 14-18, 2005, Chicago, Illinois (Gastrointest Endosc 2005;61:AB251).

PII: S0016-5107(06)02274-7

doi:10.1016/j.gie.2006.06.034

Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
Volume 64, Issue 6 , Pages 914-920, December 2006