Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
Volume 71, Issue 3 , Pages 490-499, March 2010

Surgical gastrojejunostomy or endoscopic stent placement for the palliation of malignant gastric outlet obstruction (SUSTENT study): a multicenter randomized trial

Current affiliations: Departments of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (S.M.J., E.J.K., P.D.S.), Public Health (E.W.S.), Surgery (C.H.J.V.), and Internal Medicine (E.J.K.), Erasmus MC-University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (J.E.V.), Academic Medical Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (M.P.S.), Meander Medical Center Amersfoort, Amersfoort, The Netherlands, Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (F.P.V., P.D.S.), University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands

Received 25 January 2009; accepted 25 September 2009. published online 09 December 2009.

Rotterdam, Amsterdam, Amersfoort, Utrecht, The Netherlands

Background

Both gastrojejunostomy (GJJ) and stent placement are commonly used palliative treatments of obstructive symptoms caused by malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO).

Objective

Compare GJJ and stent placement.

Design

Multicenter, randomized trial.

Setting

Twenty-one centers in The Netherlands.

Patients

Patients with GOO.

Interventions

GJJ and stent placement.

Main Outcome Measurements

Outcomes were medical effects, quality of life, and costs. Analysis was by intent to treat.

Results

Eighteen patients were randomized to GJJ and 21 to stent placement. Food intake improved more rapidly after stent placement than after GJJ (GOO Scoring System score ≥2: median 5 vs 8 days, respectively; P < .01) but long-term relief was better after GJJ, with more patients living more days with a GOO Scoring System score of 2 or more than after stent placement (72 vs 50 days, respectively; P = .05). More major complications (stent: 6 in 4 patients vs GJJ: 0; P = .02), recurrent obstructive symptoms (stent: 8 in 5 patients vs GJJ: 1 in 1 patient; P = .02), and reinterventions (stent: 10 in 7 patients vs GJJ: 2 in 2 patients; P < .01) were observed after stent placement compared with GJJ. When stent obstruction was not regarded as a major complication, no differences in complications were found (P = .4). There were also no differences in median survival (stent: 56 days vs GJJ: 78 days) and quality of life. Mean total costs of GJJ were higher compared with stent placement ($16,535 vs $11,720, respectively; P = .049 [comparing medians]). Because of the small study population, only initial hospital costs would have been statistically significant if the Bonferroni correction for multiple testing had been applied.

Limitations

Relatively small patient population.

Conclusions

Despite slow initial symptom improvement, GJJ was associated with better long-term results and is therefore the treatment of choice in patients with a life expectancy of 2 months or longer. Because stent placement was associated with better short-term outcomes, this treatment is preferable for patients expected to live less than 2 months. (Clinical trial registration number: ISRCTN 06702358.)

Abbreviations: CBD, common bile duct, GJJ, gastrojejunostomy, GOO, gastric outlet obstruction, GOOSS, Gastric Outlet Obstruction Scoring System, HRQoL, health-related quality of life

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.
 

 See CME section; p. 596

 DISCLOSURE: The following authors disclosed financial relationships relevant to this publication: S.M. Jeurnink, P.D. Siersema, E.W. Steyerberg, and E.J. Kuipers were financially supported by ZonMW (grant 945-06-503). All other authors disclosed no financial relationships relevant to this publication.

PII: S0016-5107(09)02559-0

doi:10.1016/j.gie.2009.09.042

Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
Volume 71, Issue 3 , Pages 490-499, March 2010