Background Removing lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) may be difficult and even harmful, but these features have seldom been analyzed. We aimed to generate a comprehensive assessment of the feasibility and safety of LAMS retrieval procedures.
Methods A prospective multicenter case series including all technically successfully deployed LAMSs between January 2019 and January 2020 that underwent endoscopic stent removal. All retrieval-related data were prospectively recorded using standardized telephone questionnaires as part of centralized follow-up that ended after stent removal had been performed. Multivariable logistic regression models assessed the potential risk factors for complex removal.
Results For the 407 LAMSs included, removal was attempted in 158 (38.8 %) after an indwell time of 46.5 days (interquartile range [IQR] 31–70). The median (IQR) removal time was 2 (1–4) minutes. Removal was labelled as complex in 13 procedures (8.2 %), although advanced endoscopic maneuvers were required in only two (1.3 %). Complex removal risk factors were stent embedment (relative risk [RR] 5.84, 95 %CI 2.14–15.89; P = 0.001), over-the-wire deployment (RR 4.66, 95 %CI 1.60–13.56; P = 0.01), and longer indwell times (RR 1.14, 95 %CI 1.03–1.27; P = 0.01). Partial and complete embedment were observed in 14 (8.9 %) and five cases (3.2 %), respectively. The embedment rate during the first 6 weeks was 3.1 % (2/65), reaching 15.9 % (10/63) during the following 6 weeks (P = 0.02). The adverse event rate was 5.1 %, including seven gastrointestinal bleeds (5 mild, 2 moderate).
Conclusions LAMS removal is a safe procedure, mostly requiring basic endoscopic techniques attainable in conventional endoscopy rooms. Referral to advanced endoscopy units should be considered for stents with known embedment or long indwell times, which may require more technically demanding procedures.
Postsurgical benign colorectal strictures occur in up to 20% of patients who undergo colon or rectal resection. Traditionally, treatment has been surgical, but recent decades have seen the growing importance of an endoscopic approach, particularly balloon dilatation, which is now considered the first-line treatment for these benign strictures. However, balloon dilatation is associated with a recurrence of the stricture in up to 25% of cases. When this arises, one can opt for surgery aimed at performing a reanastomosis; a new intestinal anastomosis may be technically complex or even impossible, which would result in the patient requiring a permanent colostomy, with its consequent negative impact on quality of life. Accordingly, different endoscopic approaches have been evaluated for strictures refractory to balloon dilatation, such as the implant of self-expanding metallic stents, biodegradable stents, or incisional therapy, with variable results in efficacy.
Resumen
El drenaje de colecciones intraabdominales postquirúrgicas guiado por ecoendoscopia es una técnica cada vez más utilizada en la práctica clínica. El objetivo de nuestro estudio es describir nuestra experiencia en el drenaje guiado por ecoendoscopia de colecciones postoperatorias intraabdominales. Para ello, se evaluó retrospectivamente los pacientes con colecciones postoperatorias sintomáticas que fueron sometidos a un drenaje guiado por ecoendoscopia en nuestro centro entre los años 2017 y 2022. Se realizaron 10 drenajes ecoguiados de colecciones postquirúrgicas en 9 pacientes. El éxito técnico fue del 100% y el éxito clínico del 80%. Ocurrieron complicaciones en el 20% de los casos, que se pudieron resolver eficazmente mediante endoscopia. En nuestra experiencia, el drenaje guiado por ecoendoscopia es una opción segura y eficaz en el drenaje de colecciones postoperatorias intraabdominales, con alta tasa de éxito técnico y clínico y un reducido porcentaje de complicaciones.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.