Summary Background  Placement of self‐expanding metal stents (SEMS) or plastic stents (SEPS) has emerged as a minimally invasive treatment option for benign oesophageal ruptures and leaks; however, it is not clear which stent type should be preferred. Aim  To assess clinical effectiveness and safety of treating benign oesophageal ruptures and anastomotic leaks with temporary placement of a stent with special emphasis on different stent designs. Methods  A pooled analysis was performed after searching PubMed and EMBASE databases for studies regarding placement of fully covered and partially covered SEMS (FSEMS and PSEMS) and SEPS for this indication. Data were pooled and evaluated for clinical outcome, complications and survival. Results  Twenty‐five studies, including 267 patients with complete follow‐up on outcome, were identified. Clinical success was achieved in 85% of patients and was not different between stent types (SEPS 84%, FSEMS 85% and PSEMS 86%, P = 0.97). Time of stent placement was longest for SEPS (8 weeks) followed by FSEMS and PSEMS (both 6 weeks). In total, 65 (34%) patients had a stent‐related complication. Stent migration occurred more often with SEPS [n = 47 (31%)] and FSEMS [n = 7 (26%)] than with PSEMS [n = 2 (12%), P ≤ 0.001], whereas there was no significant difference in tissue in‐ and overgrowth between PSEMS [12% vs. 7% (FSEMS) and 3% (SEPS), P = 0.68]. Conclusions  Although there is a lack of randomised controlled trials, it seems that covered stent placement for a period of 6–8 weeks is safe and effective for benign oesophageal ruptures and anastomotic leaks to heal. As efficacy between different stent types is not significantly different, stent choice should depend on expected risk of stent migration (self‐expanding plastic stents and fully covered self‐expanding metal stents) and, to a minor degree, on expected risk of tissue in‐ or overgrowth (partially covered self‐expanding metal stents).

BackgroundBenign esophageal ruptures and anastomotic leaks are life-threatening conditions that are often treated surgically. Recently, placement of partially and fully covered metal or plastic stents has emerged as a minimally invasive treatment option. We aimed to determine the clinical effectiveness of covered stent placement for the treatment of esophageal ruptures and anastomotic leaks with special emphasis on different stent designs.MethodsConsecutive patients who underwent placement of a fully covered self-expandable metal stent (FSEMS), a partially covered SEMS (PSEMS) or a self-expanding plastic stent (SEPS) for a benign esophageal rupture or anastomotic leak after upper gastrointestinal surgery in the period 2007-2010 were included. Data on patient demographics, type of lesion, stent placement and removal, clinical success and complications were collectedResultsA total of 52 patients received 83 esophageal stents (61 PSEMS, 15 FSEMS, 7 SEPS) for an anastomotic leak (n = 32), iatrogenic rupture (n = 13), Boerhaave's syndrome (n = 4) or other cause (n = 3). Endoscopic stent removal was successful in all but eight patients treated with a PSEMS due to tissue ingrowth. Clinical success was achieved in 34 (76%, intention-to-treat: 65%) patients (PSEMS: 73%, FSEMS: 83%, SEPS: 83%) after a median of 1 (range 1-5) stent and a median stenting time of 39 (range 7-120) days. In total, 33 complications in 24 (46%) patients occurred (tissue in- or overgrowth (n = 8), stent migration (n = 10), ruptured stent cover (all Ultraflex; n = 6), food obstruction (n = 3), severe pain (n = 2), esophageal rupture (n = 2), hemorrhage (n = 2)). One (2%) patient died of a stent-related cause.ConclusionsCovered stents placed for a period of 5-6 weeks may well be an alternative to surgery for treating benign esophageal ruptures or anastomotic leaks. As efficacy between PSEMS, FSEMS and SEPS is not different, stent choice should depend on expected risks of stent migration (SEPS and FSEMS) and tissue in- or overgrowth (PSEMS).

BackgroundBenign biliary strictures may be a consequence of surgical procedures, chronic pancreatitis or iatrogenic injuries to the ampulla. Stents are increasingly being used for this indication, however it is not completely clear which stent type should be preferred.MethodsA systematic review on stent placement for benign extrahepatic biliary strictures was performed after searching PubMed and EMBASE databases. Data were pooled and evaluated for technical success, clinical success and complications.ResultsIn total, 47 studies (1116 patients) on outcome of stent placement were identified. No randomized controlled trials (RCTs), one non-randomized comparative studies and 46 case series were found. Technical success was 98,9% for uncovered self-expandable metal stents (uSEMS), 94,8% for single plastic stents and 94,0% for multiple plastic stents. Overall clinical success rate was highest for placement of multiple plastic stents (94,3%) followed by uSEMS (79,5%) and single plastic stents (59.6%). Complications occurred more frequently with uSEMS (39.5%) compared with single plastic stents (36.0%) and multiple plastic stents (20,3%).ConclusionBased on clinical success and risk of complications, placement of multiple plastic stents is currently the best choice. The evolving role of cSEMS placement as a more patient friendly and cost effective treatment for benign biliary strictures needs further elucidation. There is a need for RCTs comparing different stent types for this indication.

Opinion statementBenign esophageal strictures arise from a diversity of causes, for example esophagogastric reflux, esophageal resection, radiation therapy, ablative therapy, or the ingestion of a corrosive substance. Most strictures can be treated successfully with endoscopic dilation using bougies or balloons, with only a few complications. Nonetheless, approximately one third of patients develop recurrent symptoms after dilation within the first year. The majority of these patients are managed with repeat dilations, depending on their complexity. Dilation combined with intra lesional steroid injections can be considered for peptic strictures, while incisional therapy has been demonstrated to be effective for Schatzki rings and anastomotic strictures. When these therapeutic options do not resolve the stenosis, stent placement should be considered. Self bougienage can be proposed to a selected group of patients with a proximal stenosis. As a final step surgery is an option, but even then the risk of stricture formation at the anastomotic site remains. This chapter reviews refractory benign esophageal strictures and the treatment options that are currently available.

Although placement of SEMS (uncovered or partially covered) for palliation of extrahepatic bile duct obstruction initially is more expensive than placement of plastic stents, SEMS have longer functional time. The total costs after 1 year do not differ significantly with stent type. Dutch Clinical Trial Registration no: NTR1361.