Comparison of efficacies between stents for malignant colorectal obstruction: a randomized, prospective study

Park, Semi; Cheon, Jae Hee; Park, Sung Chul; Moon, Chang Mo; Hong, Sung Pil; Lee, Sang Kil; Kim, Tae Il

doi:10.1016/j.gie.2010.02.046

Cited by 69 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…[27][28][29] At the same time, there have been several studies reporting no significant difference in overall outcome between the 2 stent types. 14,23,25,30 In our study, similarly, the immediate and long-term success of SEMS placement was not associated with stent type (covered vs uncovered) or length. In addition, the 4 different brands of SEMSs that we used had similar rates of clinical success.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 68%

“…Despite advanced techniques and newly developed stent types, there has been no observable change in the complication rate of colorectal SEMS placement for palliative decompression. 24 In a systematic historical review, perforation rates varied between 0 and 83% 22 ; more recent studies have described median perforation rates from 3.7% to 9%, 8,12,23,25 and as high as 54% (6/11) in patients receiving chemotherapy. 26 Migration occurs in approximately 10% to 22% of patients.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Outcomes of secondary stent-in-stent self-expandable metal stent insertion for malignant colorectal obstruction

Yoon

Jung

Hong

et al. 2011

Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 68%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Outcomes of secondary stent-in-stent self-expandable metal stent insertion for malignant colorectal obstruction

Yoon

Jung

Hong

et al. 2011

Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Covered stents are generally associated with a higher chance of immediate failure because of poor prevention of stent migration, and uncovered stents may cause long-term failure because of ingrowth of tumors. [20][21][22] However, there have been several studies reporting no significant effects on overall outcomes by different stent types. 2,23,24 In our study, the immediate and long-term failures of SEMS placement were not associated with stent type (covered vs uncovered).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical outcomes and risk factors for technical and clinical failures of self-expandable metal stent insertion for malignant colorectal obstruction

Yoon

Jung

Hong

et al. 2011

Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

Self Cite

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Placement of the second stent was performed by one of seven endoscopists from our hospital using a modified version of a previously described method [16,17]. The four types of stents used in our study were: (1) the covered Niti-S colonic stent (Taewoong Medical, Seoul, Korea); (2) the newly developed, covered Comvi stent (Taewoong Medical) [18]; (3) the uncovered WallFlex colonic stent (Boston Scientific, Denver, Colo., USA), and (4) the uncovered Niti-S colonic D type stent (Taewoong Medical).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Outcomes of Secondary Self-Expandable Metal Stents versus Surgery after Delayed Initial Palliative Stent Failure in Malignant Colorectal Obstruction

Yoon¹,

Park²,

Hong³

et al. 2013

Digestion

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background/Aims: When re-intervention is required due to an occluded first colorectal self-expanding metal stent for malignant colorectal obstruction, serious controversies exist regarding whether to use endoscopic re-stenting or surgery. To compare the clinical outcomes in patients who underwent stent re-insertion versus palliative surgery as a second intervention. Methods: A total of 115 patients who received either self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) insertion or palliative surgery for treatment of a second occurrence of malignant colorectal obstruction after the first SEMS placement were retrospectively studied between July 2005 and December 2009. Results: The median overall survival (8.2 vs. 15.5 months) and progression-free survival (4.0 vs. 2.7 months) were not significantly different between the stent and surgery groups (p = 0.895 and 0.650, respectively). The median lumen patency in the stent group was 3.4 months and that in the surgery group was 7.9 months (p = 0.003). The immediate complication rate after second stent insertion was 13.9% and late complication rate was observed in 12 of 79 (15.2%) patients. There was no mortality related to the SEMS procedure. The complication and mortality rates associated with palliative surgery were 3.5% (2/57) and 12.3% (7/57), respectively. Conclusions: Although there is no significant difference in the overall survival between stenting and surgery, a secondary stent insertion had a lower mortality rate despite a shorter duration of temporary colorectal decompression compared to that of palliative surgery.

show abstract

Comparison of efficacies between stents for malignant colorectal obstruction: a randomized, prospective study

Cited by 69 publications

References 24 publications

Outcomes of secondary stent-in-stent self-expandable metal stent insertion for malignant colorectal obstruction

Outcomes of secondary stent-in-stent self-expandable metal stent insertion for malignant colorectal obstruction

Clinical outcomes and risk factors for technical and clinical failures of self-expandable metal stent insertion for malignant colorectal obstruction

Outcomes of Secondary Self-Expandable Metal Stents versus Surgery after Delayed Initial Palliative Stent Failure in Malignant Colorectal Obstruction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About