Cargando…

Antireflux Metal Stent for Initial Treatment of Malignant Distal Biliary Obstruction

OBJECTIVES: To compare the use of an antireflux metal stent (ARMS) with that of a conventional covered self-expandable metal stent (c-CSEMS) for initial stenting of malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively investigated 59 consecutive patients with unrese...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Morita, Shinichi, Arai, Yasuaki, Sugawara, Shunsuke, Sone, Miyuki, Sakamoto, Yasunari, Okusaka, Takuji, Yoshinaga, Shigetaka, Saito, Yutaka, Terai, Shuji
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5831319/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29643916
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/3805173
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVES: To compare the use of an antireflux metal stent (ARMS) with that of a conventional covered self-expandable metal stent (c-CSEMS) for initial stenting of malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively investigated 59 consecutive patients with unresectable MDBO undergoing initial endoscopic biliary drainage. ARMS was used in 32 patients and c-CSEMS in 27. Technical success, functional success, complications, causes of recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO), time to RBO (TRBO), and reintervention were compared between the groups. RESULTS: Stent placement was technically successful in all patients. There were no significant intergroup differences in functional success (ARMS [96.9%] versus c-CSEMS [96.2%]), complications (6.2 versus 7.4%), and RBO (48.4 versus 42.3%). Food impaction was significantly less frequent for ARMS than for c-CSEMS (P = 0.037), but TRBO did not differ significantly between the groups (log-rank test, P = 0.967). The median TRBO was 180.0 [interquartile range (IQR), 114.0–349.0] days for ARMS and 137.0 [IQR, 87.0–442.0] days for c-CSEMS. In both groups, reintervention for RBO was successfully completed in all patients thus treated. CONCLUSION: ARMS offers no advantage for initial stent placement, but food impaction is significantly prevented by the antireflux valve.