4.7 Article

Esophageal stents for the palliation of malignant dysphagia and fistula recurrence after esophagectomy

期刊

GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY
卷 72, 期 2, 页码 249-254

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2010.01.070

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Despite advances in staging methods, surgical techniques, and adjuvant treatment, recurrent cancer after esophagectomy is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Objective: Our purpose was to investigate the safety and efficacy of a self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) in patients with dysphagia or fistula caused by recurrent cancer after esophagectomy. Design: Prospective, observational study with standardized treatment and follow-up. Setting: Single university center. Patients: In 81 patients with recurrent cancer after previous surgical esophagectomy, 100 esophageal SEMSs were inserted for dysphagia (n = 66) or fistula formation (n = 15). Interventions: Stent placement. Main Outcome Measurements: Technical and functional outcome, complications, and survival. Results: The SEMSs restored luminal patency in 65 (98%) of 66 patients and sealed malignant fistulae in 14 (93%) of 15 patients. Stent dysfunction occurred in 24 (30%) of 81 patients. They all were successfully managed by subsequent endoscopic intervention. After stent placement, a total of :16 complications were observed. Major complications occurred in 9 (11%) of 81 patients, mild complications occurred in 7 (9%) of 81 patients. The overall 30-day mortality rate after stent insertion was 25%. Progression of the disease resulted in death after a median interval of 70 days (range 1 clay to 91 months). Limitations: Nonrandomized design. Conclusions: SEMS placement in recurrent esophageal cancer after surgical resection offers adequate palliation by relieving dysphagia and sealing off esophageal respiratory fistulae. Therefore, in these patients who have a relatively short life expectancy, SEMS placement should be considered the treatment of choice. (Gastrointest Endosc 2010;72:249-54.)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据