Tatsunori Satoh1, Hirotoshi Ishiwatari2, Shinya Kawaguchi3, Naofumi Shirane3, Hiroyuki Matsubayashi1,4, Junichi Kaneko1, Junya Sato1, Kazuma Ishikawa1, Takuya Otsu3, Shuzo Terada3, Hiroyuki Ono1, Masataka Kikuyama5. 1. Division of Endoscopy, Shizuoka Cancer Center, 1007 Shimonagakubo Nagaizumi-cho, Sunto-gun, Shizuoka, Japan. 2. Division of Endoscopy, Shizuoka Cancer Center, 1007 Shimonagakubo Nagaizumi-cho, Sunto-gun, Shizuoka, Japan. ishihiro481019@gmail.com. 3. Department of Gastroenterology, Shizuoka General Hospital, Shizuoka, Japan. 4. Division of Genetic Medicine Promotion, Shizuoka Cancer Center, Shizuoka, Japan. 5. Department of Gastroenterological Internal Medicine, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center Komagome Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic biliary drainage using metal stent (MSs) is an established palliative treatment for patients with unresectable malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO). However, a major drawback of MS is recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO). Uncovered MSs with a diameter of 14 mm (UMS-14) were developed to overcome this. We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of UMS-14 with those of conventional covered MSs having a diameter of 10 mm (CMS-10). METHODS: Consecutive patients with MDBO caused by unresectable pancreatic cancer, who underwent UMS-14 or CMS-10 placement at two tertiary-care centers, were retrospectively examined according to the Tokyo Criteria 2014. RESULTS: Two hundred and thirty-eight patients who underwent UMS-14 (the UMS-14 group, n = 80) or CMS-10 (the CMS-10 group, n = 158) over a 62-month period were included. The technical and clinical success rates were similar between the two groups. RBO occurred in 20 (25%) and 59 (37%) patients of the UMS-14 and CMS-10 groups, respectively (p = 0.06). Median time till RBO was significantly longer in the UMS-14 group than in the CMS-10 group (not reached vs. 290 days, p = 0.04). Multivariate analysis revealed that CMS-10 placement was an independent risk factor for RBO (hazard ratio: 1.66, 95% confidence interval: 1.00-2.76). The incidence of early complications, including pancreatitis, and the overall survival (UMS-14 vs. CMS-10: 169 vs. 167 days, p = 0.83) were comparable between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: UMS-14 stents were safe and effective for treating patients with MDBO secondary to unresectable pancreatic cancer. The insertion of UMS-14 is recommended, because it is less likely to get occluded as compared to CMS-10.
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic biliary drainage using metal stent (MSs) is an established palliative treatment for patients with unresectable malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO). However, a major drawback of MS is recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO). Uncovered MSs with a diameter of 14 mm (UMS-14) were developed to overcome this. We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of UMS-14 with those of conventional covered MSs having a diameter of 10 mm (CMS-10). METHODS: Consecutive patients with MDBO caused by unresectable pancreatic cancer, who underwent UMS-14 or CMS-10 placement at two tertiary-care centers, were retrospectively examined according to the Tokyo Criteria 2014. RESULTS: Two hundred and thirty-eight patients who underwent UMS-14 (the UMS-14 group, n = 80) or CMS-10 (the CMS-10 group, n = 158) over a 62-month period were included. The technical and clinical success rates were similar between the two groups. RBO occurred in 20 (25%) and 59 (37%) patients of the UMS-14 and CMS-10 groups, respectively (p = 0.06). Median time till RBO was significantly longer in the UMS-14 group than in the CMS-10 group (not reached vs. 290 days, p = 0.04). Multivariate analysis revealed that CMS-10 placement was an independent risk factor for RBO (hazard ratio: 1.66, 95% confidence interval: 1.00-2.76). The incidence of early complications, including pancreatitis, and the overall survival (UMS-14 vs. CMS-10: 169 vs. 167 days, p = 0.83) were comparable between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: UMS-14 stents were safe and effective for treating patients with MDBO secondary to unresectable pancreatic cancer. The insertion of UMS-14 is recommended, because it is less likely to get occluded as compared to CMS-10.