A novel self-expanding biflanged metal stent vs tubular metal stent for EUS-guided transmural drainage of pancreatic pseudocyst: A retrospective, cohort study. Issue 3 (January 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Yao, Yao; Zhang, Dingguo; Guo, Jiefang; Qi, Ke; Li, Feng; Zhu, Jianwei; Wang, Dong; Chen, Jie; Xu, Can; Wang, Luowei; Wang, Kaixuan; Jin, Zhendong; Li, Zhaoshen
• Other Names: Hussein. Okasha section editor.
• Is Part Of: Medicine. Volume 98:Issue 3(2019)
• Publication Date: 2019-01
• Subjects: drainage -- endoscopic ultrasound -- pancreatic pseudocyst -- stent; Medicine -- Periodicals; Medicine -- Periodicals; Médecine -- Périodiques; Geneeskunde; Medicine; Periodicals; Periodicals; 610.5
• DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000014179
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0025-7974

Abstract

Abstract : Abstract: Although endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided transmural drainage of pancreatic fluid collections with metal stents is generally preferred over plastic stents, its superiority among different types of metal stents has not yet been well studied. We conducted this study to compare clinical outcomes and complications of a novel self-expanding biflanged metal stent (BFMS) and a traditional-shaped tubular metal stent (TMS) in treating pancreatic pseudocyst (PPC). This was a retrospective analysis on consecutive patients with PPC underwent EUS-guided transmural drainage with either TMS or BFMS in a single tertiary center with expertise in management of complex biliary and pancreatic problems. The technical and functional success rate, reintervention, complications, and recurrence rate were evaluated. From September 2013 to January 2018, 125 patients (66.4% male, median age 47 years) underwent EUS-guided transmural drainage for PPC. Among them, 49 used TMS and 76 used BFMS. All patients met the inclusion criteria that cyst diameter was >6 cm or the distance between cyst and stomach wall was shorter than 1 cm. There was no difference in technical success (98% vs 97.4%, P = 1.0) or functional success rate (87.8% vs 92.1%, P = .54) using 2 types of metal stents. However, more procedure related complications occurred in TMS than in BFMS group. TMS group had a much higher migration rate than BFMS group (14.6% vs 0, P = .001), even though there was no significant difference in bleeding, infection, or death rate between 2 groups. With similar clinical outcomes, TMS group required more additional plastic stent placement than BFMS group for better drainage. TMS and BFMS placement can both be considered as methods of endoscopic transmural PPC drainage with equal efficacy, whereas BFMS could be preferred for fewer complications or less need of additional plastic stent placement.