...
首页> 外文期刊>BMC Gastroenterology >A comparison of the temporary placement of 3 different self-expanding stents for the treatment of refractory benign esophageal strictures: a prospective multicentre study
【24h】

A comparison of the temporary placement of 3 different self-expanding stents for the treatment of refractory benign esophageal strictures: a prospective multicentre study

机译:临时放置3种不同的自膨式支架治疗难治性食管良性狭窄的比较:一项前瞻性多中心研究

获取原文
           

摘要

Background Refractory benign esophageal strictures (RBESs) have been treated with the temporary placement of different self-expanding stents with conflicting results. We compared the clinical effectiveness of 3 types of stents: self-expanding plastic stents (SEPSs), biodegradable stents, and fully covered self-expanding metal stents (FCSEMSs), for the treatment of RBES. Methods This study prospectively evaluated 3 groups of 30 consecutive patients with RBESs who underwent temporary placement of either SEPSs (12?weeks, n?=?10), biodegradable stents (n?=?10) or FCSEMSs (12?weeks, n?=?10). Data were collected to analyze the technical success and clinical outcome of the stents as evaluated by recurrent dysphagia, complications and reinterventions. Results Stent implantation was technically successful in all patients. Migration occurred in 11 patients: 6 (60%) in the SEPS group, 2 (20%) in the biodegradable group and 3 (30%) in the FCSEMS group (P?=?0.16). A total of 8/30 patients (26.6%) were dysphagia-free after the end of follow-up: 1 (10%) in the SEPS group, 3 (30%) in the biodegradable group and 4 (40%) in the FCSEMS group (P?=?0.27). More reinterventions were required in the SEPS group (n?=?24) than in the biodegradable group (n?=?13) or the FCSEMS group (n?=?13) (P?=?0.24). Multivariate analysis showed that stricture length was significantly associated with higher recurrence rates after temporary stent placement (HR?=?1.37; 95% CI?=?1.08-1.75; P?=?0.011). Conclusions Temporary placement of a biodegradable stent or of a FCSEMS in patients with RBES may lead to long-term relief of dysphagia in 30 and 40% of patients, respectively. The use of SEPSs seems least preferable, as they are associated with frequent stent migration, more reinterventions and few cases of long-term improvement. Additionally, longer strictures were associated with a higher risk of recurrence.
机译:背景难治性良性食管狭窄(RBES)已通过临时放置不同的自膨式支架进行治疗,结果相矛盾。我们比较了三种类型的支架在治疗RBES方面的临床效果:自膨胀塑料支架(SEPS),可生物降解支架和完全覆盖的自膨胀金属支架(FCSEMS)。方法该研究前瞻性地评估了3组连续30例RBES的患者,这些患者接受了SEPS(12周,n = 10)或可生物降解支架(n = 10)或FCSEMS(12周,n = 12)的临时放置。 =?10)。收集数据以分析支架的技术成功和临床结果,如通过反复吞咽困难,并发症和再干预进行评估。结果技术上所有患者均成功植入支架。迁移发生在11位患者中:SEPS组为6(60%),可生物降解组为2(20%),FCSEMS组为3(30%)(P≥0.16)。随访结束后,共有8/30例患者无吞咽困难:SEPS组1例(10%),可生物降解组3例(30%),而SEPS组4例(40%)。 FCSEMS组(P≥0.27)。与可生物降解组(n = 13)或FCSEMS组(n = 13)相比,SEPS组(n = 24)需要更多的干预(P = 0.24)。多因素分析表明,狭窄长度与临时置入支架后较高的复发率显着相关(HR≤1.37; 95%CI≤1.08-1.75; P≤0.011)。结论RBES患者暂时放置可生物降解的支架或FCSEMS可能分别减轻30%和40%的患者的吞咽困难。 SEPS的使用似乎是最不优选的,因为它们与频繁的支架迁移,更多的再次介入以及很少的长期改善相关。此外,更长的狭窄与更高的复发风险相关。

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号