We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Comparison of clinical efficacies and safeties of lumen-apposing metal stent and conventional-type metal stent-assisted EUS-guided pancreatic wall-off necrosis drainage: a real-life experience in a tertiary hospital.
Surgical Endoscopy 2018 May
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage of pancreatic wall-off necrosis (WON) with transmural stent is regarded as firstline therapy. We aimed at comparing its efficacy and safety with using fully covered self-expandable metal stent (FCSEMS) and lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS).
METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on all consecutive patients with pancreatic WONs who underwent EUS-guided drainage by either FCSEMS or LAMS.
RESULTS: From 2011 to 2016, 68 patients (66.2% male, median age, 66.5 years) underwent WON drainage (22/68 (32.4%) using FCSEMSs of size 10 × 60 mm (14/22, Hanarostent; 8/22 Wallflex); 46/68 (67.6%) using LAMSs (38/46 and 8/46 with AXIOS of size 15 × 10 mm and 10 × 10 mm, respectively). These two groups were matched for age (66 vs. 70 years, p 0.514), APACHE II (11.5 vs. 10, p 0.693), causes [72.7 vs. 80.4% by gallstone pancreatitis (p 0.472); 9.1 vs. 10.9% by alcoholism (p 0.818)], WON size (8.5 vs. 9 cm, p 0.322), location (36.4 vs. 26.1% at pancreatic head, p 0.384; 54.5 vs. 65.2% at body/tail, p 0.395), and enterostomy site [63.6 vs. 76.1% via transgastric (p 0.285); 31.8 vs. 19.6% via transduodenal (p 0.267)] and their number of necrosectomy (p 0.978). The technical (100 vs. 93.5%, p 0.219) and clinical (95.5 vs. 93.5%, p 0.749) success and adverse event (22.7 vs. 39.1%, p 0.180; 9.1 vs. 19.6% with bleeding, p 0.271; 4.5 vs. 13% with spontaneous stent migration, p 0.28; 9.1 vs. 6.5% with dislodgement during necrosectomy, p 0.704) of the two groups were comparable without significant different. However, the LAMS group associated with early stent revision compared with FCSEMS group (log rank p 0.048).
CONCLUSIONS: EUS-guided drainage of WON using FCSEMSs and LAMSs are comparable in efficacy and safety; however, the latter is associated with early stent revision.
METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on all consecutive patients with pancreatic WONs who underwent EUS-guided drainage by either FCSEMS or LAMS.
RESULTS: From 2011 to 2016, 68 patients (66.2% male, median age, 66.5 years) underwent WON drainage (22/68 (32.4%) using FCSEMSs of size 10 × 60 mm (14/22, Hanarostent; 8/22 Wallflex); 46/68 (67.6%) using LAMSs (38/46 and 8/46 with AXIOS of size 15 × 10 mm and 10 × 10 mm, respectively). These two groups were matched for age (66 vs. 70 years, p 0.514), APACHE II (11.5 vs. 10, p 0.693), causes [72.7 vs. 80.4% by gallstone pancreatitis (p 0.472); 9.1 vs. 10.9% by alcoholism (p 0.818)], WON size (8.5 vs. 9 cm, p 0.322), location (36.4 vs. 26.1% at pancreatic head, p 0.384; 54.5 vs. 65.2% at body/tail, p 0.395), and enterostomy site [63.6 vs. 76.1% via transgastric (p 0.285); 31.8 vs. 19.6% via transduodenal (p 0.267)] and their number of necrosectomy (p 0.978). The technical (100 vs. 93.5%, p 0.219) and clinical (95.5 vs. 93.5%, p 0.749) success and adverse event (22.7 vs. 39.1%, p 0.180; 9.1 vs. 19.6% with bleeding, p 0.271; 4.5 vs. 13% with spontaneous stent migration, p 0.28; 9.1 vs. 6.5% with dislodgement during necrosectomy, p 0.704) of the two groups were comparable without significant different. However, the LAMS group associated with early stent revision compared with FCSEMS group (log rank p 0.048).
CONCLUSIONS: EUS-guided drainage of WON using FCSEMSs and LAMSs are comparable in efficacy and safety; however, the latter is associated with early stent revision.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app