Peter D. Siersema Radbboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands Procedures that are required for stent placement in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract include endoscopy with a small (4–6 mm) or normal (8–10 mm) caliber gastroscope for strictures in the esophagus, a large (11.5–14 mm) caliber gastroscope or therapeutic duodenoscope (11–12.5 mm) for strictures in the distal stomach/duodenum, and a sigmoidoscope or colonoscope (12–14 mm) for strictures in the colorectum (Figure 25.1). These endoscopic procedures are used for stent placement in the esophagus, distal stomach/duodenum, and colorectum. These strictures are often malignant; however, benign strictures can also be stented, particularly in the esophagus. In addition, stents are placed for malignant esophagorespiratory fistulas and for benign esophageal leaks or ruptures. Basic prerequisites for learning to place stents include skill in upper endoscopy and colonoscopy, interpretation of fluoroscopic images, and experience in general stricture dilation techniques. Prior ERCP training is also very helpful. There is a large variety in the degree of difficulty for stent placement. In general, esophageal stents are easiest to place, although the degree of difficulty may also vary. For example, stent placement of a midesophageal obstruction is usually straightforward, but proximal esophageal lesions are often more challenging to stent. Gastroduodenal and colorectal stents are more difficult to place, which is due to the severity of these obstructions and the local anatomical situation. Endoscopists, who also perform more complex procedures, such as ERCP, should however be able to traverse complex gastroduodenal and colorectal strictures, to interpret difficult fluoroscopic images, and to adequately place stents for malignant obstructions. In general, colorectal stent placement in the setting of an acute complete obstruction is difficult, since the patient is ill, bowel preparation inadequate, the anatomy angulated, and the lumen frequently not seen en face. Another issue is the variety of stents and stent delivery systems that are currently available. It is difficult to master all of the specific characteristics of stents and their deployment systems. All currently available stents have their own degree of shortening in the GI tract. The necessary skills for stent placement in the GI tract are best obtained in high‐volume tertiary referral centers. Patients requiring stent placement are often seen in centers with a high number of referrals for therapeutic endoscopy and/or a large GI oncology practice. The trainee must be supervised by a senior endoscopist (trainer) with expertise in stent placement for different types of strictures throughout the GI tract. The training is supported by instruction in dilation techniques for strictures. It is prerequisite that the trainee is familiar with indications for stent placement, knows contraindications for procedures, and is able to anticipate and to act upon complications that occur due to stenting [1]. Stent placement requires sufficient cognitive skills with regard to the: Necessary technical skills include therapeutic upper and lower endoscopy, guide wire placement, and biliary stent placement. As stent placement is sometimes indicated in extremely tight strictures, the trainee should also be able to dilate these strictures using balloon or Savary‐Gilliard dilation. Training in dilation techniques is covered in Chapter 17 of this volume. Moreover, as stent placement for benign indications is increasingly being performed, the trainee should have the skills to remove various types of stents. The ability to manage procedure‐related (e.g., perforation, hemorrhage) and long‐term (e.g., fistula formation) complications and recurrent obstruction due to stent migration, tumoral or nontumoral tissue overgrowth, or food obstruction is essential. It is important to note that the location of the stricture and its relation to surrounding organs are important to consider prior to stent placement. This is particularly true for obstructions in the proximal and midesophagus, benign esophageal ruptures and leaks, and gastric outlet obstruction. Finally, it is important for trainees to develop skill in coordinating care with other providers such as oncologists, radiologists, general surgeons, and interventional bronchoscopists, in the event of proximal esophageal tumors that threaten upper airway compression. Stent placement for palliation of dysphagia or closure of esophagorespiratory fistulas is an alternative treatment option for patients who are otherwise not candidates for surgical resection. In addition, stents are increasingly used for (prolonged) dilation of benign esophageal strictures and for sealing benign esophageal ruptures or leaks [2]. Prior to esophageal stent placement, the endoscopist should evaluate the following items: In malignant esophageal strictures, it is important to decide whether the patient is “fit enough” to benefit from stent placement. In patients with a WHO performance score of 4 (100% bedridden), the indication should be carefully evaluated. Esophageal tumors can be located in the proximal, mid‐, or distal esophagus. For tumors in the proximal and midesophagus, there is a risk of coexisting tumor ingrowth into the trachea or bronchus or tumor compressing the airways. Placement of a tracheal stent should be considered prior to esophageal stent placement. Stents across the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) are at an increased risk of migration. There is also a risk of gastroesophageal reflux. Moreover, the distal stent end may damage the stomach wall at the level of the lesser curvature when the stent is placed too distally. Partially or fully covered stents are now the predominantly used stent types in the esophagus (Table 25.1) (Figure 25.2). It has been shown that the functional result of uncovered esophageal stents is negatively affected by the high risk of tissue ingrowth through the uncovered stent mesh [3]. Recurrent dysphagia due to stent migration, tissue in‐ or overgrowth, or food impaction is currently the most important cause of a poorly functioning stent. Stent designs have usually one or more items that may prevent recurrent dysphagia (Table 25.2). The optimal stent choice in a particular clinical situation is an important issue. In malignant esophageal strictures, partially covered stents are a valuable option. In benign strictures, fully covered metal or plastic stents are preferable as the risk of nontumoral (hyperplastic) tissue ingrowth is reduced with these designs, making stent removal easier. In benign esophageal ruptures or leaks without a stricture, large caliber covered stent devices are the stent type of choice. If a normal caliber stent is used, migration is a risk. Although fully covered stents can easier be removed than partially covered stents, many experts prefer a partially covered stent in this situation, as the uncovered parts of the stent allow complete sealing and anchoring of the stent. This is however a nonregistered indication of partially covered stents. Table 25.1 Characteristics of some the currently used partially or fully covered self‐expanding esophageal stents. Table 25.2 Characteristics of currently used covered stents to minimize recurrent dysphagia. It is generally believed that stents placed for a tumor causing extrinsic esophageal compression are at an increased risk of migration. Unfortunately, this is not based on comparative studies. Nevertheless, many experts place partially covered stents for extrinsic compression to reduce migration risk. Stents are increasingly being used for strictures in the proximal esophagus, close to the upper esophageal sphincter (UES). Placement at this site requires careful positioning, as the upper stent end should not extend above the UES to prevent the risk of foreign body sensation. Other complications include stent‐induced pain and tracheal compression. If the latter is the case, initial tracheal stent placement is advised. It is recommended that the endoscopist should be skilled and experienced in placing stents in the proximal esophagus. Finally, it is recommended to use only flexible stent designs, for example, the Ultraflex stent (Boston Scientific, Natick, USA) to minimize the risk of complications. As all currently available stents have specific advantages but also drawbacks, we suggest to develop experience with a small selection of stent types, for example, one partially covered metal stent and one fully covered metal or nonmetal (plastic) stent. Hemorrhage is not a very common procedure‐related complication in esophageal stent placement; however, if occurring, it may have a dramatic outcome. Although routine evaluation of coagulation parameters is not indicated, it is recommended to control prothrombin time (PT) and activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) when risk factors for abnormal results present, such as warfarin or heparin use or liver dysfunction. In this section, the antegrade technique (Video 25.1) and the combined antegrade and retrograde (CAR) technique for esophageal stent placement are separately discussed. For antegrade stent placement, the following steps need to be taken:
25
Esophageal, Gastroduodenal, and Colorectal Stenting
Procedure(s) to be considered
Prerequisite level of expertise and skill for learning this
Special considerations
Specific technical and cognitive skill sets
Equipment
Key steps of proper technique
Esophagus
Pre‐esophageal stenting evaluation
Stent type
Covering
Length (cm)
Diameter (mm)
Release system
Radial force
Degree of shortening
Flexibility
Material
Stent manufacturer
Ultraflex
Partial
10, 12, 15
18, 22
Proximal/distal
Low
30–40%
High
Nitinol/polyurethane
Boston Scientific, Natick, MA, USA
Polyflex
Full
9, 12, 15
16, 18, 21
Distal
High
0%
Low
Polyester/silicone
Boston Scientific, Natick, MA, USA
WallFlex
Partial/Full
10, 12, 15
18, 23
Distal
High to strong
30–40%
Moderate
Nitinol/silicone
Boston Scientific, Natick, MA, USA
Evolution
Partial/Full
8, 10, 12.5, 15
20
Distal
Moderate
10–20%
Moderate
Nitinol/silicone
Cook Medical, Limerick, Ireland
SX‐Ella
Full
8.5, 11, 13.5
20
Distal
High
10–20%
Low
Nitinol/polyethylene
Ella, Hradec, Kralove, Czech Republic
Niti‐S
Full
6, 8, 10 12, 15
18
Proximal/distal
Moderate
10%
Moderate
Nitinol/polyurethane
Taewoong, Seoul, South Korea
Alimaxx‐E
Full
7, 10, 12
18, 22
Distal
Low
0%
Moderate
Nitinol/polyurethane
Merit, South Jordan UT, USA
Esophageal stent placement
Antegrade technique