TY - JOUR
T1 - Is a small-caliber or large-caliber endoscope more suitable for colonic self-expandable metallic stent placement? A randomized controlled study
AU - Minoda, Yosuke
AU - Ogino, Haruei
AU - Sumida, Yorinobu
AU - Osoegawa, Takashi
AU - Itaba, Soichi
AU - Hashimoto, Norikazu
AU - Esaki, Mitsuru
AU - Kitagawa, Yusuke
AU - Yodoe, Kentaro
AU - Iboshi, Yoichiro
AU - Matsuguchi, Takahiro
AU - Tadokoro, Mei
AU - Chaen, Tomohito
AU - Kubo, Hiroaki
AU - Kubokawa, Masaru
AU - Harada, Naohiko
AU - Nishizima, Kenichi
AU - Fujii, Hiroyuki
AU - Hata, Yoshitaka
AU - Tanaka, Yoshimasa
AU - Ihara, Eikichi
AU - Ogawa, Yoshihiro
N1 - Funding Information:
We thank Junji Kishimoto, the statistical analysis specialist involved in this study. The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s), 2022.
PY - 2022/1
Y1 - 2022/1
N2 - Objectives: The colonic self-expandable metallic stent (C-SEMS) with a 9-French (Fr) delivery system allows for a small-caliber endoscope (SCE) to be used to treat malignant colonic obstruction. Despite the lack of evidence, the SCE has become popular because it is considered easier to insert than the large-caliber endoscope (LCE). We aimed to determine whether the SCE is more suitable than the LCE for C-SEMS placement. Methods: Between July 2018 and November 2019, 50 consecutive patients who were scheduled to undergo C-SEMS for colon obstruction were recruited in this study. Patients were randomized to the SCE or LCE group. The SCE and LCE were used with 9-Fr and 10-Fr delivery systems, respectively. The primary outcome was the total procedure time. Secondary outcomes were the technical success rate, complication rate, clinical success rate, insertion time, guidewire-passage time, stent-deployment time, and colonic obstruction-scoring-system score. Results: Forty-five patients (SCE group, n = 22; LCE group, n = 23) were analyzed. The procedure time in the LCE group (median, 20.5 min) was significantly (p = 0.024) shorter than that in the SCE group (median, 25.1 min). The insertion time in the LCE group (median, 2.0 min) was significantly (p = 0.0049) shorter than that in the SCE group (median, 6.0 min). A sub-analysis of the procedure difficulties showed that the insertion time in the LCE group (median, 5.0 min) was significantly shorter than that in the SCE group (median, 8.5 min). Conclusion: Both LCE and SCE can be used for C-SEMS; however, LCE is more suitable than SCE as it achieved a faster and equally efficacious C-SEMS placement as that of SCE. Clinical trial registration number: University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN 32748).
AB - Objectives: The colonic self-expandable metallic stent (C-SEMS) with a 9-French (Fr) delivery system allows for a small-caliber endoscope (SCE) to be used to treat malignant colonic obstruction. Despite the lack of evidence, the SCE has become popular because it is considered easier to insert than the large-caliber endoscope (LCE). We aimed to determine whether the SCE is more suitable than the LCE for C-SEMS placement. Methods: Between July 2018 and November 2019, 50 consecutive patients who were scheduled to undergo C-SEMS for colon obstruction were recruited in this study. Patients were randomized to the SCE or LCE group. The SCE and LCE were used with 9-Fr and 10-Fr delivery systems, respectively. The primary outcome was the total procedure time. Secondary outcomes were the technical success rate, complication rate, clinical success rate, insertion time, guidewire-passage time, stent-deployment time, and colonic obstruction-scoring-system score. Results: Forty-five patients (SCE group, n = 22; LCE group, n = 23) were analyzed. The procedure time in the LCE group (median, 20.5 min) was significantly (p = 0.024) shorter than that in the SCE group (median, 25.1 min). The insertion time in the LCE group (median, 2.0 min) was significantly (p = 0.0049) shorter than that in the SCE group (median, 6.0 min). A sub-analysis of the procedure difficulties showed that the insertion time in the LCE group (median, 5.0 min) was significantly shorter than that in the SCE group (median, 8.5 min). Conclusion: Both LCE and SCE can be used for C-SEMS; however, LCE is more suitable than SCE as it achieved a faster and equally efficacious C-SEMS placement as that of SCE. Clinical trial registration number: University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN 32748).
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85123110940&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85123110940&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/17562848211065331
DO - 10.1177/17562848211065331
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85123110940
VL - 15
JO - Therapeutic Advances in Gastroenterology
JF - Therapeutic Advances in Gastroenterology
SN - 1756-283X
ER -