Table 3.
Study | Patients, stents | Site of tumor obstruction | Tumor overgrowth | Migration | Bleeding | Perforation |
Costamagna et al[1] | 202, 212 | Endoscopic duodenal stenting | 12.4% | 1.5% | 3.0% | 0.5% |
van Hooft et al[2] | 50, 57 | Endoscopic stenting for gastric outlet obstruction | 21.0% | 4.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
Jeong et al[4] | 25, 28 | Gastrojejunostomy, esophagojejunostomy, cSEMS | 17.0% | 4.0% | 0.0% | 1.0% |
Chandrasegaram et al[7] | 26, 31 | Endoscopic stenting vs operative gastrojejunostomy | 12.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
Jang et al[17] | 583, 603 | Peripyloric region, nonperipyloric region, duodenum alone anastomosis (Billroth I, Billroth II), jejunum | 3.8% | NM | NM | < 1.0% |
Kim et al[25] | 50, 50 | Endoscopic stenting for malignant gastroduodenal obstructions | 18.0% | 10.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
Wong et al[26] | 6, 6 | Surgical vs endoscopic palliation | NM | NM | NM | NM |
Mosler et al[27] | 36, 52 | Endoscopic stenting of nonesophageal upper gastrointestinal stenosis | 11.0% | 14.0% | 0.0% | 6.0% |
Kim et al[28] | 213, 236 | Malignant gastroduodenal obstruction | 7.0% | 4.0% | 1.0% | 0.0% |
Bang et al[29] | 134, 132 | Endoscopic treatment for malignant antropyloric and duodenal | cSEMS 5.7%SEMS 19.0% | cSEMS 26.4% SEMS 6.3% | 2.2% | < 1.0% |
Keränen et al[30] | 104, 130 | Endoscopic treatment for malignant gastric outlet obstruction | 18.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 1.9% |
Ahn et al[31] | 47, 52 | Malignant gastroduodenal obstruction, uncovered SEMS | 11.0% | 2.0% | 0.0% | 4.0% |
Canena et al[32] | 74, 80 | Endoscopic stenting for gastric outlet obstruction | 9.5% | 0.0% | 1.4% | 0.0% |
Cha et al[33] | 85, 85 | Endoscopic stenting for gastroduodenal obstruction | 29.0% | 4.0% | 4.0% | 4.0% |
Own data | 20, 32 | Small bowel/duodenum | cSEMS 13.0%SEMS 19.0% | cSEMS 56.0%SEMS 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
SEMS: Self-expanding metal stent; cSEMS: Covered SEMS; NM: Not mentioned.