Table 3.
Technical and clinical success of enteral stent placement n (%)
| Overall (n = 1281) | UCSEMS (n = 970) | PCSEMS (n = 311) | P value1 | |
| Technical success | 1246 (97.3) | 937 (96.6) | 309 (99.4) | 0.008 |
| Reasons for technical failure | ||||
| Inability to pass guidewire | 13 (1.0) | 13 (1.3) | 0 | |
| Looping/buckling of delivery system | 2 (0.2) | 0 | 2 (0.6) | |
| Stent malposition | 1 (0.1) | 1 (0.1) | 0 | |
| Stent migration during deployment | 4 (0.3) | 4 (0.4) | 0 | |
| Insufficient deployment | 4 (0.3) | 4 (0.4) | 0 | |
| Colonic stent inserted | 1 (0.1) | 1 (0.1) | 0 | |
| No stenosis at endoscopy | 1 (0.1) | 1 (0.1) | 0 | |
| Procedural perforation | 1 (0.1) | 1 (0.1) | 0 | |
| Not specified | 8 (0.6) | 8 (0.8) | 0 | |
| Clinical success | 1098 (85.7) | 811 (83.6) | 287 (92.3) | < 0.001 |
1
Comparison of UCSEMS and PCSEMS using Fisher’s exact test. UCSEMS: Uncovered self-expandable metal stents; PCSEMS: Partially covered self-expandable metal stents.