We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Fully vs. partially covered selfexpandable metal stent for palliation of malignant esophageal strictures: a randomized trial (the COPAC study).
Endoscopy 2018 October
BACKGROUND: Covered esophageal self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) are currently used for palliation of malignant dysphagia. The optimal extent of the covering to prevent recurrent obstruction is unknown. Therefore, we aimed to compare fully covered (FC) versus partially covered (PC) SEMSs in patients with incurable malignant esophageal stenosis.
METHODS: In this multicenter randomized controlled trial, 98 incurable patients with dysphagia caused by a malignant stricture of the esophagus or cardia were randomized 1:1 to an FC-SEMS or PC-SEMS. The primary outcome was recurrent obstruction after endoscopic SEMS placement. Secondary outcomes were technical and clinical success, adverse events, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Patients were followed until 6 months after SEMS placement or to SEMS removal, second SEMS insertion, or death, whichever came first.
RESULTS: Recurrent obstruction after SEMS placement was similar for both types of stents: 19 % for FC-SEMSs and 22 % for PC-SEMSs ( P = 0.65). The times to recurrent obstruction did not differ. The frequency of adverse events was similar between the two groups, with major adverse events occurring in 38 % and 47 % of patients for FC-SEMSs and PC-SEMSs, respectively ( P = 0.34). No significant differences were seen in technical success, improvement of dysphagia, and HRQoL. Proximal esophageal stenosis and female sex were independently associated with recurrent obstruction and/or major adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS: Esophageal FC-SEMSs did not reveal a lower recurrent obstruction rate compared with PC-SEMSs in the palliative management of malignant dysphagia.
METHODS: In this multicenter randomized controlled trial, 98 incurable patients with dysphagia caused by a malignant stricture of the esophagus or cardia were randomized 1:1 to an FC-SEMS or PC-SEMS. The primary outcome was recurrent obstruction after endoscopic SEMS placement. Secondary outcomes were technical and clinical success, adverse events, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Patients were followed until 6 months after SEMS placement or to SEMS removal, second SEMS insertion, or death, whichever came first.
RESULTS: Recurrent obstruction after SEMS placement was similar for both types of stents: 19 % for FC-SEMSs and 22 % for PC-SEMSs ( P = 0.65). The times to recurrent obstruction did not differ. The frequency of adverse events was similar between the two groups, with major adverse events occurring in 38 % and 47 % of patients for FC-SEMSs and PC-SEMSs, respectively ( P = 0.34). No significant differences were seen in technical success, improvement of dysphagia, and HRQoL. Proximal esophageal stenosis and female sex were independently associated with recurrent obstruction and/or major adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS: Esophageal FC-SEMSs did not reveal a lower recurrent obstruction rate compared with PC-SEMSs in the palliative management of malignant dysphagia.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
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