Indications and complications of esophageal self expandable metal stents (SEMS): Results of a national survey

B. Dennert, S. T. Zierer, Francisco C Ramirez

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The self-reported complication rates for the available SEMS, are unknown. Objective: To determine the self-reported indications and complications derived from the use of SEMS by community gastroenterologists. Material and Methods: A mail in survey to ASGE members. Results: A total of 3,414 surveys were mailed. Only 212 (6.2%) responded. 60% of these physicians had experience with SEMS. 72% percent practiced in a the private setting and 75% had placed ≤ 3 SEMS at the time of this survey. A total of 434 SEMS were placed. The indications for SEMS placement are listed Esop CA EGJ CA Extrinsic TE Fist Failed Leak Coated 62 19 21 40 8 6 Uncoated 93 22 20 NA NA NA Immediate technical complications were as follows: Misplacement Failed Expansion Failed deployment Microvasive (M) 3 10 3 Schneider (S) 4 4 1 Other/NS(O/NS) 14 17 9 Total 21/434 (4.8%) 31/434 (7,1%) 13/434 (3%) Immediate patient complications: Chest Pain Bleed Perforation Migration Death M 1 S 13 2 2 1 O/NS 10 1 3 5 1 Total 24 (5.5%) 1 (0.2%) 5 (1.1%) 7 (1.6%) 2 (0.5%) Delayed patient complications. Bleed Perf Migrt Death Tumor GERD TEfis Dysph M 1 4 3 6 9 9 S 1 2 8 2 2 2 7 O/NS 1 1 8 21 19 10 2 22 Tot(%) 2(0.5) 2(0.5) 14(3) 32(7) 27(6) 21(5) 4(1) 38(9) Conclusions: The rate of technical complications varies from 3-7%. Immediate and delayed patient complications are self reported to vary from 0.2%-5.5% and from 0.5 to 9%. respectively.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)333
Number of pages1
JournalGastrointestinal Endoscopy
Volume43
Issue number4
StatePublished - 1996
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

5-chloro-3-tert-butyl-2'-chloro-4'-nitrosalicylanilide
Postal Service
Gastroesophageal Reflux
Chest Pain
Surveys and Questionnaires
Self Expandable Metallic Stents
Physicians
4-(2-(4-isopropylbenzamido)ethoxy)benzoic acid
Neoplasms
Gastroenterologists

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Gastroenterology

Cite this

Indications and complications of esophageal self expandable metal stents (SEMS) : Results of a national survey. / Dennert, B.; Zierer, S. T.; Ramirez, Francisco C.

In: Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Vol. 43, No. 4, 1996, p. 333.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{6587602a799e4d94adbffa3b62b46b6a,
title = "Indications and complications of esophageal self expandable metal stents (SEMS): Results of a national survey",
abstract = "The self-reported complication rates for the available SEMS, are unknown. Objective: To determine the self-reported indications and complications derived from the use of SEMS by community gastroenterologists. Material and Methods: A mail in survey to ASGE members. Results: A total of 3,414 surveys were mailed. Only 212 (6.2{\%}) responded. 60{\%} of these physicians had experience with SEMS. 72{\%} percent practiced in a the private setting and 75{\%} had placed ≤ 3 SEMS at the time of this survey. A total of 434 SEMS were placed. The indications for SEMS placement are listed Esop CA EGJ CA Extrinsic TE Fist Failed Leak Coated 62 19 21 40 8 6 Uncoated 93 22 20 NA NA NA Immediate technical complications were as follows: Misplacement Failed Expansion Failed deployment Microvasive (M) 3 10 3 Schneider (S) 4 4 1 Other/NS(O/NS) 14 17 9 Total 21/434 (4.8{\%}) 31/434 (7,1{\%}) 13/434 (3{\%}) Immediate patient complications: Chest Pain Bleed Perforation Migration Death M 1 S 13 2 2 1 O/NS 10 1 3 5 1 Total 24 (5.5{\%}) 1 (0.2{\%}) 5 (1.1{\%}) 7 (1.6{\%}) 2 (0.5{\%}) Delayed patient complications. Bleed Perf Migrt Death Tumor GERD TEfis Dysph M 1 4 3 6 9 9 S 1 2 8 2 2 2 7 O/NS 1 1 8 21 19 10 2 22 Tot({\%}) 2(0.5) 2(0.5) 14(3) 32(7) 27(6) 21(5) 4(1) 38(9) Conclusions: The rate of technical complications varies from 3-7{\%}. Immediate and delayed patient complications are self reported to vary from 0.2{\%}-5.5{\%} and from 0.5 to 9{\%}. respectively.",
author = "B. Dennert and Zierer, {S. T.} and Ramirez, {Francisco C}",
year = "1996",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "43",
pages = "333",
journal = "Gastrointestinal Endoscopy",
issn = "0016-5107",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Indications and complications of esophageal self expandable metal stents (SEMS)

T2 - Results of a national survey

AU - Dennert, B.

AU - Zierer, S. T.

AU - Ramirez, Francisco C

PY - 1996

Y1 - 1996

N2 - The self-reported complication rates for the available SEMS, are unknown. Objective: To determine the self-reported indications and complications derived from the use of SEMS by community gastroenterologists. Material and Methods: A mail in survey to ASGE members. Results: A total of 3,414 surveys were mailed. Only 212 (6.2%) responded. 60% of these physicians had experience with SEMS. 72% percent practiced in a the private setting and 75% had placed ≤ 3 SEMS at the time of this survey. A total of 434 SEMS were placed. The indications for SEMS placement are listed Esop CA EGJ CA Extrinsic TE Fist Failed Leak Coated 62 19 21 40 8 6 Uncoated 93 22 20 NA NA NA Immediate technical complications were as follows: Misplacement Failed Expansion Failed deployment Microvasive (M) 3 10 3 Schneider (S) 4 4 1 Other/NS(O/NS) 14 17 9 Total 21/434 (4.8%) 31/434 (7,1%) 13/434 (3%) Immediate patient complications: Chest Pain Bleed Perforation Migration Death M 1 S 13 2 2 1 O/NS 10 1 3 5 1 Total 24 (5.5%) 1 (0.2%) 5 (1.1%) 7 (1.6%) 2 (0.5%) Delayed patient complications. Bleed Perf Migrt Death Tumor GERD TEfis Dysph M 1 4 3 6 9 9 S 1 2 8 2 2 2 7 O/NS 1 1 8 21 19 10 2 22 Tot(%) 2(0.5) 2(0.5) 14(3) 32(7) 27(6) 21(5) 4(1) 38(9) Conclusions: The rate of technical complications varies from 3-7%. Immediate and delayed patient complications are self reported to vary from 0.2%-5.5% and from 0.5 to 9%. respectively.

AB - The self-reported complication rates for the available SEMS, are unknown. Objective: To determine the self-reported indications and complications derived from the use of SEMS by community gastroenterologists. Material and Methods: A mail in survey to ASGE members. Results: A total of 3,414 surveys were mailed. Only 212 (6.2%) responded. 60% of these physicians had experience with SEMS. 72% percent practiced in a the private setting and 75% had placed ≤ 3 SEMS at the time of this survey. A total of 434 SEMS were placed. The indications for SEMS placement are listed Esop CA EGJ CA Extrinsic TE Fist Failed Leak Coated 62 19 21 40 8 6 Uncoated 93 22 20 NA NA NA Immediate technical complications were as follows: Misplacement Failed Expansion Failed deployment Microvasive (M) 3 10 3 Schneider (S) 4 4 1 Other/NS(O/NS) 14 17 9 Total 21/434 (4.8%) 31/434 (7,1%) 13/434 (3%) Immediate patient complications: Chest Pain Bleed Perforation Migration Death M 1 S 13 2 2 1 O/NS 10 1 3 5 1 Total 24 (5.5%) 1 (0.2%) 5 (1.1%) 7 (1.6%) 2 (0.5%) Delayed patient complications. Bleed Perf Migrt Death Tumor GERD TEfis Dysph M 1 4 3 6 9 9 S 1 2 8 2 2 2 7 O/NS 1 1 8 21 19 10 2 22 Tot(%) 2(0.5) 2(0.5) 14(3) 32(7) 27(6) 21(5) 4(1) 38(9) Conclusions: The rate of technical complications varies from 3-7%. Immediate and delayed patient complications are self reported to vary from 0.2%-5.5% and from 0.5 to 9%. respectively.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33748986582&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33748986582&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:33748986582

VL - 43

SP - 333

JO - Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

JF - Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

SN - 0016-5107

IS - 4

ER -