A prospective, randomized trial of esophageal submucosal tunnel closure with a stent versus no closure to secure a transesophageal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery access site

Abstract

Secure esophagotomy closure methods are a critical element in the advancement of transesophageal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) procedures. To compare the clinical outcomes in swine receiving an esophageal stent or no stent after a submucosal tunnel NOTES access procedure. Prospective, randomized, controlled trial in 10 Yorkshire swine. Academic center. An endoscopic mucosectomy device was used to create an esophageal mucosal defect. An endoscope was advanced through a submucosal tunnel into the mediastinum and thorax, and diagnostic mediastinoscopy and thoracoscopy were performed. Ten animals were randomized to no stenting (n = 5) or stenting (n = 5) with a prototype small-intestine submucosa-covered stent. Gross and histologic appearance of the mucosectomy and esophagotomy sites as well as clinical outcomes. There was a significant difference in the overall procedure time between the animals that received a stent (35.0 min, range 27-46.0 min) and those with no closure (19.0 min, range 17-32 min) (P value = .018). The unstented group achieved endoscopic and histologic evidence of complete re-epithelialization and healing (100%) at the mucosectomy site compared with the stented group (20%, P = .048). Stent migration into the stomach occurred in two swine. Both groups had complete closure of the submucosal tunnel and well-healed esophagotomy sites. Animal study, small number of subjects. The placement of a covered esophageal stent significantly interferes with mucosectomy site healing.