Removable Self-Expanding Plastic Esophageal Stent as a Continuous, Non-Permanent Dilator in Treating Refractory Benign Esophageal Strictures: A Prospective Two-Center Study

Abstract

Refractory benign esophageal strictures (RBES) are difficult to treat requiring frequent dilatations or surgery. Conceptually, while maintaining luminal patency, if a dilator is kept in place continuously for several weeks, the benefits may be longer lasting. An expandable esophageal stent will be ideal in achieving the above. Preliminary results on using a removable self-expanding plastic esophageal stent, Polyflex stent (PS), for treating RBES have been mixed. To evaluate the efficacy of PS in the treatment of RBES. Forty patients with RBES [mean age 60 +/- 15 SD yrs, female 14, male 26, Anastomotic 12 (fistula 4), Corrosive 8, Radiation 7, Pill induced 4, Post trauma 3 (fistula 3), Peptic 2, Others 4 (fistula 1)] were prospectively studied. Continuous non-permanent dilation was performed by placing a PS and removing it after 4 wk. The patients were then followed at regular intervals. Pre-insertion baseline data and post-removal information on dysphagia status, complications, and change in outcome were prospectively collected. The technical success in stent placement and stent removal were 95% and 94%, respectively. Mean post-stent dysphagia score was 0.6 +/- 0.7 SD, which was significantly better than pre-stent scores (3.0 +/- 0.8 SD; P < 0.001). At median follow-up of 53 wk (range 11-156), only 40% (intention to treat 30%) patients were dysphagia-free. However, the overall change in outcome from baseline options (ongoing dilatations, or surgery) was 66% (dysphagia-free 12, did not want removal 2, did not remove 1, preferred long-term stenting 10). The stent was successful in closing the fistula in five of eight (63%) patients. Complications observed were migration eight (22%), severe chest pain four (11%), bleeding three (8%), perforation two (5.5%), GE reflux two (5.5%), impaction two (5.5%), and new fistula one (2.7%). There was one mortality from massive bleeding. It was feasible to deploy and remove PS stents in the majority of patients with RBES. Some patients achieved long-term relief without further re-interventions while several others re-strictured and preferred long-term stenting over repeated dilations or surgery. The procedure carries significant risks and hence should only be considered in carefully selected patients.