Self-expandable metal stents for malignant gastric outlet obstruction: A pooled analysis of prospective literature

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

¹Comparison of UCSEMS and PCSEMS using Fisher’s exact test. UCSEMS: Uncovered self-expandable metal stents; PCSEMS: Partially covered self-expandable metal stents.