Comparison between uncovered and covered self-expandable metal stent placement in malignant duodenal obstruction

doi:10.3748/wjg.v21.i5.1580

Advanced Search

BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge

Home / Archive / Volume 21, Issue 5

This Article

(340)

(1528)

(0)

(7213)

(33)

Peer-Review Report of This Article

Citation of this article

Corresponding Author of This Article

Research Domain of This Article

Article-Type of This Article

Open-Access Policy of This Article

Times Cited Counts in Google of This Article

Journal Information of This Article

Publication Name

World Journal of Gastroenterology

ISSN

1007-9327

Publisher of This Article

Baishideng Publishing Group Inc, 7041 Koll Center Parkway, Suite 160, Pleasanton, CA 94566, USA

- Full Article with Cover (PDF)
- Full Article (XML)

Retrospective Study

World J Gastroenterol. Feb 7, 2015; 21(5): 1580-1587
Published online Feb 7, 2015. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i5.1580

Table 1 Baseline characteristics

	Stent type		P value
	Uncovered(n = 38)	Covered(n = 29)	P value
Age (yr)	68.9 ± 10.2	68.5 ± 11.2	0.860
Sex (M/F)	18/20 (47.4/52.6)	11/18 (37.9/62.1)	0.440
ECOG PS (0/1/2/3/4)	0/9/16/9/4	0/5/10/8/6	0.203¹
Previous treatment
Operation	6 (9.0)	5 (7.5)	1.000
Chemotherapy	10 (14.9)	5 (7.5)	0.377
Previous biliary drainage
PTBD	5 (13.2)	7 (24.1)	0.246
ERBD	19 (50.0)	8 (27.6)	0.064
PTBD and ERBD	5 (13.2)	0 (0.0)	0.064
Underlying malignancy			0.423¹
Pancreatic cancer	22 (32.8)	9 (13.4)
Bile duct cancer	4 (6.0)	8 (11.9)
Gallbladder cancer	4 (6.0)	5 (7.5)
Ampullary cancer	3 (4.5)	2 (3.0)
Duodenal cancer	1 (1.5)	3 (4.5)
Hepatocellular carcinoma	1 (1.5)	1 (1.5)
Others	3 (4.5)	1 (1.5)
Cancer stage			0.335¹
I	1 (2.6)	1 (3.4)
II	3 (7.9)	5 (17.2)
III	2 (5.3)	1 (3.4)
IV	32 (84.2)	22 (75.9)
Stent diameter (mm)	19.8 ± 0.55	19.4 ± 0.92	0.699
Stent length (mm)	99.5 ± 17.1	101.4 ± 14.3	0.688
Stent number			0.256
1 stent	35 (53.0)	28 (42.4)
2 stents	3 (4.5)	0 (0.0)
Median time interval to intervention from	96.5 (3-803)	118.0 (1-2930)	0.699
Initial diagnosis (d)
Chemotherapy after procedure	11 (28.9)	5 (17.2)	0.265
Median duration of follow-up (d)	71 (8-592)	60 (9-827)	0.411

¹Linear by linear association. Values are presented as n (%), mean ± SD, or d (range). ECOG PS: Eastern cooperative oncology group performance status; PTBD: Percutaneous biliary drainage; ERBD: Endoscopic retrograde biliary drainage.

Full Size Table

Citation: Kim JW, Jeong JB, Lee KL, Kim BG, Ahn DW, Lee JK, Kim SH. Comparison between uncovered and covered self-expandable metal stent placement in malignant duodenal obstruction. World J Gastroenterol 2015; 21(5): 1580-1587
URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v21/i5/1580.htm
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v21.i5.1580

Kim JW, Jeong JB, Lee KL, Kim BG, Ahn DW, Lee JK, Kim SH. Comparison between uncovered and covered self-expandable metal stent placement in malignant duodenal obstruction. World J Gastroenterol 2015; 21(5): 1580-1587 [PMID: 25663777 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i5.1580]

All content on this site: Copyright © 1993-2026 Baishideng Publishing Group Inc, its licensors, and contributors. All rights are reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies. For all open access content, the relevant licensing terms apply.