Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

Clin Endosc : Clinical Endoscopy

Search
Advanced Search
OPEN ACCESS
mobile search button mobile menu button

Articles

Page Path
HOME > Clin Endosc > Ahead-of print articles > Article
Review Role of fully covered metal stents in the management of chronic pancreatitis
Younghun Jeonorcid, Hoonsub Soorcid, Sung Jo Bangorcid

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2024.349
Published online: May 8, 2025

Department of Internal Medicine, Ulsan University Hospital, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Ulsan, Korea

Correspondence: Hoonsub So Department of Internal Medicine, Ulsan University Hospital, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 25 Daehakbyeongwon-ro, Dong-gu, Ulsan 44033, Korea E-mail: hoon3112@gmail.com
• Received: December 26, 2024   • Revised: February 10, 2025   • Accepted: February 13, 2025

© 2025 Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

  • 221 Views
  • 27 Download
Full Article

Download PDF Download PDF

  • Chronic pancreatitis (CP), a progressive inflammatory disease that results in irreversible pancreatic damage, is often complicated by ductal strictures and debilitating pain. Fully covered self-expandable metal stents (FCSEMS) have emerged as significant innovations in the endoscopic management of refractory pancreatic duct strictures. This review synthesizes recent evidence highlighting the benefits and limitations of FCSEMS, such as superior patency, reduced need for reinterventions, and effective symptom relief compared to traditional plastic stents, alongside risks, such as stent migration and de novo strictures. A comparison with plastic stents and an algorithm for pancreatic duct stricture management are provided. Regional variations in clinical guidelines from the United States, Europe, Japan, and Korea reflect diverse approaches to integrating FCSEMS into practice. Emerging innovations in stent technology are promising for improving CP management outcomes.
  • Keywords: Chronic pancreatitis; Endoscopy; Pain management; Pancreatic ducts; Stents
Chronic pancreatitis (CP) is a progressive fibro-inflammatory condition that causes irreversible structural damage to the pancreas. It is characterized by chronic abdominal pain, pancreatic duct strictures, and endocrine and exocrine insufficiency.1,2 Pain, reported in up to 85% of patients,3 is the most challenging symptom, often resulting from increased ductal pressure due to dominant pancreatic duct strictures2. The management of CP-related pain requires a stepwise approach, starting with minimally invasive endoscopic procedures and escalating to surgical interventions when necessary,1 since treatments can result in complications, such as bleeding, infection, or even death.4,5 The advent of fully covered self-expandable metal stents (FCSEMS) has advanced the endoscopic management of CP-related pancreatic duct strictures owing to their superior patency, larger lumen, and ability to prevent tissue ingrowth compared with plastic stents, although their use is tempered by potential complications. With such concerns, some guidelines, such as the 2024 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guidelines6 suggest against the routine use of FCSEMS for refractory pancreatic duct strictures and recommend individualized patient assessment. This review focuses on the role of FCSEMS in the management of CP-related strictures, emphasizing their benefits, limitations, and recent evidence.
Surgical and endoscopic treatments are both used to manage pain in CP; however, surgery often provides superior long-term outcomes. A meta-analysis by Mendieta et al.,7 including 13 studies and 981 patients, compared surgical and endoscopic interventions for pain relief in patients with CP. The analysis found that surgery offered significantly better long-term pain relief, with a pooled relative risk (RR) of 1.35 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12–1.63; p<0.001). Additionally, surgical treatment reduced the need for reinterventions compared to endoscopic approaches (RR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.16–0.74). Similarly, Ma et al.8 conducted a meta-analysis comparing these interventions and reported that surgery was associated with superior pain relief (RR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.11–1.81) and a lower rate of endocrine insufficiency (RR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.42–0.77). Despite these advantages, surgery is often reserved for patients who fail to respond to less invasive therapies. The 2024 ASGE guidelines primarily recommend surgical approaches for CP-related pancreatic duct strictures and emphasize the importance of timely surgical referral, noting that prolonged endotherapy can negatively impact surgical outcomes, especially in patients with ductal strictures at the tail or large stones and dense calcifications, which would cause difficulties in complete endoscopic relief of the obstruction.6,9 However, guidelines from the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) advocate a stepwise approach to pain management and recommend endoscopic therapy as the first-line option because of its minimally invasive nature and lower perioperative risks.2,4 For patients with significant comorbidities or a preference for avoiding major surgery, endoscopic techniques, such as stent placement and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy, remain viable alternatives. This stepwise approach balances the efficacy of surgical interventions with the need to minimize patient morbidity, highlighting the importance of tailoring treatment strategies to individual patient profiles. However, a stepwise approach may fail to achieve optimal timing for surgery.
Notably, the routine use of FCSEMS for refractory main pancreatic duct strictures is not recommended because there is scarce evidence of its efficacy and safety. No randomized prospective studies have compared the use of metal and plastic stents in the management of pancreatic duct strictures associated with CP. However, some single-arm studies have demonstrated several advantages of FCSEMS over plastic stents. A meta-analysis by Tringali et al.10 reported that FCSEMS achieved a 92% rate of pain resolution and a 91% rate of stricture resolution, outperforming multiple plastic stents (MPS), which showed 83% of stricture resolution.11 Supporting this, a systematic review and meta-analysis by Sofi et al.12 compared FCSEMS with MPS in refractory pancreatic duct strictures, revealing no significant difference in the overall stricture resolution rates between the two groups. However, FCSEMS significantly reduced the number of endoscopic interventions required, with fewer procedure-related complications, suggesting improved procedural efficiency and patient convenience. Similarly, Sharaiha et al.3 highlighted the reduced need for repeated endoscopic procedures with FCSEMS compared to plastic stents, enhancing patient convenience and reducing healthcare burdens. The structural design of the FCSEMS, featuring a larger lumen diameter, facilitates more effective drainage of pancreatic secretions and reduces the risk of stent occlusion. This design also prevents tissue ingrowth, which is a common complication observed with plastic stents and ensures safer and easier stent removal. These benefits are reflected in the current clinical guidelines. The ESGE recommends the use of FCSEMS for refractory strictures or when plastic stents fail.4 Similarly, the AGA supports the use of FCSEMS in specific scenarios of CP.2 Additionally, the Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery has provided guidelines that align with these recommendations, endorsing the use of FCSEMS in the management of pancreatic duct strictures.1 However, despite these benefits, adverse events, such as stent migration and de novo strictures remain concerns, and in addition to scarce well-designed prospective comparative trials, prevent the routine use of FCSEMS, as suggested by the ASGE guideline.6 Migration rates vary widely, from 2.8% in studies utilizing anti-migrative designs, such as flared stents to 47.7% in cases with softer stents lacking such features, as reported by Sherman et al.13 De novo strictures have been observed in up to 48.6% of patients, particularly those with prolonged stent placement, as noted by Ko et al.14 Nonetheless, innovations in stent design have significantly mitigated these risks. Considering the high efficacy rates in symptom relief and ductal patency, along with the manageable adverse event profile, there remains a strong argument for the selective use of FCSEMS in managing refractory pancreatic duct strictures, particularly when MPS therapy fails to achieve adequate results (Table 1).
Over the past decade, FCSEMS have been extensively investigated for their efficacy and safety in the management of CP-related ductal strictures (Table 2).3,13-24 Research from the United States has been pivotal, with studies such as Sharaiha et al.3 demonstrating significant clinical success, reporting an 87.9% resolution of ductal strictures and reduced procedural frequency compared with plastic stents. Similarly, Sherman et al.13 highlighted the technical success of soft FCSEMS, achieving a 97% success rate, although challenges, such as stent migration (47.7%) remain critical considerations. In Europe, Tringali et al.15 reported long-term stricture resolution in 93.3% of cases, while Korpela et al.16 highlighted a resolution rate of 70.6% with a recurrence rate of 30.0% following stent removal.
In Japan, innovative designs have contributed to improved outcomes; for example, Ogura et al.17 achieved a 100% stricture resolution rate, and Matsubara et al.18 reported a resolution rate of 80% with improved stent designs, such as the Niti-S Bumpy stent. Yamada et al.19 explored a dumbbell-type stent design and reported 86.3% resolution and no symptom recurrence after removal.
In India, Shah et al.20 provided prospective evidence, reporting a resolution rate of 86.1% with manageable complications. Recent findings by Rai et al.21 underscore the versatility of FCSEMS in complex cases, with a 100% resolution rate and limited complications.
Korean researchers have made significant contributions in advancing the application and understanding of FCSEMS in the treatment of CP. Oh et al.22 investigated the outcomes of a 6-mm diameter FCSEMS for benign refractory pancreatic duct strictures and reported high technical success (100%) and clinical success (83.3%) rates, with long-term pain relief in 86.7% of patients after stent removal during a median follow-up of 47.3 months. Ko et al.14 provided an 11-year follow-up study demonstrating an 85.1% stricture resolution rate with sustained pain relief, although stent-induced de novo strictures were noted in 48.6% of patients. Lee et al.23 compared FCSEMS with plastic stents and found superior outcomes in terms of stricture resolution (87.0% vs. 42.0%) and pain relief (76.9% vs. 53.7%) during a median follow-up of 33.7 months. Innovations in stent design were also explored by Lee et al.24 who introduced a modified non-flared FCSEMS to reduce migration and stent-induced ductal injuries. Their study reported a technical success rate of 100%, with no FCSEMS-related de novo strictures during a median follow-up period of 34 months. These studies collectively highlight FCSEMS as a pivotal advancement in the endoscopic management of pancreatic duct strictures, providing durable outcomes and reduced procedural burden while paving the way for further innovation in stent design and patient selection.
Adverse events associated with FCSEMS in CP have been extensively analyzed, with stent migration, de novo strictures, and other complications being the most frequently reported (Table 3).3,13-24 To control FCSEMS-specific adverse events, such as de novo strictures and stent migration, multiple dedicated stents have been developed and used (Table 4).14,18,19,24 Stent migration rates vary widely, from 2.8% in studies using flared designs, such as Oh et al.22 to 47.7% in Sherman et al.,13 which used softer stents without anti-migrative features. Ko et al.14 reported a migration rate of 17.1% over an 11-year follow-up period using flared stents, highlighting the role of anti-migration designs in mitigating this complication. However, while these features reduce migration risks, they may contribute to de novo strictures, as noted by Ko et al.,14 in where 48.6% of the patients developed strictures following prolonged stent placement. Conversely, shorter stent indwelling durations, as reported by Oh et al.,22 are associated with fewer de novo strictures, suggesting that the timing of stent removal is a critical factor in minimizing complications.
Other adverse events included cholangitis, severe abdominal pain, and acute pancreatitis. Severe abdominal pain was reported in 8.3% of cases by Shah et al.,20 while post-ERCP pancreatitis was observed in 2.8% of patients by Oh et al.22 The cholangitis rates range from 2% to 20%, with higher rates often associated with prolonged stent placement or inadequate drainage. These findings underline the importance of optimizing the stent design, determining the appropriate indwelling duration, and carefully selecting patients to minimize the risk of adverse events. Recent innovations aim to balance the benefits of anti-migratory stents with their potential to induce ductal injury, paving the way for safer and more effective stent technologies.
The management of pain in CP should follow a stepwise algorithm, integrating both endoscopic and surgical options, while considering individualized patient factors. The initial treatment typically involves endoscopic management with a single plastic stent, which is maintained for up to 1 year.4 If the pain worsens during this period or persists beyond 1 year, additional plastic stents can be introduced. For patients with refractory pain despite MPS, the placement of FCSEMS is considered. However, the 2024 ASGE guidelines emphasize that FCSEMS should not be used routinely and advocate for individualized decision-making based on patient-specific factors, including the presence of comorbidities, prior stent failures, and tolerance to invasive procedures.6 Patients with significant surgical risks owing to comorbidities may benefit from prolonged endoscopic therapy, whereas those with recurrent stent occlusions or intolerance to repeated endoscopic interventions may be better suited for early surgical consultations. If FCSEMS placement fails to achieve pain relief, surgical intervention should be considered as the definitive approach because surgery offers superior long-term pain control in numerous cases.7 This algorithm ensures that treatment decisions are tailored to the patient’s clinical context, thereby optimizing both efficacy and safety (Fig. 1).
For the optimal treatment of CP-related strictures, patient-specific factors (comorbidities, previous stent failures, and tolerance to invasive procedures), institutional experience, and cost should be considered. The FCSEMS represents a transformative advancement in the endoscopic management of CP-related pain. Although surgery offers superior long-term outcomes, FCSEMS provide a minimally invasive and effective alternative, particularly in patients for whom surgical intervention is unsuitable. Further research should focus on optimizing stent designs to reduce complications, such as migration, and refining patient selection criteria to maximize therapeutic success.
Fig. 1.
Management algorithm for pain in chronic pancreatitis. FCSEMS, fully covered metal stent.
ce-2024-349f1.jpg
Table 1.
Comparing FCSEMS and plastic stents
Feature FCSEMS Plastic stents
Pain resolution High (up to 92%) Moderate (60% to 80%)
Stricture resolution High (up to 91%) Moderate (60% to 80%)
Stent migration High (up to 47.7%) Low (5% to 15%)
Stent occlusion Lower risk due to larger lumen Higher risk of occlusion
Risk of de novo strictures Higher risk in prolonged use Lower risk
Cost Higher initial cost Lower cost
Procedure frequency Less frequent procedures needed More frequent procedures needed

FCSEMS, fully covered self-expandable metal stents.

Table 2.
Studies regarding FCSEMS for CP in recent 10 years
Study Year Patient (n) Stent type Diameter (mm) Length (cm) Planned stent removal (mo) Stricture resolution (%) (n/total n) Symptom recurrence after stent removal (%) (n/total n) Follow-up duration (mo)
Ogura et al.17 2016 13 Niti-S, S-type 6 6, 8 6 100 (13/13) 23.1 (3/13) 9 (median)
Matsubara et al.18 2016 10 Niti-S, Bumpy 8, 10 5–10 3 80 (8/10) 70 (7/10) 35 (median)
Tringali et al.15 2018 15 Niti-S, Bumpy 6, 8 3, 4, 5 6 93.3 (14/15) 11.1 (1/9)a) 39 (mean)
Oh et al.22 2018 18 Niti-S, Bumpy 7.5 5, 6, 7, 8 6 83.3 (15/18) 13.3 (2/15) 47 (median)
Yamada et al.19 2018 22 BONASTENT M-intraductal 8, 10 3–7 5 86.3% (19/22) 0 (0/22) 12.5 (median)
Sharaiha et al.3 2019 33 WallFlex 8, 10 N/A 3 87.9 (29/33) 36.3 (12/33) 14 (mean)
Korpela et al.16 2019 17 Niti-S, Bumpy/Hanaro/Viabil 8, 10 3, 4, 6 5 70.6 (12/17) 30.0 (3/10)a) 29 (median)
Lee et al.24 2020 25 Bonastent, M-Intraductal 8, 10 3, 5 3 100 (25/25) 12.0 (3/25) 34 (median)
Lee et al.23 2021 26 Niti-S, Bumpy 15%/Niti-S, D 38%/Niti-S, Com-VI7%/HANARO 19%/EGIS, Flower 19% 8, 10 4–8 6 87 (23) 27.3 (6/26) 25 (median)
Shah et al.20 2022 36 Niti-S, Bumpy 6, 8 8 3 N/A 44.4 (8/18) 19 (median)
Ko et al.14 2023 35 Niti-S, Bumpy 6, 8, 10 4–8 3 100 (35/35) 54.3 (19/35) 136 (median)
Sherman et al.13 2023 67 WallFlex Pancreatic RX fully covered soft stent System 6, 8 4, 5, 6 6 N/A 73.9 (55/67) N/A
Rai et al.21 2023 11 Niti-S, Bumpy 8, 10 6-10 6 100 (11/11) 90.9 (10/11) 48 (median)

FCSEMS, fully covered self-expandable metal stent; CP, chronic pancreatitis; N/A, not available.

a)Patients lost to follow-up were excluded.

Table 3.
Adverse events reported in studies regarding FCSEMS for chronic pancreatitis in recent 10 years
Study Year Patient (n) Stent migration (%) (n/total n) Stent-induced de novo stricture (%) (n/total n) Severe abdominal pain (%) (n/total n) Cholangitis (%) (n/total n) Pancreatitis (%) (n/total n) Others (%) (n/total n)
Ogura et al.17 2016 13 15.3 (2/13) 0 7.7 (1/13) 0 0 0
Matsubara et al.18 2016 10 20.0 (2/10) 20.0 (2/10) 30.0 (3/10) 0 20.0 (2/10) 12.5 (1/8)a) impaction of stone, 12.5 (1/8)a) pseudocyst
Tringali et al.15 2018 15 46.7 (7/15) 26.7 (4/15) 0 10.0 (1/10)b) 0 0
Oh et al.22 2018 18 0 0 16.7 (3/18) 0 0 N/A
Yamada et al.19 2018 22 0 4.5 (1/22) 9.1 (2/22) 0 0 9.1 (2/22) tearing metal stent
Sharaiha et al.3 2019 33 0 0 18.2 (6/33) 6.1 (2/33) 0 3.0 (1/33) impaction of stent, distal end
Korpela et al.16 2019 17 35 (7/17) 0 11.7 (2/17) 11.7 (2/17) 17.6 (3/17) 0
Lee et al.24 2020 25 4.0 (1/25) 0 0 0 0 0
Lee et al.23 2021 26 27 (7/26) 23 (6/26) 0 3.8 (1/26) 19.2 (5/26) 8 (2/26) stent fracture
Shah et al,20 2022 36 16.7 (6/36) 8.3 (3/36) 8.3 (3/36) 0 2.8 (1/36) 0
Ko et al.14 2023 35 0 48.6 (17/35) 0 5.7 (2/35) 0 0
Sherman et al.13 2023 67 47.7 (31/65) 7.7 (5/65) 14.9 (12/67) 1.5 (1/67) 11.9 (10/67) 1.5 (1/67) duodenal ulceration
Rai et al.21 2023 11 0 9.1 (1/11) 0 0 0 0

FCSEMS, fully covered self-expandable metal stent; N/A, not available.

a)Patients lost to follow-up were excluded.

b)Patients who received FCSEMS through the major papilla.

Table 4.
Dedicated FCSEMS for adverse events
Dedicated FCSEMS Study Reduction in stent migration De novo stricture incidence Key findings
Flared-end FCSEMS Ko et al.14 Reduced to 0% 48.6% (not reduced) Flared ends reduced migration significantly, but high de novo stricture rate observed.
Dumbbell-type FCSEMS Yamada et al.19 Reduced to 0% 4.50% Dumbbell design reduced migration and de novo strictures effectively.
Niti-S bumpy stent Matsubara et al.18 Reduced to 20% 20% Improved stent design reduced migration but still had notable de novo strictures.
Modified non-flared short FCSEMS Lee et al.24 Reduced to 4% 0% (no de novo strictures reported) Modified design minimized both migration and de novo strictures.

FCSEMS, fully covered self-expandable metal stent.

  • 1. Shimizu K, Ito T, Irisawa A, et al. Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for chronic pancreatitis 2021. J Gastroenterol 2022;57:709–724.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 2. Strand DS, Law RJ, Yang D, et al. AGA clinical practice update on the endoscopic approach to recurrent acute and chronic pancreatitis: expert review. Gastroenterology 2022;163:1107–1114.ArticlePubMed
  • 3. Sharaiha RZ, Novikov A, Weaver K, et al. Fully covered self-expanding metal stents for refractory pancreatic duct strictures in symptomatic chronic pancreatitis, US experience. Endosc Int Open 2019;7:E1419–E1423.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 4. Dumonceau JM, Delhaye M, Tringali A, et al. Endoscopic treatment of chronic pancreatitis: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline: updated August 2018. Endoscopy 2019;51:179–193.ArticlePubMed
  • 5. Napolitano M, Brody F, Lee KB, et al. 30-Day outcomes and predictors of complications after Puestow procedure. Am J Surg 2020;220:372–375.ArticlePubMed
  • 6. ASGE Standards of Practice Committee, Sheth SG, Machicado JD, et al. American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on the role of endoscopy in the management of chronic pancreatitis: summary and recommendations. Gastrointest Endosc 2024;100:584–594.ArticlePubMed
  • 7. Mendieta PJ, Sagae VM, Ribeiro IB, et al. Pain relief in chronic pancreatitis: endoscopic or surgical treatment?: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 2021;35:4085–4094.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 8. Ma KW, So H, Shin E, et al. Endoscopic versus surgical intervention for painful obstructive chronic pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Med 2021;10:2636.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 9. Issa Y, Kempeneers MA, Bruno MJ, et al. Effect of early surgery vs endoscopy-first approach on pain in patients with chronic pancreatitis: the ESCAPE randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2020;323:237–247.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 10. Tringali A, Costa D, Rota M, et al. Covered self-expandable metal stents for pancreatic duct stricture: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Endosc Int Open 2022;10:E1311–E1321.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 11. Tringali A, Bove V, Vadalà di Prampero SF, et al. Long-term follow-up after multiple plastic stenting for refractory pancreatic duct strictures in chronic pancreatitis. Endoscopy 2019;51:930–935.ArticlePubMed
  • 12. Sofi AA, Khan MA, Ahmad S, et al. Comparison of clinical outcomes of multiple plastic stents and covered metal stent in refractory pancreatic ductal strictures in chronic pancreatitis- a systematic review and meta-analysis. Pancreatology 2021;21:854–861.ArticlePubMed
  • 13. Sherman S, Kozarek RA, Costamagna G, et al. Soft self-expandable metal stent to treat painful pancreatic duct strictures secondary to chronic pancreatitis: a prospective multicenter trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2023;97:472–481.e3.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 14. Ko SW, So H, Oh D, et al. Long-term clinical outcomes of a fully covered self-expandable metal stent for refractory pancreatic strictures in symptomatic chronic pancreatitis: an 11-year follow-up study. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2023;38:460–467.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 15. Tringali A, Vadalà di Prampero SF, Landi R, Bove V, et al. Fully covered self-expandable metal stents to dilate persistent pancreatic strictures in chronic pancreatitis: long-term follow-up from a prospective study. Gastrointest Endosc 2018;88:939–946.ArticlePubMed
  • 16. Korpela T, Udd M, Lindström O, et al. Fully covered self-expanding metal stents for benign refractory pancreatic duct strictures in chronic pancreatitis. Scand J Gastroenterol 2019;54:365–370.ArticlePubMed
  • 17. Ogura T, Onda S, Takagi W, et al. Placement of a 6 mm, fully covered metal stent for main pancreatic head duct stricture due to chronic pancreatitis: a pilot study (with video). Therap Adv Gastroenterol 2016;9:722–728.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 18. Matsubara S, Sasahira N, Isayama H, et al. Prospective pilot study of fully covered self-expandable metal stents for refractory benign pancreatic duct strictures: long-term outcomes. Endosc Int Open 2016;4:E1215–E1222.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 19. Yamada T, Ogura T, Okuda A, et al. Pilot study of dumbbell-type covered self-expandable metal stent deployment for benign pancreatic duct stricture (with Videos). J Gastrointest Surg 2018;22:2194–2200.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 20. Shah BB, Rodge GA, Goenka U, et al. A prospective study of fully covered self-expandable metal stents for refractory benign pancreatic duct strictures. Clin Endosc 2022;55:793–800.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 21. Rai P, Kumar P, Kumar A, et al. Self-expanding metallic stent for refractory pancreatic duct stricture in chronic pancreatitis: a prospective follow-up study. Indian J Gastroenterol 2023 Sep 28 [Epub]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12664-023-01445-6ArticlePubMed
  • 22. Oh D, Lee JH, Song TJ, et al. Long-term outcomes of 6-mm diameter fully covered self-expandable metal stents in benign refractory pancreatic ductal stricture. Dig Endosc 2018;30:508–515.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 23. Lee SH, Kim YS, Kim EJ, et al. Long-term outcomes of fully covered self-expandable metal stents versus plastic stents in chronic pancreatitis. Sci Rep 2021;11:15637.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 24. Lee YN, Moon JH, Park JK, et al. Preliminary study of a modified, nonflared, short, fully covered metal stent for refractory benign pancreatic duct strictures (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 2020;91:826–833.ArticlePubMed

Figure & Data

REFERENCES

    Citations

    Citations to this article as recorded by  

      • PubReader PubReader
      • ePub LinkePub Link
      • Cite
        CITE
        export Copy Download
        Close
        Download Citation
        Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.
        Format:
        • RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
        • BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software
        Include:
        • Citation for the content below
        Role of fully covered metal stents in the management of chronic pancreatitis
        Close
      • XML DownloadXML Download
      Figure
      • 0
      Related articles
      Role of fully covered metal stents in the management of chronic pancreatitis
      Image
      Fig. 1. Management algorithm for pain in chronic pancreatitis. FCSEMS, fully covered metal stent.

      Fig. 1.

      Role of fully covered metal stents in the management of chronic pancreatitis
      Feature FCSEMS Plastic stents
      Pain resolution High (up to 92%) Moderate (60% to 80%)
      Stricture resolution High (up to 91%) Moderate (60% to 80%)
      Stent migration High (up to 47.7%) Low (5% to 15%)
      Stent occlusion Lower risk due to larger lumen Higher risk of occlusion
      Risk of de novo strictures Higher risk in prolonged use Lower risk
      Cost Higher initial cost Lower cost
      Procedure frequency Less frequent procedures needed More frequent procedures needed
      Study Year Patient (n) Stent type Diameter (mm) Length (cm) Planned stent removal (mo) Stricture resolution (%) (n/total n) Symptom recurrence after stent removal (%) (n/total n) Follow-up duration (mo)
      Ogura et al.17 2016 13 Niti-S, S-type 6 6, 8 6 100 (13/13) 23.1 (3/13) 9 (median)
      Matsubara et al.18 2016 10 Niti-S, Bumpy 8, 10 5–10 3 80 (8/10) 70 (7/10) 35 (median)
      Tringali et al.15 2018 15 Niti-S, Bumpy 6, 8 3, 4, 5 6 93.3 (14/15) 11.1 (1/9)a) 39 (mean)
      Oh et al.22 2018 18 Niti-S, Bumpy 7.5 5, 6, 7, 8 6 83.3 (15/18) 13.3 (2/15) 47 (median)
      Yamada et al.19 2018 22 BONASTENT M-intraductal 8, 10 3–7 5 86.3% (19/22) 0 (0/22) 12.5 (median)
      Sharaiha et al.3 2019 33 WallFlex 8, 10 N/A 3 87.9 (29/33) 36.3 (12/33) 14 (mean)
      Korpela et al.16 2019 17 Niti-S, Bumpy/Hanaro/Viabil 8, 10 3, 4, 6 5 70.6 (12/17) 30.0 (3/10)a) 29 (median)
      Lee et al.24 2020 25 Bonastent, M-Intraductal 8, 10 3, 5 3 100 (25/25) 12.0 (3/25) 34 (median)
      Lee et al.23 2021 26 Niti-S, Bumpy 15%/Niti-S, D 38%/Niti-S, Com-VI7%/HANARO 19%/EGIS, Flower 19% 8, 10 4–8 6 87 (23) 27.3 (6/26) 25 (median)
      Shah et al.20 2022 36 Niti-S, Bumpy 6, 8 8 3 N/A 44.4 (8/18) 19 (median)
      Ko et al.14 2023 35 Niti-S, Bumpy 6, 8, 10 4–8 3 100 (35/35) 54.3 (19/35) 136 (median)
      Sherman et al.13 2023 67 WallFlex Pancreatic RX fully covered soft stent System 6, 8 4, 5, 6 6 N/A 73.9 (55/67) N/A
      Rai et al.21 2023 11 Niti-S, Bumpy 8, 10 6-10 6 100 (11/11) 90.9 (10/11) 48 (median)
      Study Year Patient (n) Stent migration (%) (n/total n) Stent-induced de novo stricture (%) (n/total n) Severe abdominal pain (%) (n/total n) Cholangitis (%) (n/total n) Pancreatitis (%) (n/total n) Others (%) (n/total n)
      Ogura et al.17 2016 13 15.3 (2/13) 0 7.7 (1/13) 0 0 0
      Matsubara et al.18 2016 10 20.0 (2/10) 20.0 (2/10) 30.0 (3/10) 0 20.0 (2/10) 12.5 (1/8)a) impaction of stone, 12.5 (1/8)a) pseudocyst
      Tringali et al.15 2018 15 46.7 (7/15) 26.7 (4/15) 0 10.0 (1/10)b) 0 0
      Oh et al.22 2018 18 0 0 16.7 (3/18) 0 0 N/A
      Yamada et al.19 2018 22 0 4.5 (1/22) 9.1 (2/22) 0 0 9.1 (2/22) tearing metal stent
      Sharaiha et al.3 2019 33 0 0 18.2 (6/33) 6.1 (2/33) 0 3.0 (1/33) impaction of stent, distal end
      Korpela et al.16 2019 17 35 (7/17) 0 11.7 (2/17) 11.7 (2/17) 17.6 (3/17) 0
      Lee et al.24 2020 25 4.0 (1/25) 0 0 0 0 0
      Lee et al.23 2021 26 27 (7/26) 23 (6/26) 0 3.8 (1/26) 19.2 (5/26) 8 (2/26) stent fracture
      Shah et al,20 2022 36 16.7 (6/36) 8.3 (3/36) 8.3 (3/36) 0 2.8 (1/36) 0
      Ko et al.14 2023 35 0 48.6 (17/35) 0 5.7 (2/35) 0 0
      Sherman et al.13 2023 67 47.7 (31/65) 7.7 (5/65) 14.9 (12/67) 1.5 (1/67) 11.9 (10/67) 1.5 (1/67) duodenal ulceration
      Rai et al.21 2023 11 0 9.1 (1/11) 0 0 0 0
      Dedicated FCSEMS Study Reduction in stent migration De novo stricture incidence Key findings
      Flared-end FCSEMS Ko et al.14 Reduced to 0% 48.6% (not reduced) Flared ends reduced migration significantly, but high de novo stricture rate observed.
      Dumbbell-type FCSEMS Yamada et al.19 Reduced to 0% 4.50% Dumbbell design reduced migration and de novo strictures effectively.
      Niti-S bumpy stent Matsubara et al.18 Reduced to 20% 20% Improved stent design reduced migration but still had notable de novo strictures.
      Modified non-flared short FCSEMS Lee et al.24 Reduced to 4% 0% (no de novo strictures reported) Modified design minimized both migration and de novo strictures.
      Table 1. Comparing FCSEMS and plastic stents

      FCSEMS, fully covered self-expandable metal stents.

      Table 2. Studies regarding FCSEMS for CP in recent 10 years

      FCSEMS, fully covered self-expandable metal stent; CP, chronic pancreatitis; N/A, not available.

      Patients lost to follow-up were excluded.

      Table 3. Adverse events reported in studies regarding FCSEMS for chronic pancreatitis in recent 10 years

      FCSEMS, fully covered self-expandable metal stent; N/A, not available.

      Patients lost to follow-up were excluded.

      Patients who received FCSEMS through the major papilla.

      Table 4. Dedicated FCSEMS for adverse events

      FCSEMS, fully covered self-expandable metal stent.

      Table 1.

      Table 2.

      Table 3.

      Table 4.

      Clin Endosc : Clinical Endoscopy Twitter Facebook
      © Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.
      Close layer
      TOP