Copyright
©2013 Baishideng Publishing Group Co.
World J Gastroenterol. Oct 7, 2013; 19(37): 6199-6206
Published online Oct 7, 2013. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i37.6199
Published online Oct 7, 2013. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i37.6199
Table 1 Patients' characteristics n (%)
Characteristics | SEMS | cSEMS |
Stents | 16 (50) | 16 (50) |
Male gender | 7 (44) | 10 (63) |
Age (yr), mean ± SD (range) | 70 ± 11 (50-85) | 71 ± 11 (50-84) |
Localization | ||
Jejunum, n | 3 | 0 |
Duodenum, n | 13 | 16 |
Disease | ||
Pancreatic carcinoma, n | 6 | 7 |
Cholangiocellular carcinoma, n | 3 | 2 |
Gallbladder carcinoma, n | 1 | 2 |
Gastric cancer, n | 3 | 2 |
Colorectal cancer, n | 2 | 0 |
Breast cancer metastasis, n | 1 | 0 |
Stenosis due to duodenal ulcer perforation, n | 0 | 3 |
Balloon dilatation of the stent | 3 (19) | 2 (13) |
Concomitant biliary drainage | 9 (56) | 8 (50) |
-
Citation: Waidmann O, Trojan J, Friedrich-Rust M, Sarrazin C, Bechstein WO, Ulrich F, Zeuzem S, Albert JG. SEMS
vs cSEMS in duodenal and small bowel obstruction: High risk of migration in the covered stent group. World J Gastroenterol 2013; 19(37): 6199-6206 - URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v19/i37/6199.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v19.i37.6199