throbber
0016-5107/92/3801-0007$03.00
`GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY
`Copyright © 1992 by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
`
`Treatment of malignant esophageal
`obstruction with silicone-coated metallic self-
`expanding stents
`
`John Schaer, MD, Ronald M. Katon, MD
`Krassi Ivancev, MD, Barry Uchida, BS, RT
`Josef Rosch, MD, Kenneth Binmoeller, MD
`Portland, Oregon
`
`Six patients with high-grade malignant esophageal obstruction were treated with
`silicone-coated metallic self-expanding esophageal stents (Z stents). Endoscopic
`placement of stents was well tolerated. All patients achieved excellent palliation,
`defined by a decrease of at least two dysphagia grades, which was sustained.
`Complications occurred during follow-up in four patients and included stent
`migration, silicone disruption with tumor ingrowth, food impaction, and perforation
`(discovered at autopsy) at the distal stent site. Three of the four complications
`were promptly treated by endoscopic or radiologic intervention. Recent
`modification in stent design and placement technique will hopefully reduce
`complications. The self-expanding stent has several theoretical advantages over
`the rigid plastic stent and Nd:YAG laser for palliation of obstructing esophageal
`malignancy. (Gastrointest Endosc 1992;38:7-11)
`
`A variety of therapies are employed in the palliative
`treatment of malignant esophageal obstruction. Un-
`fortunately, no single modality provides effective, safe,
`inexpensive relief of dysphagia in all cases. Two of the
`more commonly used modalities are photocoagulation
`with the Nd:YAG laser and the placement of rigid
`plastic endoprostheses. Nd:YAG laser treatment is
`limited by its high cost, the requirement for frequent
`treatment sessions, and tumor recurrence. 1- 3 The use
`of rigid plastic endoprostheses is plagued by high
`complication rates.4- 8 Recently, self-expanding metal-
`lic stents have shown promise in the treatment of
`biliary obstruction.9 It seemed possible that a modified
`version of a self-expanding metallic stent might pro-
`vide benefit in refractory esophageal obstruction. This
`report describes our experience in six consecutive
`patients with malignant esophageal obstruction pal-
`liated with silicone-coated self-expanding metallic Z
`stents.
`
`Received July 10, 1991. For revision August 1, 1991. Accepted August
`26,1991.
`From the Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, and
`The Charles Dotter Institute for Interventional Therapy, Oregon
`Health Sciences University, Portland, Oregon. Reprint requests: Ron-
`ald M. Katon, MD, Division of Gastroenterology, L-461, Oregon
`Health Sciences University, 3181 S. W. Sam Jackson Park Rd.,
`Portland, Oregon 97201-3098.
`
`VOLUME 38, NO.1, 1992
`
`PATIENTS AND METHODS
`
`Patients
`Six patients with malignant esophageal obstruction were
`studied. All six had severe grade 3 or 4 dysphagia, and none
`were operative candidates. Mean age was 71 years (range,
`57 to 87 years). There were four men and two women. Three
`patients had esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, two pa-
`tients had esophageal adenocarcinoma, and one patient had
`an adenocarcinoma of the lung which was metastatic to the
`mediastinum. Five of the six patients had been refractory to
`prior therapies. All patients had extensive obstructive le-
`sions in the middle or distal esophagus. In three patients,
`the lesion extended to the gastroesophageal junction (Table
`1).
`A total of nine stents were placed in six patients. Informed
`consent was obtained under a compassionate use basis. Five
`of six patients were treated in an outpatient setting, while
`the sixth was hospitalized for 24 hours. Patients were first
`evaluated with a barium esophagram and endoscopy with
`the Olympus GIFXV10 endoscope to determine the location
`and length of esophageal obstruction. Five of the six patients
`underwent initial dilation with American Endoscopy Dila-
`tors (Mentor, Ohio) to 42 to 45 French diameter.
`
`Stents
`The prostheses used were modified self-expanding Z
`stents coated with a silicone membrane and were homemade
`
`7
`
`W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc.
`Exhibit 1019-1
`
`

`
`Table 1.
`Patient demographics
`
`Patient Age Sex
`
`Tumor type
`
`Prior treatment
`
`Location
`(cm)
`67 M ESOPH-SCCAa (27-32) Laser X 8, chemo-
`therapy, radia-
`tion
`(30-40) Pericardial window
`70 F Lung-ADCA
`57 M ESOPH-SCCA (37-47)b Radiation
`87 M ESOPH-SCCA (37-47)b Radiation
`62 M ESOPHADCA (28-36) Chemotherapy
`83 F ESOPHADCA (28-34)b Laser x 2, dilation,
`alcohol inj. x 3
`a SCCA, squamous cell carcinoma; ADCA, adenocarcinoma.
`b Tumor extended beyond gastroesophageal junction.
`
`1
`
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`
`in our institution. Stents were handmade from O.018-inch
`stainless steel wire. Individual stent bodies had an internal
`diameter of 15 mm and a length of 2 em. Multiple stent·
`bodies were interconnected for a total stent length of 8 to
`12 em. The last four patients treated had a flanged proximal
`end which had a 20-mm internal diameter (Fig. 1). All stents
`had 3-mm long wire hooks on the exterior of the stent that
`"anchored" the stent within the tumor.
`
`Stent placement technique
`Stents were placed under fluoroscopic control using light
`conscious sedation. A 14 French orogastric tube was first
`passed distal to the esophageal obstruction. Two guidewires
`were placed through the orogastric tube, which was then
`removed. Over one guidewire a 5.5 French angiography
`catheter was placed for contrast injection. Over the second
`guidewire, an 18 French Teflon stent delivery catheter was
`placed. The stent was then pushed out of the delivery
`catheter under fluoroscopic guidance and delivered into the
`esophagus.
`Patients underwent a follow-up esophagram and endo-
`scopic examination immediately after stent placement and
`also at 1 week, 4 weeks, 8 weeks, and as needed thereafter.
`Clinical assessment was performed at monthly intervals
`until patient death or the completion of the study period. In
`the three patients whose stent extended beyond the gastro-
`esophageal junction, H2 blockers and anti-reflux measures
`were prescribed prophylactically to minimize gastroesopha-
`geal reflux. Mean duration of follow-up was 4 months. The
`severity of dysphagia was quantified with a 0 to 4 dysphagia
`scale as follows: 0 = no dysphagia; 1 = dysphagia to normal
`solids; 2 = dysphagia to soft solids; 3 = dysphagia to solids
`and liquids; and 4 = inability to swallow saliva.
`
`RESULTS
`Stent placement was successful and well tolerated
`in all six patients. There were no complications noted
`at the time of stent placement. Mean dysphagia grade
`prior to stenting was 3.3. All patients had improve-
`ment of at least
`two dysphagia grades after stent
`placement, and mean dysphagia grade post-stenting
`was 0.67 (Table 2). Endoscopic and radiologic exami-
`nation confirmed the improvement in esophageallu-
`
`8
`
`minal diameter in each patient. In four of six patients,
`the stents expanded to maximal diameter within 24
`hours, while in two patients the stents expanded to
`approximately 75% of their maximal diameter. Relief
`of dysphagia was sustained in all patients with a mean
`follow-up of 4 months. Four patients died during fol-
`low-up with a mean survival of 4 months (Table 2).
`Figures 2 and 3 depict an 83-year-old woman with
`adenocarcinoma of the esophagus (patient 6, Tables 1
`and 2). She had undergone five esophageal dilations,
`four
`treatments with ethanol
`injection, and two
`Nd:YAG laser treatments prior to stenting. She had
`complete dysphagia and was receiving enteral alimen-
`tation through a gastrostomy tube. After stenting she
`was able to ingest a semi-solid diet. Improvement has
`been sustained for 3 months and she no longer requires
`gastrostomy feedings. Figures 4 and 5 represent a 70-
`year-old woman with adenocarcinoma of the lung and
`mediastinal metastases (patient 2, Tables 1 and 2).
`She had an extra-esophageal tumor with esophageal
`compression and complete dysphagia. With placement
`
`Figure 1. Stainless steel self-expanding Z stent with silicone
`membrane.
`
`GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY
`
`W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc.
`Exhibit 1019-2
`
`

`
`Table 2.
`Results and complications of self-expandable stent
`Dysphagia grade
`Post-stent
`Pre-stent
`3
`1
`
`Patient
`
`2
`3
`4
`5
`
`6
`
`4
`3
`3
`3
`
`0
`0
`1
`1
`
`_4_
`X= 3.3
`
`1
`X = 0.67
`
`Complications
`
`Foreign body sensation,
`torn membrane with
`tumor ingrowth
`None
`Stent migration
`Meat impaction
`Distal esophageal per-
`foration
`None
`
`Follow-up
`
`Died (8 mol
`
`Died (2 mol
`Died (3.5 mol
`Alive (5 mol
`Died (2 mol
`
`Alive (3 mol
`X=4mo
`
`and no further injury to the silicone membrane oc-
`curred. This problem was treated by placing a second
`stent within the first stent, which provided relief of
`dysphagia and blocked tumor ingrowth. This patient
`was also the only patient with a foreign body sensation
`in the chest after stenting. This sensation persisted,
`but was easily controlled with Tylenol. Patient 3 suf-
`fered migration of his stent into the stomach. The
`stent was retrieved endoscopically by grasping it with
`a polypectomy snare and pulling it into an overtube.
`A second stent with a flanged proximal border was
`then placed. All four stents placed subsequently had
`this flanged stent design. No other problems with
`stent migration were encountered. Patient 4 had one
`episode of meat impaction, which was easily cleared
`endoscopically. Patient 6 died 2 months following
`stent placement, and was found at autopsy to have an
`esophageal perforation near the distal margin of the
`stent. The perforation occurred within tissue invaded
`by malignancy and it was not clear whether the per-
`foration occurred from stent trauma or from degen-
`eration of the esophageal tumor. Three other patients
`died at 2 months, 3.5 months, and 8 months following
`stent insertion. No autopsies were obtained in these
`patients.
`
`DISCUSSION
`Self-expanding metallic Z stents were found to be
`efficacious in the palliative therapy of malignant
`esophageal obstruction. Despite the selection of pa-
`tients with challenging strictures, an esophageal lu-
`men adequate to maintain oral alimentation was
`achieved in all six patients. In each patient, dysphagia
`improved by at least two grades, and improvement
`was sustained in all patients.
`The use of self-expanding Z stents has several po-
`tential advantages over Nd:YAG laser or rigid plastic
`stents in the palliation of malignant esophageal
`stenosis. The Nd:YAG laser is expensive, requires
`frequent treatment sessions, and recurrence of ob-
`struction after the initial series of treatments is a
`
`9
`
`AF
`
`igure 2. Barium swallow. A, Approximately 10-cm long
`compression of mid-esophagus with near total obstruction.
`B, Full stent expansion and excellent flow of barium.
`
`oftwo overlapping stents (total length 14 cm), she was
`able to take a regular diet until her death from met-
`astatic disease 2 months later.
`
`Complications
`Two patients experienced no complications. In the
`remaining four patients, five complications were en-
`countered as follows (Table 2). In patient 1, the use
`of an inadequate 14 French diameter delivery catheter
`resulted in tears in the silicone coating of the stent
`which allowed tumor ingrowth. In subsequent pa-
`tients, we employed an 18 French delivery catheter,
`
`VOLUME 38, NO.1, 1992
`
`W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc.
`Exhibit 1019-3
`
`

`
`problem.1- 3 In addition, submucosal lesions are inac-
`cessible to treatment with the Nd:YAG laser. Al-
`though rigid endoprostheses are relatively inexpensive
`and readily available, complication rates are high.
`Perforation rates range between 7 and 18%, and stent
`migration, tumor overgrowth, and bleeding are trou-
`blesome.4- 8
`Endoscopic placement of the Z stent is gentle and
`does not generate the shearing forces necessary for
`right stent insertion. Stent placement is a one-stage
`procedure, obviating the need for multiple sessions as
`in Nd:YAG laser treatment.
`In this investigation there was no morbidity en-
`
`Figure 3. Endoscopic photographs. A, Pin hole size lumen
`prior to stenting. S, Marked improvement in luminal diameter.
`Stent is partially obscured by retained barium.
`
`countered during placement of the stents in any pa-
`tient. Stent placement was performed with light con-
`scious sedation and in five of six patients was accom-
`plished in an outpatient setting. Pre-stenting dilation
`was performed to a modest 42 to 45 French diameter
`in comparison to the 54 to 60 French diameter dila-
`tions usually required for placement of rigid endo-
`prostheses.5,8 Another potential advantage of Z stents
`over rigid stents is in the management of tumor over-
`growth. With Z stents an overlapping stent can be
`placed at either end of the original stent to, in effect,
`extend the stented region. In patient 1, an overlapping
`stent was successfully used to cover a defect in the
`silicone membrane, which had allowed tumor en-
`croachment. This capability is not possible with rigid
`stents. Whether stent migration will be less common
`with the flanged Z stents then with rigid stents re-
`mains to be determined in larger studies.
`The complications encountered with Z stents during
`the follow-up period were easily managed with endo-
`scopic or radiologic interventions in three of four
`patients. Modifications in stent design, such as the
`flanged proximal stent body used to prevent migra-
`tion, should decrease future similar problems.
`In the one case of esophageal perforation found at
`autopsy, a question remains as to whether the pointed
`distal ends of the stent may have contributed to the
`perforation. Accordingly, future stents will have yet
`another design modification, with rounded wires at
`the distal end of the stent and a distal silicone bumper
`
`Figure 4. Barium swallow. A, Long, irregular, near-total obstruction in distal esophagus. S, Expansion of stent is nearly complete,
`except in its mid-portion, which is expanded to 70 to 75%. C, Excellent flow of barium through the stent.
`
`10
`
`GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY
`
`W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc.
`Exhibit 1019-4
`
`

`
`Figure 5. Endoscopic photographs. A, Nodular tumor with near-total esophageal obstruction. B, Proximal view of stent with full
`in mid-esophagus. Note visualization of esophageal wall
`through silicone
`expansion. C, View of partially expanded stent
`membrane.
`
`added to prevent trauma to the esophageal mucosa.
`Three other patients died during the course of this
`study, at 2 months, 3.5 months, and 8 months after
`stent insertion. Unfortunately, autopsies could not be
`obtained in these patients, so no further information
`exists regarding possible inflammation and/or injury
`to the esophageal tissue from these metallic stents.
`Long-term placement of metallic stents in the biliary
`tract has not resulted in perforation or necrosis.9 As
`with rigid stents, the only patients unsuitable for the
`Z stent are those with neoplasms completely obstruct-
`ing the esophagus or in close proximity to the crico-
`pharyngeus.
`The mesh stent (Wallstent-Medinvent SA) is an-
`other self-expanding stent design which has been em-
`ployed in a small number of patients for palliation of
`esophageal malignancy.1O, 11 Due to their inherent de-
`sign, mesh stents have openings between the wire
`filaments which cannot be coated, therefore allowing
`tumor ingrowth. This complication occurred in two of
`six patients reported by Knyrim et al.1O The silicone
`coating of the Z stent provides a barrier to tumor
`ingrowth. Also, due to this intact barrier, Z stents may
`have an application ~n the treatment oftracheo-esoph-
`ageal fistula, whereas mesh stents appear unsuitable
`for this purpose.
`Finally,
`the central question is how will self-
`expanding stents fit into the armamentarium available
`for palliation of esophageal malignancy? Future com-
`parative trials between Nd:YAG laser and stents of
`various designs, including both rigid and expandable
`stents, are needed to determine the optimal applica-
`
`tion of these various modalities in the palliative treat-
`ment of malignant esophageal stenosis.
`
`REFERENCES
`1. Fleischer D, Kessler F. Endoscopic Nd:YAG laser therapy for
`carcinoma of the esophagus: a new form of palliative treatment.
`Gastroenterology 1983;85:600-6.
`2. Mellow MH, Pinkas H. Endoscopic therapy for esophageal
`carcinoma with Nd:YAG laser: prospective evaluation of effi-
`cacy,
`complications,
`and survival. Gastrointest Endosc
`1984;30:334-9.
`3. Fleischer D, Sivak M. Endoscopic Nd:YAG laser therapy as
`palliation for oesophagogastric carcinoma. Gastroenterology
`1985;89:827-31.
`4. Ogilivie AL, Dronfield MW, Ferguson R, Atkinson M. Palliative
`intubation of oesophagogastric neoplasms at fibreoptic endos-
`copy. Gut 1984;23:1060-7.
`5. Tytgat GNJ, Huibregste K, Bartlesman JFWM, Den Hartog
`Jaeger FCA. Endoscopic palliative therapy of gastrointestinal
`and biliary tumors with prostheses. Clin Gastroenterol
`1986;15:249-71.
`6. Loizou LA, Grigg D, Atkinson M, Robertson C, Brown SG. A
`prospective comparison of laser therapy and intubation in en-
`doscopic palliation for malignant dysphagia. Gastroenterology
`1991;100:1303-10.
`7. Graham DY, Dobbs SM, Zubler M. What is the role of prosthe-
`ses insertion in esophageal carcinoma? Gastrointest Endosc
`1983;29:1-5.
`8. Buset M, Des Marez B, Cremer M. Endoscopic palliative intu-
`bation of the esophagus invaded by lung cancer. Gastrointest
`Endosc 1990;36:357-9.
`9. Huibregtse K, Cheng J, Coene PPLO, Fockens P, Tytgat GNJ.
`Endoscopic placement of expandable metal stents for biliary
`strictures-a preliminary report on experience with 33 patients.
`Endoscopy 1989;21:280-2.
`10. Knyrim K, Wagner HJ, Pausch J, Vakil N, Starck E. Expand-
`able metal stents for the palliative treatment of esophageal
`obstruction [Abstract). Gastrointest Endosc 1990;36:236.
`11. Domschke W, Foerster ECH, Matek W, Rod! W. Self-expand-
`ing mesh stent for esophageal cancer stenosis. Endoscopy
`1990;22:134-6.
`
`VOLUME 38, NO.1, 1992
`
`11
`
`W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc.
`Exhibit 1019-5

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket