ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2024
Safety of long-term esophageal stent use for multiple indications.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Safety of long-term esophageal stent placement and a predictive model for restenosis: A double-center retrospective study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Exceptionally prolonged retention of a silicone-covered esophageal stent before TIPS for refractory variceal bleeding: a case report.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Boerhaave Syndrome-Narrative Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Successful treatment of a case of super-high malignant esophago-tracheal fistula with Sigma fully covered esophageal stent placement: case report.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Long-term (>30 days) esophageal stenting is controversial. Previous studies have documented complications associated with long-term esophageal stent use. This study's objective was to investigate complications associated with long-term esophageal stent use. Methods: A retrospective review of stenting done by thoracic surgery for any reason between 2010-2020 was completed. Patients were included if they had at least 30 days of follow-up after their initial stent placement. Outcomes included stent dwell time, patient outcomes, procedural and stent-related complications. Results: Fifty-six patients, with 25 having ≥2 stents placed were included; overall, 90 stents were placed. The median length of initial esophageal stent dwell time was 59 [interquartile range (IQR), 21-119] days. Stent migration was the most common complication and occurred more with benign indications (P=0.12). As the length of dwell time increased, prevalence of any complication decreased. Complication rates between short-term (<30 days) and long-term stents were not significantly different (P=0.39). No instances of esophageal perforation or aortoesophageal fistulas related to stents were identified. There was one instance of post-esophagectomy tracheoesophageal fistula which was managed successfully with prolonged stenting. Conclusions: Over a 10-year period, there were no instances of stent erosion into the aorta or esophageal perforation, and the most frequent stent-related complication was stent migration. Long-term esophageal stenting did not result in increased rates of stent related complications in our cohort. This case series demonstrates that long-term stents may be safely used for many different indications. Randomized controlled studies may be needed to validate these findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.