Covered versus uncovered stent insertion for malignant superior vena cava obstruction

Abstract

Purpose: To determine whether covered or uncovered stent insertion achieved better clinical efficacy when used to treat malignant superior vena cava (SVC) obstruction (SVCO).

Material and methods: A total of 64 patients with malignant SVCO underwent stent insertion between January 2011 and March 2018 at our center. Of these, 34 were treated via uncovered stent insertion while 30 were treated via covered stent insertion. We compared the clinical effectiveness, patency of the stent, and overall survival between these two groups.

Results: Both treatments achieved a 100% technical and clinical success rate, without any incidence of complications relating to the procedure. Stent dysfunction was found in one and six patients in the covered and uncovered groups during the follow-up period (1/30 vs. 6/34, p = .153), respectively. The covered stent patency period was significantly longer in the group treated with covered stents (374 vs. 317 days, p = .049), while median survival following stent insertion was 175 and 159 days, respectively, for the covered and uncovered groups (p = .784).

Conclusion: Uncovered and covered stent insertion are both safe means of effectively treating patients with malignant SVCO, but covered stents achieve better patency for long-term periods than uncovered stents.

Keywords:

• Covered stent
• uncovered stent
• superior vena cava
• obstruction

Declaration of interest

The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.