Anti-Migration System for Anti-reflux Oeso-gastric Stent (ANTIMIG)
- Conditions
- Stent MigrationGastroEsophageal Cancer
- Interventions
- Device: Gastroesophageal stent placement
- Registration Number
- NCT05431738
- Lead Sponsor
- Société Française d'Endoscopie Digestive
- Brief Summary
The aim of this prospective, controlled, randomized, multicentre, single-blind study is to compare the rate of intragastric migration of 2 types of esophageal stents with and without an anti-migration device placed for locally advanced or metastatic malignant stenosis of the gastroesophageal junction.
- Detailed Description
In order to reduce the rate of spontaneous intragastric migration of esophageal stent placed for gastroesophageal junction tumor, anti-migration device has been developed. Pilot studies suggest the absence of morbidity of this device, but no comparative study has been conducted to confirm the interest of this anti-migration device.
The aim of this study is to compare the rate of intragastric migration of 2 types of esophageal stents with and without an anti-migration device placed for locally advanced or metastatic malignant stenosis of the gastroesophageal junction.
* Main objective: To evaluate the rate of intragastric migration of 2 types of esophageal stents (one with and the second without anti-migration device) placed for malignant stenosis of the gastroesophageal junction.
* Secondary objective(s):
* Degraded migration rate (M3 and M6) if patient alive, and duration of survival without dysphagia
* Comparison of the morbidity of these two stents
* Comparison of the effectiveness of these two stents on dysphagia and reflux
* Clinical and technical failure rate of these two stents
This is a prospective, controlled, randomized, multicentre, single-blind study.
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- RECRUITING
- Sex
- All
- Target Recruitment
- 180
- Patient of both sexes aged 18 or over.
- Patient admitted to one of the investigation centers for dysphagia due to tumoral stenosis of the gastroesophageal junction, locally advanced or metastatic.
- Patient ASA 1, ASA 2, ASA 3
- Absence of participation in another clinical study
- Signed Informed Consent
- Patients benefiting from the social security system.
- Patient referred for stenosis by extrinsic compression by an extra digestive mass
- Patients with contraindications relating to the procedures essential for the introduction of a stent
- Mediastinal radiotherapy or esophageal surgery history
- Patient under 18 or over 90
- Patient ASA 4, ASA 5
- Pregnant Woman
- Patient unable to give personal consent
- Absence of signed informed consent
Study & Design
- Study Type
- INTERVENTIONAL
- Study Design
- PARALLEL
- Arm && Interventions
Group Intervention Description STENT WITH ANTI-MIGRATION DEVICE Gastroesophageal stent placement Placement of a gastroesophageal stent with anti-migration device : Ella®, Leufen, Novatech STENT WITHOUT ANTI-MIGRATION DEVICE Gastroesophageal stent placement Placement of a gastroesophageal stent without anti-migration device : Hanarostent® ECW, Life Partners Europe
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Stent Intragastric migration rate at M1 1 month Stent Intragastric migration rate at M1 confirmed on radiography or CT
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Dysphagia recurrence at M3 3 months Dysphagia evaluation in 5 stages (Atkinson score) at M3 0 - no dysphagia
1. - Clinging to the swallowing of solids
2. - Semi-liquid feeding possible
3. - Liquid feeding possible
4. - Aphagia (need for parenteral nutrition)Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) after stent placement 1 month Gastroesophageal reflux disease with the Reflux Disease Questionnaire (RDQ) score. The Reflux Disease Questionnaire a 12-item self-administered questionnaire, was designed to assess the frequency and severity of heartburn, regurgitation, and dyspeptic complaints and to facilitate the diagnosis of GERD. Minimum 12 : better outcome Maximum 72 : worse outcome
Stent placement complication : hemorrhage 7 days Necessity of blood transfusion and/or endoscopic management
Clinical success rate of stent placement on dysphagia 3 days Medical success rate of stent placement under digestive endoscopy on dysphagia (dysphagia resorption after endoscopy)
Stent Intragastric migration rate at M3 3 months Stent Intragastric migration rate at M3 confirmed on radiography or CT
Dysphagia-free survival time 3 years Dysphagia-free survival time at the end of the study
Stent Intragastric migration rate at M6 6 months Stent Intragastric migration rate at M6 confirmed on radiography or CT
Dysphagia recurrence at M1 1 month Dysphagia evaluation in 5 stages (Atkinson score) at M1 0 - no dysphagia
1. - Clinging to the swallowing of solids
2. - Semi-liquid feeding possible
3. - Liquid feeding possible
4. - Aphagia (need for parenteral nutrition)Dysphagia recurrence at M6 6 months Dysphagia evaluation in 5 stages (Atkinson score) at M6 0 - no dysphagia
1. - Clinging to the swallowing of solids
2. - Semi-liquid feeding possible
3. - Liquid feeding possible
4. - Aphagia (need for parenteral nutrition)Technical success rate of stent placement 1 day Technical success rate of stent placement under digestive endoscopy defined by good progression of contrast through the stent into the gastric cavity after stent placement
Stent placement complication : pain 7 days Need for opioid treatment for more than 48 hours after stent placement or removal of the stent because of pain
Stent placement complication : pneumoperitoneum 1 day Pneumoperitoneum diagnosed by CT in case of abnormal pain within hours of stent placement
Trial Locations
- Locations (1)
French Society of Digestive Endoscopy
🇫🇷Paris, France