Endoscopy
DOI: 10.1055/a-2675-1616
Innovations and brief communications

Endoscopic management of refractory gastrointestinal–tracheobronchial fistulas with two novel occluders: a comparative cohort study

1   Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital With Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China (Ringgold ID: RIN74734)
2   The First School of Clinical Medicine, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China (Ringgold ID: RIN12461)
,
1   Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital With Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China (Ringgold ID: RIN74734)
,
Yun Wang
1   Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital With Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China (Ringgold ID: RIN74734)
,
Lurong Li
1   Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital With Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China (Ringgold ID: RIN74734)
,
Junjun Xia
1   Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital With Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China (Ringgold ID: RIN74734)
2   The First School of Clinical Medicine, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China (Ringgold ID: RIN12461)
,
Jiahao Liu
1   Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital With Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China (Ringgold ID: RIN74734)
2   The First School of Clinical Medicine, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China (Ringgold ID: RIN12461)
,
Wei Jiang
1   Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital With Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China (Ringgold ID: RIN74734)
2   The First School of Clinical Medicine, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China (Ringgold ID: RIN12461)
,
Bixing Ye
1   Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital With Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China (Ringgold ID: RIN74734)
,
Weifeng Zhang
1   Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital With Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China (Ringgold ID: RIN74734)
,
Ping Zhao
1   Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital With Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China (Ringgold ID: RIN74734)
3   Gastroenterology, Zhejiang University School of Medicine Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Hangzhou, China (Ringgold ID: RIN56660)
,
Simon K. Lo
4   Gastroenterology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, United States (Ringgold ID: RIN22494)
,
Guoxin Zhang
1   Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital With Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China (Ringgold ID: RIN74734)
2   The First School of Clinical Medicine, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China (Ringgold ID: RIN12461)
› Author Affiliations

Supported by: National Natural Science Foundation of China No. 82470593 and No. 82200626
Supported by: Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province BK20220720
Supported by: Medical Key Discipline Foundation of Jiangsu Province ZDXK202206 Clinical Trial: Registration number (trial ID): ChiCTR2500095557, Trial registry: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (http://www.chictr.org/), Type of Study: Retrospective


Preview

Abstract

Background

Refractory gastrointestinal (GI)–tracheobronchial fistulas are challenging to manage. This study compared the outcomes of two novel occluders specifically designed for endoscopic occlusion of GI–tracheobronchial fistulas.

Methods

In this retrospective cohort study, 86 patients with refractory GI–tracheobronchial fistulas who underwent endoscopic occlusion using either a double umbrella-shaped (DU; n = 36) or mushroom umbrella-shaped (MU; n = 50) occluder were included. The primary outcome was sustained occlusion. Secondary outcomes included technical success, adverse events (AEs), occluder-related discomfort, and percentage weight gain.

Results

The DU occluder was associated with a higher risk of occlusion failure compared with the MU occluder (hazard ratio [HR] 2.67, 95%CI 1.24–5.73; P = 0.01), with a 12-month cumulative sustained occlusion probability of 65.5% (95%CI 51.3%–83.5%) versus 82.1% (95%CI 71.4%–94.3%), respectively. Esophageal wall injury requiring occluder removal occurred in six DU patients, but in none of the MU group. Technical success was 100% in both groups. All procedure-related AEs were mild, occurring in five DU (13.9%) and three MU patients (6.0%).

Conclusions

The MU occluder showed greater potential for sustained occlusion than the DU occluder and may be a viable option for refractory GI–tracheobronchial fistulas, although further prospective studies are needed.

Supplementary Material



Publication History

Received: 25 February 2025

Accepted after revision: 18 July 2025

Article published online:
19 August 2025

© 2025. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Oswald-Hesse-Straße 50, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany