Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of Covered Versus Uncovered Stents for Benign Superior Vena Cava (SVC) Obstruction

  • Clinical Investigation
  • Published:
CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

ABSTRACT

Purpose

To identify whether long-term symptom relief and stent patency vary with the use of covered versus uncovered stents for the treatment of benign SVC obstruction.

Methods and Materials

We retrospectively identified all patients with benign SVC syndrome treated to stent placement between January 2003 and December 2015 (n = 59). Only cases with both clinical and imaging follow-up were included (n = 47). In 33 (70%) of the patients, the obstruction was due to a central line or pacemaker wires, and in 14 (30%), the cause was fibrosing mediastinitis. Covered stents were placed in 17 (36%) of the patients, and 30 (64%) patients had an uncovered stent. Clinical and treatment outcomes, complications, and the percent stenosis of each stent were evaluated.

Results

Technical success was achieved in all cases at first attempt. Average clinical and imaging follow-up in years was 2.7 (range 0.1–11.1) (covered) and 1.7 (range 0.2–10.5) (uncovered), respectively. There was a significant difference (p = 0.044) in the number of patients who reported a return of symptoms between the covered (5/17 or 29.4%) and uncovered (18/30 or 60%) groups. There was also a significant difference (p = < 0.001) in the mean percent stenosis after stent placement between the covered [17.9% (range 0–100) ± 26.2] and uncovered [48.3% (range 6.8–100) ± 33.5] groups. No significant difference (p = 0.227) was found in the time (days) between the date of the procedure and the date of clinical follow-up where a return of symptoms was reported [covered: 426.6 (range 28–1554) ± 633.9 and uncovered 778.1 (range 23–3851) ± 1066.8]. One patient in the uncovered group had non-endovascular surgical intervention (innominate to right atrial bypass), while none in the covered group required surgical intervention. One major complication (SIR grade C) occurred that consisted of a pericardial hemorrhagic effusion after angioplasty that required covered stent placement. There were no procedure-related deaths.

Conclusion

Both covered and uncovered stents can be used for treating benign SVC syndrome. Covered stents, however, may be a more effective option at providing symptom relief and maintaining stent patency if validated by further studies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

SVC:

Superior vena cava

SIR:

Society of Interventional Radiology

References

  1. Kishi K, Sonomura T, Mitsuzane K, et al. Self-expandable metallic stent therapy for superior vena-cava syndrome—clinical observations. Radiology. 1993;189:531–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Sheikh MA, Fernandez BB Jr, Gray BH, Graham LM, Carman TL. Endovascular stenting of nonmalignant superior vena cava syndrome. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2005;65:405–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Rachapalli V, Boucher LM. Superior vena cava syndrome: role of the interventionalist. Can Assoc Radiol J. 2014;65:168–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Rizvi AZ, Kalra M, Bjarnason H, Bower TC, Schleck C, Gloviczki P. Benign superior vena cava syndrome: stenting is now the first line of treatment. J Vasc Surg. 2008;47:372–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Warner P, Uberoi R. Superior vena cava stenting in the 21st century. Postgrad Med J. 2013;89:224–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Barshes NR, Annambhotla S, El Sayed HF, et al. Percutaneous stenting of superior vena cava syndrome: treatment outcome in patients with benign and malignant etiology. Vascular. 2007;15:314–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Cheng S. Superior vena cava syndrome: a contemporary review of a historic disease. Cardiol Rev. 2009;17:16–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Stanford W, Doty DB. The role of venography and surgery in the management of patients with superior vena cava obstruction. Ann Thorac Surg. 1986;41:158–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Sacks D, McClenny TE, Cardella JF, Lewis CA. Society of Interventional Radiology clinical practice guidelines. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2003;14:S199–202.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Chee CE, Bjarnason H, Prasad A. Superior vena cava syndrome: an increasingly frequent complication of cardiac procedures. Nat Clin Pract Cardiovasc Med. 2007;4:226–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Smayra T, Otal P, Chabbert V, et al. Long-term results of endovascular stent placement in the superior caval venous system. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2001;24:388–94.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Breault S, Doenz F, Jouannic AM, Qanadli SD. Percutaneous endovascular management of chronic superior vena cava syndrome of benign causes: long-term follow-up. Eur Radiol. 2017;27:97–104.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Sabri SS, Choudhri A, Orgera G, et al. Outcomes of covered kissing stent placement compared with bare metal stent placement in the treatment of atherosclerotic occlusive disease at the aortic bifurcation. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2010;21:995–1003.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Mwipatayi BP, Thomas S, Wong J, et al. A comparison of covered vs bare expandable stents for the treatment of aortoiliac occlusive disease. J Vasc Surg. 2011;54:1561–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Humphries MD, Armstrong E, Laird J, Paz J, Pevec W. Outcomes of covered versus bare-metal balloon-expandable stents for aortoiliac occlusive disease. J Vasc Surg. 2014;60:337–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. de Jager CP, Rutten MJ, Lips DJ. “Benign” superior vena cava syndrome. Intensive Care Med. 2013;39:572–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lanciego C, Rodriguez M, Rodriguez A, Carbonell MA, Garcia LG. Permanent pacemaker-induced superior vena cava syndrome: successful treatment by endovascular stent. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2003;26:576–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Qanadli SD, El Hajjam M, Mignon F, et al. Subacute and chronic benign superior vena cava obstructions: endovascular treatment with self-expanding metallic stents. Am J Roentgenol. 1999;173:159–64.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Rosenblum J, Leef J, Messersmith R, Tomiak M, Bech F. Intravascular stents in the management of acute superior vena cava obstruction of benign etiology. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 1994;18:362–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Schindler N, Vogelzang RL. Superior vena cava syndrome. Experience with endovascular stents and surgical therapy. Surg Clin North Am. 1999;79:683–94.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Doty JR, Flores JH, Doty DB. Superior vena cava obstruction: bypass using spiral vein graft. Ann Thorac Surg. 1999;67:1111–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kennedy DP, Palit TK. Reconstruction of superior vena cava syndrome due to benign disease using superficial femoral vein. Ann Vasc Surg. 2010;24(555):e7–12.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kalra M, Gloviczki P, Andrews JC, et al. Open surgical and endovascular treatment of superior vena cava syndrome caused by nonmalignant disease. J Vasc Surg. 2003;38:215–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Lanciego C, Chacon JL, Julian A, et al. Stenting as first option for endovascular treatment of malignant superior vena cava syndrome. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001;177:585–93.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Al-Mukhaini M, Panduranga P, Sulaiman K, Riyami AA, Deeb M, Riyami MB. Coronary perforation and covered stents: an update and review. Heart Views. 2011;12:63–70.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Jamshidi P, Mahmoody K, Erne P. Covered stents: a review. Int J Cardiol. 2008;130:310–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Baruah DK. Covered stent to treat saphenous venous graft perforation—a case report. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;76:844–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. George S, Mamas M, Nolan J, Ratib K. Radial artery perforation treated with balloon tracking and guide catheter tamponade—a case series. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2016;17:480–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Kuhn J, Kilic A, Stein E. Management of Innominate Vein Rupture During Superior Vena Cava Angioplasty. A A Case Rep. 2016;7:89–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Qanadli SD, El Hajjam M, Bruckert F, et al. Helical CT phlebography of the superior vena cava: diagnosis and evaluation of venous obstruction. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999;172:1327–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Kim H, Chung JW, Park JH, et al. Role of CT venography in the diagnosis and treatment of benign thoracic central venous obstruction. Korean J Radiol. 2003;4:146–52.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Sonavane SK, Milner DM, Singh SP, Abdel Aal AK, Shahir KS, Chaturvedi A. Comprehensive imaging review of the superior vena cava. Radiographics. 2015;35:1873–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Wilson LD, Detterbeck FC, Yahalom J. Clinical practice. Superior vena cava syndrome with malignant causes. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:1862–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, 200 1st St SW, Mayo – West 2, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA

    Mustafa M. Haddad, Melissa J. Neisen, Andrew H. Stockland, James C. Andrews, Sanjay Misra & Haraldur Bjarnason

  2. Mayo Clinic School of Medicine, 200 1st St SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA

    Benjamin Simmons

  3. Departments of Cardiology and Vascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, 200 1st St SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA

    Ian R. McPhail

  4. Department of Vascular Surgery, Mayo Clinic, 200 1st St SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA

    Manju Kalra

  5. Department of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, 200 1st St SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA

    Matthew P. Johnson

Authors
  1. Mustafa M. Haddad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Benjamin Simmons
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ian R. McPhail
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Manju Kalra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Melissa J. Neisen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Matthew P. Johnson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Andrew H. Stockland
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. James C. Andrews
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Sanjay Misra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Haraldur Bjarnason
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mustafa M. Haddad.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Benjamin Simmons: Contribution was funded in part by Grant R25 HL92621 from the National Institutes of Health. Sanjay Misra: NIH funding from HL098967 and DK 108780 and DSMB Chair for Flex Stent from Cordis J and J. The other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Haddad, M.M., Simmons, B., McPhail, I.R. et al. Comparison of Covered Versus Uncovered Stents for Benign Superior Vena Cava (SVC) Obstruction. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 41, 712–717 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-018-1906-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-018-1906-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation