Self-expandable metal stents for obstructing colonic and extracolonic cancer: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - Update 2020

Self-expanding metal stent insertion by colorectal surgeons using a two-person approach colonoscopy without fluoroscopic monitoring in the management of acute colorectal obstruction: a 14-year experience

BACKGROUND

Placement of a self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) in patients presenting with an acute colorectal obstruction (ACO) may obviate emergency surgery (ES), potentially effectively palliating incurable tumors, acting as a bridge to surgery (BTS) in patients with operable or potentially operable tumors and achieving effective decompression of other ACO. We present our experience with SEMS insertion by colorectal surgeons without fluoroscopic monitoring for ACO especially for acute malignant colorectal obstruction (AMCO) for nearly a 14-year period (2007-2020).

AIM

To explore the safety and effectiveness of SEMS insertion in the management of ACO by colorectal surgeons using a two-person approach colonoscopy without fluoroscopic monitoring.

METHODS

We reviewed the medical records of patients retrospectively to identify all patients presenting to our unit with ACO especially with AMCO who had stenting carried out to achieve colonic decompression. All 434 procedures were performed by colorectal surgeons using a two-person approach colonoscopy without fluoroscopic monitoring.

RESULTS

The overall technique success rate and clinic success rate by SEMS insertion were 428/434 (98.6%) and 412/434 (94.9%). The overall incidence of complications by SEMS insertion was 19/434 (4.4%). The complications included clinical perforation (6/434, 1.4%); stent migration (2/434, 0.5%), 1 of which re-stent; stent detachment (fell off) (3/434, 0.7%), none of them with re-stent; stool impaction (6/434, 1.4%), 1 of which re-stent; and abdominal or anal pain (2/434, 0.5%). There was no hemorrhage in any of the 434 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

SEMS insertion is a relatively safe and effective technique for colonic decompression in dealing with ACO as either a BTS or as a palliative measure. It is also a solution to other causes of ACO such as recurrent tumor, benign diseases, or extra-luminal compression. Therefore, ES was largely avoided.

Ostomy prevalence and survival in elderly patients with stage III and IV rectal cancer

AIM

Oncological strategies in the elderly population are often debated. The objective of this study was to investigate the survival rates and prevalence of ostomy in elderly patients operated on for stage III and IV rectal cancers.

METHODS

This retrospective multicentric population-based study included 151 patients aged ≥75 years with stage III and IV rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent surgery between 2007 and 2014. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the impact of different prognostic factors.

RESULTS

The median age of the patients was 81 years (range: 75-97 years) with 40 patients >85 years of age. Age was significantly correlated with overall survival (OS) in both stage III and IV cancers (P < 0.001). For patients ≥80 years the presence of comorbid conditions was associated with a lower chance of survival (P = 0.02). A digestive stoma was created in 67 (76.1%) patients with stage III cancer and 26 (29.54%) had a stoma reversal. A palliative derivative stoma was performed in half of patients with stage IV cancer. Adjuvant chemotherapy was independently associated with improved 5-year OS (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Age, comorbidities and adjuvant chemotherapy were independent predictors for OS. Resection of rectal tumors in fit elderly patients should be promoted; however, patients should be aware of the high risk of stoma. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2021; 21: 670-675.

A novel animal model of colonic stenosis to aid the development of new stents for colon strictures

BACKGROUND

The incidence of colonic stenosis, primarily caused by colon cancer and Crohn's disease, is increasing each year. The development of safer stents for colonic stenosis is required because perforation associated with cancer stent placement worsens the prognosis and stent placement for anastomotic stenosis due to Crohn's disease or colectomy is not first choice due to the high migration rate. The wall of the large intestine where the stent is inserted receives the complex forces from the peristaltic movement of the large intestine and stool in addition to the reaction tension of the stent, causing perforation and migration. Animal models may help develop new and safe stents, but no animal model closely reproduces the condition of human colonic stenosis. Herein, we present a novel animal model of colonic stenosis, which closely replicates the human colonic size.

METHODS

The artificial colonic stenosis model was developed by wrapping the porcine colon with a silicone sheet after laparotomy. The usefulness of the model was evaluated by investigating the availability of endoscopic stent placement, morphological maintenance of colonic stenosis, adverse effects on pigs, and modeling time. The first three and the last three modeling times were analyzed using Student's t-test.

RESULTS

Endoscopic stent placement was performed in all cases without intraoperative complications. There were no postoperative model complications or deaths. Adhesions to the surrounding tissue in the abdominal cavity of the artificial colon stenosis were slight. The morphology of the isolated artificial stenoses was completely maintained, and no necrosis or perforation was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed a novel and feasible animal model of colonic stenosis using pigs. We believe that this animal model will be useful for developing a safer stent for obstruction caused by benign diseases and colon cancer.

[Palliative endoscopy]

Endoscopy is the leading method in the diagnostics of gastrointestinal malignancies. With the increasing incidences of various tumor entities, a palliative treatment situation is already present in many patients despite an increasing number of screening strategies. Palliative endoscopy can make an essential contribution to alleviation of tumor-related symptoms, such as dysphagia, malnutrition, cholestasis, ileus and pain. Various approaches can be offered to safeguard the nutrition, e.g. percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) and percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy (PEJ), for maintenance of the gastrointestinal passage (stents) and secretion drainage or to drain congested hollow organs. Furthermore, in cases of inaccessibility or impassability of stenoses due to tumors, endosonographically assisted punctures offer the possibility to guarantee new drainage options or continuities by stent placement. In all interventions possible contraindications and complications must be taken into account.

Does the diameter of colonic stent influence the outcomes in bridge-to-surgery patients with malignant large bowel obstruction?

PURPOSE

This study investigated the short- and long-term outcomes of 18- and 22-mm-diameter self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) as a bridge to surgery (BTS) in patients with malignant large bowel obstruction (MLBO).

METHODS

Sixty-nine pathological stage II and III colorectal cancer patients who underwent BTS were included in this multi-institutional retrospective study. Patients were divided into two groups regarding the diameter of SEMS: an 18-mm group (n = 30) and a 22-mm group (n = 39).

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the clinical success rate, but both of the two re-obstructions observed occurred in the 18-mm group. The 18-mm group showed a trend toward a higher incidence of overall postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grading ≥ II) than the 22-mm group (33.3% vs. 10.3%, P = 0.061). The 3-year disease-free and overall survival showed no significant differences between the 18- and 22-mm groups (78.2% vs. 68.8%, P = 0.753 and 92.8% vs. 82.1%, P = 0.471, respectively).

CONCLUSION

SEMS of 18 and 22 mm diameter confer statistically equivalent short- and long-term outcomes as a BTS.

Comparison of self-expandable metallic stent placement followed by laparoscopic resection and elective laparoscopic surgery without stent placement for left-sided colon cancer

AIM

Self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placement for obstructive colon cancer is widely performed as a bridge to surgery (BTS) procedure before resection. This study aimed to investigate the surgical and oncological results of laparoscopic elective surgery with or without SEMS placement to assess the efficacy of SEMS placement as a BTS.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed consecutive patients with stage II, III, and IV left-sided colon cancer who underwent elective laparoscopic resection between 2013 and 2019. All patients were divided into two groups: with and without SEMS placement.

RESULTS

The SEMS group included 24 patients, whereas the non-SEMS group included 86 patients. The serum hemoglobin and albumin levels were lower (P = .049, P = .03), and the serum leukocyte and C-reactive protein levels were higher (P < .0001, P = .022) in the SEMS group. The tumor diameter and tumor circumferential rate were higher in the SEMS group (both P < .0001). No significant differences were observed in operation time, blood loss, postoperative complications, or postoperative hospital stay. After 1:1 propensity score matching, 15 patients in the SEMS group were compared with 15 patients in the non-SEMS group. The 3-year overall survival rates of the SEMS and non-SEMS groups were 87.5% and 88.9%, respectively (P = .97). The 3-year recurrence-free survival rates of the SEMS and non-SEMS groups were 58.2% and 81.7%, respectively (P = .233). No significant difference was found in the sites of recurrence.

CONCLUSION

The perioperative and long-term outcomes of SEMS placement as a BTS before laparoscopic resection could be acceptable compared with other elective laparoscopic operations without SEMS placement.

Colonic Stent Use by Indication and Patient Outcomes: A Nationwide Inpatient Sample Study

BACKGROUND

Colonic stent placement can avoid urgent surgery for large bowel obstruction in selected patients. Population-wide stent utilization patterns and outcomes are unknown.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using retrospective, population-based, Nationwide Inpatient Sample data, we studied patients with colonic stents discharged during 2010-2015. The primary outcome was ostomy creation during the same hospitalization. Other outcomes were perforation or peritonitis, and in-hospital death. Associations of outcomes with stent indication were investigated, adjusting for patient-, admission-, and hospital characteristics. We estimated annual population-wide stent use volumes.

RESULTS

Of 4257 patients with stent placement (52% male, mean age 64.6 years), 9.9% had non-metastatic colon cancer, 12.9% metastatic colon cancer, 37.8% extracolonic malignancy (ECM), and 39.3% had benign obstruction. In 8.1% of patients, ostomy creation surgery was performed. Perforation or peritonitis occurred in 16.7%, and in-hospital death in 4.5%. Relative to ECM, ostomy creation was several-fold more likely among nonmetastatic colon cancer (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 3.4; 95%CI, 2.1-5.5), metastatic colon cancer (adjusted OR 2.5; 95%CI, 1.7-3.7), and benign obstruction patients (adjusted OR 3.1; 95%CI, 2.1-4.7). Benign obstruction was associated with high risk of perforation/peritonitis (adjusted OR 3.1 relative to non-metastatic CC (95%CI, 2.1-4.5)). Perforation/peritonitis was highly associated with inpatient death (adjusted OR 6.8 (95%CI, 4.9-9.5)). Annually, about 3,580 patients underwent stent placement, with benign obstruction showing an increasing trend (P=0.0002).

CONCLUSIONS

Over 75% of stent placements were done for patients with benign disease and ECM obstruction. Subsequent ostomy creation during the hospitalization was least likely among ECM patients. Rates of perforation/peritonitis in benign obstructions were concerningly high. (22.2%).

Long-term survival after self-expanding metallic stent or stoma decompression as bridge to surgery in acute malignant large bowel obstruction

Aim

Self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) as bridge to surgery have been questioned due to the fear of perforation and tumour spread. This study aimed to compare SEMS and stoma as bridge to surgery in acute malignant large bowel obstruction in the Swedish population.

Method

Medical records of patients identified via the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Register 2007–2009 were collected and scrutinized. The inclusion criterion was decompression intended as bridge to surgery due to acute malignant large bowel obstruction. Patients who underwent decompression for other causes or had bowel perforation were excluded. Primary endpoints were 5-year overall survival and 3-year disease-free survival. Secondary endpoints were 30-day morbidity and mortality rates.

Results

A total of 196 patients fulfilled the inclusion criterion (SEMS, 71, and stoma, 125 patients). There was no significant difference in sex, age, ASA score, TNM stage and adjuvant chemotherapy between the SEMS and stoma groups. No patient was treated with biological agents. Five-year overall survival was comparable in SEMS, 56 per cent (40 patients), and stoma groups, 48 per cent (60 patients), P = 0.260. Likewise, 3-year disease-free survival did not differ statistically significant, SEMS 73 per cent (43 of 59 patients), stoma 65 per cent (62 of 95 patients), P = 0.32. In the SEMS group, 1.4 per cent (one patient) did not fulfil resection surgery compared to 8.8 per cent (11 patients) in the stoma group (P = 0.040). Postoperative complication and 30-day postoperative mortality rates did not differ, whereas the duration of hospital stay and proportion of permanent stoma were lower in the SEMS group.

Conclusion

This nationwide registry-based study showed that long-term survival in patients with either SEMS or stoma as bridge to surgery in acute malignant large bowel obstruction were comparable. SEMS were associated with a lower rate of permanent stoma, higher rate of resection surgery and shorter duration of hospital stay.

Definition of large bowel obstruction by primary colorectal cancer: A systematic review

AIM

Controversies on therapeutic strategy for large bowel obstruction by primary colorectal cancer mainly concern acute conditions, being essentially different from subacute obstruction. Clearly defining acute obstruction is important for design and interpretation of studies as well as for guidelines and daily practice. This systematic review aimed to evaluate definitions of obstruction by colorectal cancer in prospective studies.

METHOD

A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library. Eligibility criteria included randomized or prospective observational design, publication between 2000 and 2019, and the inclusion of patients with an obstruction caused by colorectal cancer. Provided definitions of obstruction were extracted with assessment of common elements.

RESULTS

A total of 16 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 99 prospective observational studies were included. Obstruction was specified as acute in 28 studies, complete/emergency in five, (sub)acute or similar terms in four and unspecified in 78. Five of 16 RCTs (31%) and 37 of 99 cohort studies (37%) provided a definition. The definitions included any combination of clinical symptoms, physical signs, endoscopic features and radiological imaging findings in 25 studies. The definition was only based on clinical symptoms in 11 and radiological imaging in six studies. Definitions included a radiological component in 100% of evaluable RCTs (5/5) vs. 54% of prospective observational studies (20/37, P = 0.07).

CONCLUSION

In this systematic review, the majority of prospective studies did not define obstruction by colorectal cancer and its urgency, whereas provided definitions varied hugely. Radiological confirmation seems to be an essential component in defining acute obstruction.

Controversies of colonic stenting in obstructive left colorectal cancer: a critical analysis with meta-analysis and meta-regression

PURPOSE

After almost three decades since the first description of colonic stents, the controversies of its safe application continue to impede the readiness of adoption by clinicians for malignant left bowel obstruction. This review seeks to address some of the controversial aspects of stenting and its impact on surgical and oncological outcomes.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, and CNKI were searched for articles employing SEMS for left colonic obstruction. Outcomes analyzed include success rates, complications, and long-term survival. Pooled risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were estimated.

RESULTS

36 studies were included with 2002 patients across seven randomized controlled trials and 29 observational studies. High technical (92%) and clinical (82%) success rates, and low rates of complications, including perforation (5%), were found. Those with > 8% perforation rates had poorer technical success rates than those with ≤ 8%, but there were no significant differences in 90-day in-hospital mortality and three and 5-year overall and disease-free survival. A significant increase was found in technical (RR = 1.094; CI, 1.041-1.149; p < 0.001) and clinical (RR = 1.158; CI, 1.064-1.259; p = 0.001) success rates when the duration between stenting and surgery was ≥ 2 weeks compared to < 2 weeks, but there were no significant differences in perforation rates, 90-day in-hospital mortality, and long-term survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Colonic stenting is safe and effective with high success rates and low complication rates. However, outcomes of higher perforation rates and optimal timing from stent till surgery remain unclear, with only a few studies reporting on these outcomes, leaving areas for future research.

Colonic Stenting in the Emergency Setting

Nowadays, colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most frequent cancer, and about a third of patients with CRC presents themselves with symptoms of large bowel obstruction. Historically, surgical resection was the treatment of choice for colonic obstruction, but this kind of approach is burdened by a high risk of postoperative morbidity and mortality. In recent times, the use of a colonic stent has been proposed to overcome the obstruction and transform an emergency surgical case into an elective one to avoid emergency surgery complications. Endoscopic stenting is the first-line treatment option in the palliative management of colonic obstruction, and there is sufficient scientific evidence to support this approach. However, endoscopic stent used as a bridge to surgery is not yet widely adopted because the concern was raised about the long-term survival and cancer safety of this approach. The recent scientific evidence has shown that this approach improves the short-term outcomes, such as postoperative complications and the stoma rate, without differences in long-term outcomes compared to emergency surgery. Therefore, the European Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy in 2020 has reconsidered stenting as a bridge to surgery as a valid alternative to emergency surgery.

Comparison of the prognosis of four different treatment strategies for acute left malignant colonic obstruction: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background

There is controversy regarding the efficacy of different treatment strategies for acute left malignant colonic obstruction. This study investigated the 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of several treatment strategies for acute left malignant colonic obstruction.

Methods

We searched for articles published in PubMed, Embase (Ovid), MEDLINE (Ovid), Web of Science, and Cochrane Library between January 1, 2000, and July 1, 2020. We screened out the literature comparing different treatment strategies. Evaluate the primary and secondary outcomes of different treatment strategies. The network meta-analysis summarizes the hazard ratio, odds ratio, mean difference, and its 95% confidence interval.

Results

The network meta-analysis involved 48 articles, including 8 (randomized controlled trials) RCTs and 40 non-RCTs. Primary outcomes: the 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of the CS-BTS strategy and the DS-BTS strategy were significantly better than those of the ES strategy, and the 5-year OS of the DS-BTS strategy was significantly better than that of CS-BTS. The long-term survival of TCT-BTS was not significantly different from those of CS-BTS and ES. Secondary outcomes: compared with emergency resection (ER) strategies, colonic stent-bridge to surgery (CS-BTS) and transanal colorectal tube-bridge to surgery (TCT-BTS) strategies can significantly increase the primary anastomosis rate, CS-BTS and decompressing stoma-bridge to surgery (DS-BTS) strategies can significantly reduce mortality, and CS-BTS strategies can significantly reduce the permanent stoma rate. The hospital stay of DS-BTS is significantly longer than that of other strategies. There was no significant difference in the anastomotic leakage levels of several treatment strategies.

Conclusion

Comprehensive literature research, we find that CS-BTS and DS-BTS strategies can bring better 5-year OS and DFS than ER. DS-BTS strategies have a better 5-year OS than CS-BTS strategies. Without considering the hospital stays, DS-BTS strategy is the best choice.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13017-021-00355-2.

Current Status of the Self-Expandable Metal Stent as a Bridge to Surgery Versus Emergency Surgery in Colorectal Cancer: Results from an Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Literature

Background: The current use of endoscopic stenting as a bridge to surgery is not always accepted in standard clinical practice to treat neoplastic colonic obstructions. Objectives: The role of colonic self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) positioning as a bridge to resective surgery versus emergency surgery (ES) for malignant obstruction, using all new data and available variables, was studied and we focused on short- and long-term results. Materials and Methods: A systematic review with meta-analysis was performed. PubMed, SCOPUS and Web of Science databases were included. The search comprised only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the interventions that included SEMS positioning versus ES. The primary outcomes were the rates of overall postoperative mortality, clinical and technical success. The secondary outcomes were the short- and long-term results. Results: A total of 12 studies were eligible for further analyses. A laparoscopic colectomy was the most common operation performed in the SEMS group, whereas the traditional open approach was commonly used in the ES group. Intraoperative colonic lavage was seldomly performed during ES. There were no differences in mortality rates between the two groups (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.04; I² = 0%). In the SEMS group, the rate of successful primary anastomosis was significantly higher in of SEMS (69.75%) than in the ES (55.07%) (RR 1.26, 95% 245 CI 1.01 to 1.57; I² = 86%). Conversely, the upfront Hartmann procedure was performed more frequently in the ES (39.1%) as compared to the SEMS group (23.4%) (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.85; I² = 23%). The overall postoperative complications rate was significantly lower in the SEMS group (32.74%) than in the ES group (48.25%) (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.91; I² = 65%). Conclusions: In the presence of malignant colorectal obstruction, SEMS is safe and associated with the same mortality and significantly lower morbidity than the ES group. The rate of successful primary anastomosis was significantly higher than the ES group. Nevertheless, recurrence and survival outcomes are not significantly different between the two groups. The analysis of short- and long-term results can suggest the use of SEMS as a bridge to resective surgery when it is performed by an endoscopist with adequate expertise in both colonoscopy and fluoroscopic techniques and who performed commonly colonic stenting.

Biopsy sampling during self-expandable metallic stent placement in acute malignant colorectal obstruction: a narrative review

BACKGROUND

Histopathology is a crucial part of diagnosis and treatment guidance of colorectal cancer. In Denmark, it is not routine to biopsy during self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placement as a treatment option for acute colorectal obstruction of unknown etiology. This is due to lack of knowledge about the risks of hemorrhage, and thus the risk to aggravate the deteriorating overview conditions. Therefore, the aim of this study is to investigate whether there is evidence to avoid biopsy sampling during acute SEMS placement.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant studies. Studies were included if they described biopsy sampling in relation to SEMS placement. Additionally, national and international guidelines were scrutinized on Google and by visiting the websites of national and international gastrointestinal societies.

RESULTS

In total, 43 studies were included in the review. Among these, one recommended biopsy during SEMS placement, three advised against biopsy, 23 just reported biopsy was performed during the procedure, and 16 reported biopsy before or after the procedure, or the timing was not specified. Among the 12 included guidelines, only two described biopsy during SEMS placement.

CONCLUSION

The literature on the subject is limited. In 24 of the 43 included studies, biopsy sampling was done during SEMS placement without reporting a decrease in the technical success rate. The included guidelines were characterized by a general lack of description of whether biopsy during SEMS placement should be performed or not. Prospective studies are needed in order to establish the real risk of hemorrhage, if any, when a biopsy is obtained.

Endoscopic Decompression in Colonic Distension

Background

Acute colonic distension is a medical emergency with high morbidity and mortality. Clinically important causes of colonic distension are acute colonic pseudo-obstruction, colonic volvulus, and malignant obstruction. Endoscopic decompression is one established therapeutic strategy.

Summary

This therapeutic review will give an overview of possible therapeutic strategies based on the recently published literature, focusing on endoscopic decompression and summarizing the other therapeutic possibilities. The review discusses separately the therapeutic options of acute colonic pseudo-obstruction, colonic volvulus, and malignant obstruction, providing an evidence-based orientation for clinical use.

Key Messages

Endoscopic decompression of colonic distension is an established therapy with high clinical success. The technique and its position in the therapy sequence differ depending on the medical condition, the trigger of the colonic distension, and the local expertise.

Systemic Chemotherapy is a Promising Treatment Option for Patients with Colonic Stents: A Review

Approximately 10% of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) develop malignant large bowel obstruction (MLBO) at diagnosis. Furthermore, for 35% of patients with MLBO, curative primary tumor resection is unfeasible because of locally advanced disease and comorbidities. The practice of placing a self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) has dramatically increased as an effective palliative treatment. Recent advances in systemic chemotherapy for metastatic CRC have significantly contributed to prolonging patients' prognosis and expanding the indications. However, the safety and efficacy of systemic chemotherapy in patients with SEMS have not been established. This review outlines the current status of this relatively new therapeutic strategy and future perspectives. Some reports on this topic have demonstrated that 1) systemic chemotherapy and the addition of molecular targeted agents contribute to prolonged survival in patients with SEMS; 2) delayed SEMS-related complications are a major concern, and this requires strict patient monitoring; however, primary tumor control by chemotherapy might result in decreased complications, especially regarding re-obstruction; and 3) using bevacizumab could be a risk factor for SEMS-related perforation, which may be lethal. Although this relatively new approach for unresectable stage IV obstructive CRC requires a well-planned clinical trial, this therapy could be promising for patients who are unideal candidates for emergency surgery and require immediate systemic chemotherapy.

Oncologic safety of laparoscopic surgery after metallic stent insertion for obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer: a multicenter comparative study

BACKGROUND

Self-expanding metallic stents (SEMSs) are used as a bridge to surgery in patients with obstructive colorectal cancer. However, the role of laparoscopic resection after successful stent deployment is not well established. We aimed to compare the oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic vs open surgery after successful colonic stent deployment in patients with obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer.

METHODS

In this multicenter study, 179 (97 laparoscopy, 82 open surgery) patients with obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer who underwent radical resection with curative intent after successful stent deployment were retrospectively reviewed. To minimize bias, we used inverse probability treatment-weighted propensity score analysis. The short- and long-term outcomes between the groups were compared.

RESULTS

Both groups had similar demographic and tumor characteristics. The operation time was longer, but the degree of blood loss was lower in the laparoscopy than in the open surgery group. There were nine (9.3%) open conversions. After adjustment, the groups showed similar patient and tumor characteristics. The 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) (laparoscopic vs open: 68.7% vs 48.5%, p = 0.230) and overall survival (OS) (laparoscopic vs open: 79.1% vs 69.0%, p = 0.200) estimates did not differ significantly across a median follow-up duration of 50.5 months. Advanced stage disease (DFS: hazard ratio [HR] 1.825, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.072-3.107; OS: HR 2.441, 95% CI 1.216-4.903) and post-operative chemotherapy omission (DFS: HR 2.529, 95% CI 1.481-4.319; OS: HR 2.666, 95% CI 1.370-5.191) were associated with relatively worse long-term outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Stent insertion followed by laparoscopy with curative intent is safe and feasible; the addition of post-operative chemotherapy should be considered after successful treatment.

Early surgery after bridge-to-surgery stenting for malignant bowel obstruction is associated with better oncological outcomes

BACKGROUND

Placement of self-expanding metal stents has been increasingly adopted as a bridge to surgery in patients presenting with obstructed left-sided colorectal cancers. The optimal bridging time has yet to be widely established, hence this retrospective study aims to determine the optimal bridging time to elective surgery post endoluminal stenting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All patients who underwent colorectal stenting for large bowel obstruction in a single, tertiary hospital in Singapore between January 2003 and December 2017 were retrospectively identified. Patients' baseline demographics, tumour characteristics, stent-related complications, intra-operative details, post-operative complications and oncological outcomes were analysed.

RESULTS

Of the 53 patients who successfully underwent colonic stenting for malignant left sided obstruction, 33.96% of patients underwent surgery within two weeks of stent placement while 66.04% of patients underwent surgery after 2 weeks of stent placement. Univariate analysis between both groups did not demonstrate significant differences in postoperative complications and stoma formation. Significant differences were observed between both groups for stent complications (38.89% vs 8.57%, p = 0.022), on-table decompression (38.89% vs 2.86%, p = 0.001) and systemic recurrence (11.11% vs 40.00%, p = 0.030). Increased bridging interval to surgery (OR 13.16, CI 1.37-126.96, p = 0.026) was a significant risk factor for systemic recurrence on multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing definitive surgery within 2 weeks of colonic stenting may have better oncological outcomes without compromising on postoperative outcomes. Further prospective studies are required to compare outcomes between emergency surgery and different bridging intervals.

Comparison of survival and perioperative outcome of the colonic stent and the transanal decompression tube placement and emergency surgery for left-sided obstructive colorectal cancer: a retrospective multi-center observational study "The CODOMO study"

PURPOSE

Advances in endoscopic technology have led to the reevaluation of self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placement as a bridge-to-surgery (BTS) in patients with obstructive colorectal cancer. In Japan, after inclusion of SEMS placement as a BTS in the medical insurance coverage in 2012, this procedure has been increasingly performed. However, a transanal decompression tube (TADT) placement has been used as a BTS. We aimed to retrospectively evaluate the optimal strategy for obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer (OLCRC) by comparing SEMS and TADT placement with emergency surgery.

METHODS

We included 301 patients with stage II and III OLCRC from 27 institutions. The study patients were divided into Surgery group (emergency surgery, n = 103), SEMS group (BTS by SEMS, n = 113), and TADT group (BTS by TADT, n = 85). We compared the survival and perioperative outcomes of patients in the Surgery group as a standard treatment with those in the SEMS and TADT groups.

RESULTS

The 3-year relapse-free survival rate in patients in the Surgery group was 74.8%, while that in patients in the SEMS group and TADT group were 69.0% (p = 0.39) and 55.3% (p = 0.006), respectively. The technical success rate was not statistically different, but the clinical success rate was significantly higher in the SEMS group than in the TADT group (p = 0.0040). With regard to postoperative complications after curative surgery, the SEMS group had significantly lower of complications (≥ grade 2) than the Surgery group (p = 0.022).

CONCLUSION

Patients who underwent SEMS placement for OLCRC had similar oncological outcomes to patients who underwent emergency surgery.

Development and In Vitro Evaluation of 5-Fluorouracil-Eluting Stents for the Treatment of Colorectal Cancer and Cancer-Related Obstruction

Self-expanding metal stents (SEMSs) are currently the gold standard for the localised management of malignant gastrointestinal (GI) stenosis and/or obstructions. Despite encouraging clinical success, in-stent restenosis caused by tumour growth is a significant challenge. Incorporating chemotherapeutic drugs into GI stents is an emerging strategy to provide localised and sustained release of drugs to intestinal malignant tissues to prevent tumour growth. Therefore, the aim of this work was to develop and evaluate a local GI stent-based delivery system that provides a controlled release of 5-fluorouracil (5FU) over a course of several weeks to months, for the treatment of colorectal cancer and cancer-related stenosis/obstructions. The 5FU-loaded GI stents were fabricated via sequential dip-coating of commercial GI stents with a drug-loaded polyurethane (PU) basecoat and a drug-free poly(ethylene-co-vinyl acetate) (PEVA) topcoat. For comparison, two types of commercial stents were investigated, including bare and silicone (Si) membrane-covered stents. The physicochemical properties of the 5FU-loaded stents were evaluated using photoacoustic Fourier-transform infrared (PA-FTIR) spectroscopy, X-ray diffraction (XRD), X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and thermal analysis. In vitro release studies in biological medium revealed that the 5FU-loaded stents provided a sustained release of drug over the period studied (18 d), and cell viability, cell cycle distribution and apoptosis assays showed that the released 5FU had comparable anticancer activity against human colon cancer cells (HCT-116) to pure 5FU. This study demonstrates that dip-coating is a facile and reliable approach for fabricating drug-eluting stents (DESs) that are promising candidates for the treatment of GI obstructions and/or restenosis.

Perineural invasion is increased in patients receiving colonic stenting as a bridge to surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In recent years, there has been growing concern about the potential association of stent placement as a bridge to surgery in malignant colon obstruction and some anatomopathological findings that could lead to worsening long-term cancer outcomes, such as perineural, vascular and lymphatic invasion. The aim of the present review was to assess the pathological changes found in surgical specimens after stent placement for obstructing colon cancer vs. emergency surgery, and the impact of perineural invasion on survival rates METHODS: MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Ovid and ISRCTN Registry were searched, with no restrictions. We performed four meta-analyses to estimate the pooled effect sizes using a random effect model. The outcomes were perineural, vascular and lymphatic invasion rates, and 5-year overall survival rate in patients with obstructive colon cancer, depending on the presence or absence of perineural invasion.

RESULTS

Ten studies with a total of 1273 patients were included in the meta-analysis. We found that patients in the stent group had a significantly higher risk of perineural (OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.22-3.21; p = 0.006) and lymphatic invasion (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.10-1.90; p = 0.008). Furthermore, patients with positive perineural invasion had almost twice the risk of dying compared to those with no perineural invasion (HR 1.92, 95% CI 1.22-3.02; p = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Stent placement as a bridge to surgery in colorectal cancer patients modifies the pathological characteristics such as perineural and lymphatic invasion, and this may worsen the long-term prognosis of patients. The presence of perineural infiltration in obstructed colon cancer decreases the long-term survival of patients.

Short- and long-term outcomes after colonic self-expandable metal stent placement for malignant large-bowel obstruction as a bridge to surgery focus on the feasibility of the laparoscopic approach: a retrospective, single center study

Purpose

Malignant large-bowel obstruction (MLBO) is a highly urgent condition in colorectal cancer with high complication rates. Self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement in MLBO is a new decompression treatment in Japan. Preoperative stent placement (bridge to surgery: BTS) avoids emergency surgery, but oncological influences of stent placement and post-BTS surgical approach remain unclear. We examined short- and long-term results of surgery for MLBO after SEMS placement in our hospital.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 75 patients with MLBO who underwent resection after SEMS placement at our hospital from June 2013 to December 2018. Postoperative morbidity and mortality were evaluated by comparison with the surgical approach.

Results

Tumor location was significantly higher in the left-side colon and rectum (n = 59, 78.7%) than right-side colon (n = 16, 21.3%). Technical and clinical success rates for SEMS placement were 97.3% and 96.0%, respectively. Laparoscopic surgery was performed in 54 patients (69.0%), and one-stage anastomosis was performed in 73 (97.3%). Postoperative complications were similar in the open surgery (open) group (n = 5, 23.8%) and laparoscopic surgery (lap) group (n = 7, 13.0%), with no severe complications requiring reoperation. Three-year overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) rates were not significantly different in the lap vs open group (67.5% vs 66.4%; 82.2% vs 62.5%).

Conclusion

Preoperative stent treatment avoids stoma construction but allows anastomosis. One-time surgery was performed safely contributing to minimally invasive treatment and acceptable short- and long-term results.

Comparison of colonic stents, stomas and resection for obstructive left colon cancer: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Emergency surgery (ES) is the standard-of-care for left-sided obstructing colon cancer, with self-expanding metallic stents (SEMSs) and diverting colostomies (DCs) being alternative approaches. The aim of this study was to review the short- and long-term outcomes of SEMS versus ES or DC.

METHODS

Embase and Medline were searched for articles comparing SEMS versus ES or DC. Primary outcomes were survival and recurrence rates. Secondary outcomes were peri- and postoperative outcomes. SEMS-specific outcomes include success and complication rates. Pooled odds ratio and 95% confidence interval were estimated with DerSimonian and Laird random effects used to account for heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Thirty-three studies were included, involving 15,224 patients in 8 randomized controlled trials and 25 observational studies. There were high technical and clinical success rates for SEMS, with low rates of complications. Our meta-analysis revealed increased odds of laparoscopic surgery and anastomosis, and decreased stoma creation with SEMS compared to ES. SEMS led to fewer complications, including anastomotic leak, wound infection, ileus, myocardial infarction, and improved 90-day in-hospital mortality. There were no significant differences in 3- and 5-year overall, cancer-specific and disease-free survival. SEMS, compared to DC, led to decreased rates of stoma creation, higher rates of ileus and reoperation, and led to longer hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

SEMS leads to better short-term outcomes but confers no survival advantage over ES. It is unclear whether SEMS has better short-term outcomes compared to DC. There is a lack of randomized trials with long-term outcomes for SEMS versus DC, hence results should be interpreted with caution.

Outcomes of self-expandable metal stent as bridge to surgery versus emergency surgery for left-sided obstructing colon cancer: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Long-term outcomes of self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) as bridges to surgery versus emergency surgery in the treatment of left-sided obstructing colon cancer remain unclear.

METHODS

Using a nationwide inpatient database in Japan, we performed one-to-one propensity score matching to compare overall survival, the stoma requirement, postoperative complications, and the length of stay between the SEMS and emergency surgery groups.

RESULTS

Compared with the emergency surgery group, the SEMS group showed worse survival (hazard ratio, 1.80; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-3.01), a higher incidence of postoperative ileus (8% vs. 4%, P = 0.010), a longer postoperative length of stay (14 vs. 12 days, P < 0.001), and a lower stoma requirement (10% vs. 29%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

SEMSs as bridges to surgery are associated with significantly poorer overall survival, a higher incidence of postoperative ileus, a longer length of stay, and a lower stoma requirement than is emergency surgery.

Endoscopic stenting for colorectal cancer obstruction as a bridge-to-surgery strategy

BACKGROUND

Acute obstructive colorectal cancer requires prompt decompression commonly by emergency surgery (ES). However, self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) have been increasingly used as a bridge-to-surgery (BTS) strategy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In an 8-year period, consecutive patients with acute left-sided colonic obstruction, due to locally advanced colorectal cancer, underwent ES or SEMS implantation. We evaluated technical/clinical success of SEMS, adverse events, and overall (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of the two therapeutic options.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients underwent ES (n = 23) or SEMS (n = 22). The two groups were comparable for sex, age, ASA score and cancer site/stage. Technical and clinical successes of SEMS were 100% and 72.7%, respectively. Clinical success correlated with neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) at baseline (OR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.43-0.98, P = .04). SEMS allowed primary anastomosis in the 45.5% of cases (0% in ES). SEMS implantation allowed a higher rate of surgery carried out by a laparoscopic approach: 36.4% vs 13.0% in ES. Performance of a definitive stoma and complications were similar. Median OS (34 in SEMS; 45 in ES, P = .33) and DFS (36 in SEMS; 35 in ES, P = .35) did not differ between the two groups. At univariate analysis, DFS was positively associated with primary anastomosis (HR = 2.44, 95% CI 1.4-16.6, P = .04) and laparoscopic surgery (HR = 8.33, 95% CI 1.08-50, P = .04), and inversely associated with a NLR > 3.6 (HR = 0.59, 95% CI 0.16-0.92, P = .03). At multivariate analysis, no feature retained an independent predictive power.

CONCLUSION

SEMS is an effective and safe procedure, equivalent to emergency surgery in terms of complications, OS and DFS, providing the chance of a primary anastomosis in the majority of patients.

Long-term survival analysis after endoscopic stenting as a bridge to surgery for malignant colorectal obstruction: comparison with emergency diverting colostomy

OBJECTIVE

The use of colorectal self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) as bridge therapy for malignant colorectal obstruction was first reported more than 20 years ago. However, its use remains controversial. In this study, we aimed to compare the long-term survival of patients with potentially resectable malignant colorectal obstruction who had undergone colorectal SEMS placement and emergency surgery.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective analyses. Patients who received treatment between 2009 and 2017 were included. According to the eligibility criteria, 21 patients were included in the SEMS group and 67 patients were included in the surgical group..

RESULTS

The majority of the patients in the SEMS group were female (57.1%), whereas the majority of those in the surgical group were male (53.7%). The median follow-up time was 60 months for both groups with the same interquartile range of 60 months. There was no difference in the overall survival rate (log rank p=0.873) and disease-free survival rate (log rank p=0.2821) in the five-year analysis. There was no difference in local recurrence rates (38.1% vs. 22.4%, p=0.14) or distant recurrence rates (33.3% vs. 50.7%, p=0.16) in the SEMS and the surgical groups. Technical and clinical success rates of endoscopic stenting were 95.3% and 85.7%, respectively. There were no immediate adverse events (AEs). Severe AEs included perforation (14.3%), silent perforation (4.7%), reobstruction (14.3%), and bleeding (14.3%). Mild AEs included pain (42.8%), tenesmus (9.5%), and incontinence (4.76%). The limitations of this study was retrospective and was conducted at a single center.

CONCLUSIONS

No differences in disease-free and overall survival rates were observed in the five-year analysis of patients with resectable colorectal cancer who had undergone SEMS placement or colostomy for the treatment of malignant colorectal obstruction. Patients in the SEMS group had a higher rate of primary anastomosis and a lower rate of temporary colostomy than did those in the surgery group.