Local recurrence after stenting for obstructing left-sided colonic cancer

Colon cancer: the 2023 Korean clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis and treatment

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer in Korea and the third leading cause of death from cancer. Treatment outcomes for colon cancer are steadily improving due to national health screening programs with advances in diagnostic methods, surgical techniques, and therapeutic agents.. The Korea Colon Cancer Multidisciplinary (KCCM) Committee intends to provide professionals who treat colon cancer with the most up-to-date, evidence-based practice guidelines to improve outcomes and help them make decisions that reflect their patients' values and preferences. These guidelines have been established by consensus reached by the KCCM Guideline Committee based on a systematic literature review and evidence synthesis and by considering the national health insurance system in real clinical practice settings. Each recommendation is presented with a recommendation strength and level of evidence based on the consensus of the committee.

Short-term Outcomes of Elective Surgery Following Self-Expandable Metallic Stent and Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Patients With Left-Sided Colon Cancer Obstruction

BACKGROUND

Colonic stenting reduces morbidity and stoma formation for left-sided colon cancer obstruction, and a prolonged interval between stenting and surgery with neoadjuvant chemotherapy administered might result in a lower stoma rate and tumor reduction.

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed to evaluate the short-term outcomes of elective surgery following colonic stenting compared with elective surgery following colonic stenting and neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with left-sided colon cancer obstruction.

DESIGN

This is a prospective multicenter cohort study.

SETTINGS

This study was conducted at 5 medical centers.

PATIENTS

Patients ( n = 100) with acute left-sided colon cancer obstruction undergoing colonic stenting between December 2015 and December 2019 were included.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were assigned to the stenting-alone or chemotherapy group.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes measured were laparoscopic surgery and stoma rate.

RESULTS

Of the 100 patients who underwent colonic stenting, 52 were assigned to the stenting group and 48 were assigned to the chemotherapy group. No statistically significant differences were detected in stent-related complications. The adverse events associated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy were well tolerated. The level of hemoglobin (117.2 vs 107.6 g/L; p = 0.008), albumin (34.2 vs 31.5 g/L; p < 0.001), and prealbumin (0.19 vs 0.16 g/L; p = 0.001) was significantly increased, and the bowel wall thickness (1.09 vs 2.04 mm; p < 0.001) was significantly decreased preoperatively in the chemotherapy group compared with the stenting group. The number of mean harvested lymph nodes was greater in the chemotherapy group than in the stenting group (25.6 vs 21.8; p = 0.04). Laparoscopic surgery was performed more frequently (77.1% vs 40.4%; p < 0.001) and a stoma was created less frequently (10.4% vs 28.8%; p = 0.02) in the chemotherapy group than in the stenting group.

LIMITATIONS

This trial was limited by the nonrandomized design and a short follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that elective surgery following neoadjuvant chemotherapy and colonic stenting is a safe, effective, and well-tolerated treatment approach with a high laparoscopic resection rate and a low stoma rate. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B980 .

RESULTADOS A CORTO PLAZO DE LA CIRUGA ELECTIVA SEGUIDO DE STENT METLICO AUTOEXPANDIBLE Y QUIMIOTERAPIA NEOADYUVANTE EN PACIENTES CON OBSTRUCCIN POR CNCER DE COLON IZQUIERDO

ANTECEDENTES:La colocación de stents colónicos reduce la morbilidad y la formación de estomas por obstrucción por cáncer de colon izquierdo, y el intervalo prolongado entre la colocación de stents y la cirugía con quimioterapia neoadyuvante administrada podría resultar en una menor tasa de estomas y reducción del tumor.OBJETIVO:Evaluar los resultados a corto plazo de la cirugía electiva después de la colocación de stent en el colon en comparación con la cirugía electiva después de la colocación de stent en el colon y la quimioterapia neoadyuvante en pacientes con obstrucción por cáncer de colon izquierdo.DISEÑO:Estudio prospectivo de cohorte multicéntrico.ENTORNO CLINICO:Este estudio se realizó en 5 centros médicos.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron pacientes (n=100) con obstrucción aguda por cáncer de colon izquierdo que se sometieron a colocación de stent colónico entre diciembre de 2015 y diciembre de 2019.INTERVENCIONES:Los pacientes fueron asignados al grupo de stent solo o quimioterapia.MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO PRINCIPALES:Los resultados primarios medidos fueron la cirugía laparoscópica y la tasa de ostomía.RESULTADOS:De los 100 pacientes que se sometieron a la colocación de stent colónico, 52 fueron asignados al grupo de colocación de stent y 48 al grupo de quimioterapia. No se detectaron diferencias estadísticamente significativas en las complicaciones relacionadas con el stent. Los eventos adversos asociados con la quimioterapia neoadyuvante fueron bien tolerados. Hemoglobina (117,2 g/l vs. 107,6 g/l; p = 0,008), albúmina (34,2 g/l vs. 31,5 g/l; p < 0,001) y prealbúmina (0,19 g/l vs. 0,16 g/l; p = 0,001) aumentaron significativamente y el grosor de la pared intestinal (1,09 mm vs. 2,04 mm; p < 0,001) disminuyó significativamente antes de la operación en el grupo de quimioterapia en comparación con el grupo de colocación de stent. El número medio de ganglios linfáticos extraídos fue mayor en el grupo de quimioterapia que en el grupo de stent (25,6 vs. 21,8; p = 0,04). La cirugía laparoscópica se realizó con mayor frecuencia (77,1 % vs. 40,4 %; p < 0,001) y se creó un estoma con menos frecuencia (10,4 % vs. 28,8 % ; p = 0,02) en el grupo de quimioterapia que en el grupo de colocación de stent.LIMITACIONES:Este ensayo estuvo limitado por el diseño no aleatorio y el corto período de seguimiento.CONCLUSIONES:Este estudio sugiere que la cirugía electiva después de la quimioterapia neoadyuvante y la colocación de stent colónico es un tratamiento seguro, efectivo y bien tolerado, con una alta tasa de resección laparoscópica y una baja tasa de estoma. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B980 . (Traducción- Dr. Francisco M. Abarca-Rendon ).

Which treatment strategy is optimal for acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction? A Bayesian meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to determine the best treatment for acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction (ALMCO) among emergency surgery (ES), self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS), transanal drainage tube (TD), and decompressive stoma (DS).

METHOD

Articles that compared two or more treatments of ALMCO were searched from PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase. Network meta-analyses were performed to calculate the outcomes of primary anastomosis, stoma creation, morbidity, mortality, and 5-year survival.

RESULTS

Fifty-one articles met inclusion criteria. TD was the optimal treatment in performing primary anastomosis [probability of ranking first (Pro-1) 0.96], while ES was the worst [probability of ranking fourth (Pro-4) 0.99]. More permanent stoma was formed in ES and TD groups than in SEMS and DS groups [OR (95%CI): TD vs SEMS: 4.12 (1.89, 9.45); TD vs DS: 3.39 (1.46, 8.75); ES vs DS: 2.55 (1.73, 4.17); SEMS vs ES: 0.33 (0.24, 0.42)]. More morbidity occurred in ES group than in SEMS group [OR (95%CI): ES vs SEMS: 1.44 (1.14, 1.82)]. Besides, SEMS was ranked first in avoiding infection (Pro-4 0.95). For in-hospital mortality, ES was ranked first (Pro-1 0.93). TD was ranked first in recurrence (Pro-1 0.97) and metastasis (Pro-1 0.98). There was no discrepancy in 5-year overall and disease-free survival among all strategies.

CONCLUSION

SEMS as a bridge to surgery reduces stoma formation, and morbidity especially the infection rate with relatively great oncological outcomes. Therefore, SEMS should be recommended first for ALMCO in the medical center with experience and conditions.

5-year oncological outcomes in left-sided malignant colonic obstruction: stent as bridge to surgery

BACKGROUND

A considerable number of patients with colon cancer present with a colonic obstruction. The use of self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) as a bridge to surgery (BTS) in potential curative patients with left-sided colonic cancer obstruction remains debatable. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the 5-year oncological outcomes of using a SEMS as a BTS.

METHODS

All patients with left-sided malignant colon obstruction who underwent curative surgery with no metastasis upon presentation between March 2009 and May 2013 were retrospectively reviewed and analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 45 patients were included, 28 patients underwent upfront surgery, and 17 patients had a stent as a bridge to surgery. T4 stage was statistically significantly higher in patients who had a SEMS as a BTS (35.3% vs. 10.7%) (p-value 0.043). The mean duration in days of the SEMS to surgery was 13.76 (SD 10.08). TNM stage 3 was a prognostic factor toward distant metastasis (HR 5.05). When comparing patients who had upfront surgery to those who had a SEMS as a BTS, higher 5-year disease-free survival (75% vs. 72%) and 5-year overall survival (89% vs. 82%) were seen in patients who had upfront surgery. However, both were statistically insignificant.

CONCLUSION

Using self-expanding metallic stents as a bridge to surgery yields comparable 5-year survival and disease-free survival rates to upfront emergency surgery. The decision to use SEMS versus opting for emergency surgery should be made after careful patient selection and with the assistance of experienced endoscopists.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

N/A.

Stent as bridge to surgery decreases postoperative complications without worsening oncological outcomes: retrospective unicentric cohort study and stent placement protocol

BACKGROUND

Even if the use of stent as bridge to surgery (BTS) for obstructive colon cancer was described long ago, there is still much controversy on their use. Patient recovery before surgery and colonic desobstruction are just some of the reasons to defend this management that can be found in several available articles.

METHODS

This is a single-center, retrospective cohort study, including patients with obstructive colon cancer treated between 2010 and 2020. The primary aim of this study is to compare medium-term oncological outcomes (overall survival, disease-free survival) between stent as BTS and ES groups. The secondary aims are to compare perioperative results (in terms of approach, morbidity and mortality, and rate of anastomosis/stomas) between both groups and, within the BTS group, analyze whether there are any factors that may influence oncological outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 251 patients were included. Patients belonging to the BTS cohort presented a higher rate of laparoscopic approach, required less intensive care management, less reintervention, and less permanent stoma rate, when comparing with patients who underwent urgent surgery (US). There were not significant differences in terms of disease-free survival and overall survival between the two groups. Lymphovascular invasion negatively affected oncological results but was not related with stent placement.

CONCLUSION

The stent as a bridge to surgery is a good alternative to urgent surgery, which leads to a decrease in postoperative morbidity and mortality without significantly worsening oncological outcomes.

Comparison of long-term outcomes of colonic stenting as a "bridge to surgery" and emergency surgery in patients with left-sided malignant colonic obstruction

PURPOSE

Long-term oncologic outcomes of colonic stenting as a "bridge to surgery" in patients with left-sided malignant colonic obstruction (LMCO) are unclear. This study was performed to compare long-term outcomes of self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) insertion as a bridge to surgery and emergency surgery in patients with acute LMCO.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included patients with acute LMCO who underwent SEMS insertion as a bridge to surgery or emergency surgery. The primary outcomes were 5-year disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and recurrence rate. Survival outcomes were determined using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using log-rank tests.

RESULTS

There was a trend of worsening 5-year OS rate in the SEMS group compared with emergency surgery group (45% vs. 57%, P=0.07). In stage-wise subgroup analyses, a trend of deteriorating 5-year OS rate in the SEMS group with stage III (43% vs. 59%, P=0.06) was observed. The 5-year DFS and recurrence rate were not different between groups. The overall median follow-up time was 58 months. On multivariate analysis, age of ≥65 years and American Joint Committee on Cancer stage of ≥III, and synchronous metastasis were significant poor prognostic factors for OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.709; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.007-2.900; P=0.05/HR, 1.988; 95% CI, 1.038-3.809; P=0.04/HR, 2.146; 95% CI, 1.191-3.866; P=0.01; respectively).

CONCLUSION

SEMS as a bridge to surgery may have adverse oncologic outcomes. Patients in the SEMS group had a trend of worsening 5-year OS rate without higher recurrence.

Oncologic impact of colonic stents for obstructive left-sided colon cancer

Colonic stenting has had a significant positive impact on the management of obstructive left-sided colon cancer (OLCC) in terms of both palliative treatment and bridge-to-surgery (BTS). Notably, many studies have convincingly demonstrated the effectiveness of stenting as a BTS, resulting in improvements in short-term outcomes and quality of life, safety, and efficacy in subsequent curative surgery, and increased cost-effectiveness, whereas the safety of chemotherapy after stenting and the long-term outcomes of stenting as a BTS are controversial. Several studies have suggested an increased risk of perforation in patients receiving bevacizumab chemotherapy after colonic stenting. In addition, several pathological analyses have suggested a negative oncological impact of colonic stenting. In contrast, many recent studies have demonstrated that colonic stenting for OLCC does not negatively impact the safety of chemotherapy or long-term oncological outcomes. The updated version of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines released in 2020 included colonic stenting as a BTS for OLCC as a recommended treatment. It should be noted that the experience of endoscopists is involved in determining technical and clinical success rates and possibly oncological outcomes. This review discusses the positive and negative impacts of colonic stenting on OLCC treatment, particularly in terms of oncology.

Short- and long-term outcomes following bridge to surgery and emergency resection in acute malignant large bowel obstruction

AIM

Bridge to surgery (BtS) aims to decrease perioperative morbidity and mortality in emergency resection (ER) of the colon. Previous results are inconsistent, and long-term comparisons are scarce. The aim of this study was to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of BtS and ER.

METHOD

This retrospective study examined data from the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry for patients treated for acute malignant large bowel obstruction from 2007 to 2009. Patients were grouped by treatment strategy: BtS (using a self-expanding metallic stent or diverting stoma) or ER. Medical records were scrutinized for all patients in the BtS group. The primary endpoints were 5-year overall survival (OS) and 3-year recurrence-free survival (RFS). The secondary endpoints were postoperative mortality and morbidity rates and stoma permanence.

RESULTS

Overall, 143 patients were treated using BtS versus 1302 patients treated with ER. The 5-year OS was higher in the BtS group than in the ER group (53.8% vs. 37.4%; p < 0.05). No difference was noted in the 3-year RFS (75.7% vs. 75.0%; p = 0.38). The postoperative mortality rate was lower in the BtS group than in the ER group (0.7% vs. 7.3%; p < 0.05). Complications occurred in 46.9% of patients in the BtS group (both procedures) versus 35.9% of patients in the ER group (p < 0.05); the rate of severe complications was 23.1% and 16.9%, respectively (p = 0.07).

CONCLUSION

This retrospective population-based registry study showed higher long-term survival and lower postoperative mortality rates among patients treated with BtS versus ER for acute malignant large bowel obstruction.

Oncologic safety of colonic stenting as a bridge to surgery in left-sided malignant colonic obstruction: Current evidence and prospects

Approximately 7%-29% of patients with colorectal cancer present with colonic obstruction. The concept of self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) insertion as a bridge to surgery (BTS) is appealing. However, concerns on colonic stenting possibly impairing oncologic outcomes have been raised. This study aimed to review current evidence on the short- and long-term oncologic outcomes of SEMS insertion as BTS for left-sided malignant colonic obstruction. For short-term outcomes, colonic stenting facilitates a laparoscopic approach, increases the likelihood of primary anastomosis without a stoma, and may decrease postoperative morbidity. However, SEMS-related perforation also increases local recurrence and impairs overall survival. Moreover, colonic stenting may cause negative oncologic outcomes even without perforation. SEMS can induce shear forces on the tumor, leading to increased circulating cancer cells and aggressive pathological characteristics, including perineural and lymphovascular invasion. The conflicting evidence has led to discordant guidelines. Well-designed collaborative studies that integrate both oncologic outcomes and data on basic research (e.g., alteration of circulating tumors) are needed to clarify the actual benefit of colonic stenting as BTS.

Current practice for the treatment of obstructive left-sided colon cancer in China: a nationwide cross-sectional survey

PURPOSE

This study surveyed the current practice of surgical treatment of obstructive left-sided colon cancer (OLCC) in China.

METHODS

All colorectal surgery departments at tertiary or secondary hospitals in China were invited to complete a web-based questionnaire between August 27 and September 2, 2020.

RESULTS

Overall, completed questionnaire were received from 357 hospitals. Emergency surgery was the mainstay of treatment for OLCC, with the open approach accounting for up to 61.62%. The stoma rate of emergency surgery was up to 80%, mainly due to inadequate bowel preparation and severe edema of colon walls. Hartmann's procedure (61.62%) was the most preferred operation. A total of 243 hospitals (68.7%) reported that they would consider the use of a self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) as a bridge for elective surgery. More than 50% of the hospitals participating in this study reported the success rate of SEMS placement, as well as the resolution rate of obstruction more than 80%, and the stent-related perforation rate was < 5%. A total of 126 hospitals considered carrying out a strategy of SEMS followed by neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to elective surgery and believed that it might further improve treatment outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

SEMS is a feasible option for the treatment of OLCC in addition to traditional emergency surgery, and its clinical benefits have been preliminarily recognized.

Self-expanding metal stent placement and pathological alterations among obstructive colorectal cancer cases

BACKGROUND

Experimental studies suggest that self-expanding metal stents (SEMSs) enhance the aggressive behavior of obstructive colorectal cancer. The influence of SEMS placement on pathological alterations remains to be elucidated.

AIM

To determine whether SEMS placement is associated with molecular or pathological features of colorectal carcinoma tissues.

METHODS

Using a nonbiased molecular pathological epidemiology database of patients with obstructive colorectal cancers, we examined the association of SEMS placement with molecular or pathological features, including tumor size, histological type, American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC)-pTNM stage, and mutation statuses in colorectal cancer tissues compared with the use of transanal tubes. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to adjust for potential confounders.

RESULTS

SEMS placement was significantly associated with venous invasion (P < 0.01), but not with the other features examined, including tumor size, disease stage, mutation status, and lymphatic invasion. In both the univariable and multivariable models with adjustment for potential factors including tumor location, histological type, and AJCC-pT stage, SEMS placement was significantly associated with severe venous invasion (P < 0.01). For the outcome category of severe venous invasion, the multivariable odds ratio for SEMS placement relative to transanal tube placement was 19.4 (95% confidence interval: 5.24–96.2). No significant differences of disease-free survival and overall survival were observed between SEMS and transanal tube groups.

CONCLUSION

SEMS placement might be associated with severe venous invasion in colorectal cancer tissue, providing an impetus for further investigations on the pathological alterations by SEMSs in colorectal cancer development.

Upfront surgery versus self-expanding metallic stent as bridge to surgery in left-sided colonic cancer obstruction: A multicenter observational study

BACKGROUND

Oncological outcomes of self-expanding metallic stent used as a bridge to surgery in potential curative patients with left-sided colonic cancer obstruction remain unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate perioperative and mid-term oncological outcomes of 2 of the currently most commonly performed treatments in left-sided colonic cancer obstruction.

METHODS

This is a retrospective multicenter study including patients with left-sided colonic cancer obstruction treated with curative intent between 2013 and 2017. The presence of metastasis at diagnosis was an exclusion criterion. The primary outcome was to evaluate the noninferiority, in terms of overall survival, of bridge to surgery strategy compared with emergency colonic resection. The secondary outcomes were perioperative morbimortality, disease free survival, local recurrence, and distant recurrence.

RESULTS

A total of 564 patients were included, 320 in the emergency colonic resection group and 244 in the bridge to surgery group. Twenty-seven patients of the bridge-to-surgery group needed urgent operation. Postoperative morbidity rates were statistically higher in the emergency colonic resection group (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] 0.37 [0.24-0.55], P < .001). There was no difference in 90-day mortality between groups (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] 0.85 [0.36-1.99], P = .702). The median follow-up was 3.80 years (2.29-4.92). The results show the noninferiority of bridge to surgery versus emergency colonic resection in terms of overall survival (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval) 0.78 [0.56-1.07], P = .127). There were no differences in disease free survival, distant recurrence, and local recurrence rates between bridge to surgery and emergency colonic resection groups.

CONCLUSION

Self-expanding metallic stent as bridge to surgery might not lead to a negative impact on the long-term prognosis of the tumor compared with emergency colonic resection in expert hands and selected patients.

Long-term outcomes of standardized colonic stenting using WallFlex as a bridge to surgery: Multicenter prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

The oncological outcomes, especially high recurrence rate, of bridge-to-surgery (BTS) self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placement remain concerning, emphasizing the necessity of standardized SEMS placement. However, its impact on long-term BTS outcomes is unknown. We investigated the long-term outcomes of BTS colonic stenting using standardized SEMS placement.

METHODS

This prospective, multicenter cohort study conducted at 46 hospitals in Japan (March 2012 to October 2013) included consecutive patients with stage II and III obstructive colorectal cancer managed with BTS SEMS placement. The SEMS placement technique was standardized by information dissemination among the participating hospitals. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) after SEMS placement, and the secondary outcomes were relapse-free survival (RFS), recurrence, and short-term outcomes of SEMS placement and surgery.

RESULTS

The 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS rates were 94.1%, 77.4%, and 67.4% (Kaplan-Meier), respectively, with high technical success (99.0%, 206/208) and low perforation (1.9%, 4/208) rates. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year RFS rates were 81.6%, 65.6%, and 57.9% (Kaplan-Meier), respectively, and the overall recurrence rate was 31.0% (62/200). The RFS rate was significantly poorer in patients with perforation (n = 4) than in those without perforation (n = 196) (log-rank P = 0.017); moreover, perforation was identified as an independent factor affecting RFS (hazard ratio 3.31; 95% confidence interval 1.03-10.71, multivariate Cox regression).

CONCLUSION

This large, prospective, multicenter study revealed satisfactory long-term outcomes of BTS colonic stenting using a standardized SEMS insertion method, which might be specifically due to the reduced perforation rate. (UMIN000007953).

Recent Updates in Gastrointestinal Stent Placement from the Esophagus to the Colon: A Radiological Perspective

Fluoroscopic-guided stent placement has become an advantageous treatment option for diverse gastrointestinal disorders. In addition to palliative stent placement in patients with inoperable cancers, stenting has gradually expanded to other conditions, including as a bridge to surgery, as well as in patients' benign lesions and anastomotic strictures or leaks. This narrative review describes the indications, efficacy and safety of stent placement from the esophagus to the colon, including current recommendations, recent updates, and novel stents.

Effect of self-expandable metal stent on morbidity and mortality and oncological prognosis in malignant colonic obstruction: retrospective analysis of its use as curative and palliative treatment

INTRODUCTION

Acute gastrointestinal obstruction due to colorectal cancer occurs in 7-30% of cases and is an abdominal emergency that requires urgent decompression. The safety and oncological effect of self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) in these patients remains controversial. This study aimed to evaluate its impact on these variables and compare it with that of emergency surgery (ES).

METHODS

Descriptive, retrospective and single-centre study, performed between 2008 and 2015, with follow-up until 2017. One hundred eleven patients with diagnosis of left malignant colonic obstruction were included and divided according to the treatment received: stent as bridge to surgery (SBTS group: 39), palliative stent (PS group: 30) and emergency surgery with curative (ECS group: 34) or palliative intent (EPS group: 8). Treatment was decided by the attending surgeon in charge.

RESULTS

Technical and clinical general success rates for colorectal SEMS were 95.7% and 91.3%, respectively, with an associated morbimortality of 23.2%, which was higher in the PS group (p = 0.002). The SBTS group presented a higher laparoscopic approach and primary anastomosis (p < 0.001), as well as a lower colostomy rate than the ECS group (12.8% vs. 40%; p = 0.023). Postoperative morbidity and mortality were significantly lower in the SBTS group compared to the ECS group (41% vs. 67.6%; p = 0.025). Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were similar between the analysed groups.

CONCLUSION

Colonic stent placement is a safe and effective therapeutic alternative to emergency surgery in the management of left-sided malignant colonic obstruction in both curative and palliative fields. It presents a lower postoperative morbimortality and a similar oncological prognosis.

Transanal decompression tube is superior to self-expandable metallic colonic stent for malignant colorectal obstruction: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

The surgical management of left-sided malignant large bowel obstruction (MLBO) is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Recently, self-expandable metallic colonic stent (SEMS) and transanal decompression tube (TDT) used as a 'bridge to surgery' (BTS) have been widely used. This study aims to compare the clinical outcomes and oncological safety of SEMS and TDT as BTS to transform MLBO into elective surgery.

METHODS

Between February 2013 and March 2019, 62 patients with MLBO received SEMS (n = 32) or TDT (n = 30), and elective one-stage surgery later. We evaluated decompression efficiency and oncological safety in selective operation in TDT and SEMS groups, including preoperative preparation time, surgical approach, number of lymphatic dissection and vascular invasion, ulcer formation and histopathological findings of resected specimens.

RESULTS

The preoperative preparation time in the SEMS group was shorter than that of the TDT group (P < 0.05). However, there was no significant difference between the groups in postoperative length of hospital stay (P > 0.05). The number of vascular invasions in the TDT group was less than that in the SEMS group (P < 0.05). Furthermore, the risk of wound abscess and ulcer formation in the TDT group was significantly lower than that in the SEMS group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that SEMS is associated with a relatively poor oncological outcome and the placement of TDT as BTS in MLBO patients may be a better alternation.

Which prognostic factors are important for long-term outcomes in symptomatic obstructive colon cancer? A multi-institutional retrospective cohort study

Purpose

The prognostic factors in obstructive colon cancer have not been clearly identified. We aimed to identify the prognostic factor to establish optimal treatment strategy in obstructive colon cancer.

Methods

Patients who underwent surgery for primary colon cancer in stages II and III with symptomatic obstruction from 2004 to 2010 in six hospitals were retrospectively collected. Clinicopathological and surgical outcomes were compared between stent insertion and emergent surgery group. Multiple regression analysis and survival curve analysis were used to identify the prognostic factors in symptomatic obstructive colon cancer.

Results

Among 210 patients, 168 patients (80.0%) underwent stent insertion followed by surgery and 42 patients (20.0%) underwent emergent surgery. Laparoscopic approach (55.4% vs. 23.8%, p < 0.001) and adequate lymph node (LN) harvest (≥12) (93.5% vs. 69.0%, p < 0.001) were significantly higher in stent insertion group. In multiple regression analysis, emergent surgery (hazard ratio [HR], 2.153; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.031–4.495), vascular invasion (HR, 6.257; 95% CI, 2.784–14.061), and omitting adjuvant chemotherapy (HR, 3.107; 95% CI, 1.394–6.925) were independent poor prognostic factors in 5-year overall survival, and N stage (N1 HR, 3.095; 95% CI, 1.316–7.284; N2 HR, 4.156; 95% CI, 1.671–10.333) was the only poor prognostic factor in 5-year disease-free survival.

Conclusion

In symptomatic obstructive colon cancer, emergent surgery, N stage, vascular invasion, and omission of adjuvant chemotherapy were independent poor prognostic factors. Stent insertion is suggested as the initial treatment for symptomatic obstructive colon cancer, and adjuvant chemotherapy is recommended, especially when vascular invasion or LN metastasis is confirmed.

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.

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.

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.

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.

The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland consensus guidelines in emergency colorectal surgery

AIM

There is a requirement for an expansive and up to date review of the management of emergency colorectal conditions seen in adults. The primary objective is to provide detailed evidence-based guidelines for the target audience of general and colorectal surgeons who are responsible for an adult population and who practise in Great Britain and Ireland.

METHODS

Surgeons who are elected members of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland Emergency Surgery Subcommittee were invited to contribute various sections to the guidelines. They were directed to produce a pathology-based document using literature searches that were systematic, comprehensible, transparent and reproducible. Levels of evidence were graded. Each author was asked to provide a set of recommendations which were evidence-based and unambiguous. These recommendations were submitted to the whole guideline group and scored. They were then refined and submitted to a second vote. Only those that achieved >80% consensus at level 5 (strongly agree) or level 4 (agree) after two votes were included in the guidelines.

RESULTS

All aspects of care (excluding abdominal trauma) for emergency colorectal conditions have been included along with 122 recommendations for management.

CONCLUSION

These guidelines provide an up to date and evidence-based summary of the current surgical knowledge in the management of emergency colorectal conditions and should serve as practical text for clinicians managing colorectal conditions in the emergency setting.

Short- and long-term outcomes of self-expanding metallic stent placement vs. emergency surgery for malignant colorectal obstruction

The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy does not recommend self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) placement as a bridge to surgery (BTS) for malignant colorectal obstruction (MCRO). However, no universally accepted consensus has been determined. The present study aimed to evaluate the short- and long-term outcomes of SEMS placement vs. emergency surgery (ES) for MCRO. Surgical resection of colorectal cancer was performed in 3,840 patients between April 2001 and June 2016. Of these, 93 patients had MCRO requiring emergency decompression. Only patients in whom the colorectal lesion was ultimately resected were included; thus, the present study included 62 patients treated with MCRO via SEMS placement as a BTS (n=25) or via ES (n=37). The rates of laparoscopic surgery, primary anastomosis, stoma formation, lymph node dissection, adverse events, 30-day mortality and disease-free survival were evaluated. The clinical success rate of SEMS placement was 92.0% (23/25). Compared with the ES group, the SEMS group had higher rates of laparoscopic surgery (68.0 vs. 2.7%; P<0.001) and primary anastomosis (88.0 vs. 51.4%; P=0.003), a greater number of dissected lymph nodes (30 vs. 18; P=0.001), and lower incidences of stoma formation (24.0 vs. 67.6%; P=0.002) and overall adverse events (24.0 vs. 62.2%; P=0.004). The 30-day mortality and disease-free survival of the SEMS group were not significantly different to that of the ES group (0 vs. 2.7%; P=1.000; log-rank test; P=0.10). In conclusion, as long as adverse events such as perforation are minimized, SEMS placement as a BTS could be a first treatment option for MCRO. The present study is registered in the University Hospital Medical Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN R000034868).

Comparison of safety between self-expanding metal stents as a bridge to surgery and emergency surgery based on pathology: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To explore the long-term oncological safety of using self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) as a bridge to surgery for acute obstructive colorectal cancer by comparing the pathological results of emergency surgery (ES) with elective surgery after the placement of SEMS.

METHODS

Studies comparing SEMS as a bridge to surgery with emergency surgery for acute obstructive colorectal cancer were retrieved through the databases of Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane libraries, and a meta-analysis was conducted based on the pathological results of the two treatments. Risk ratios (OR) or mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for the outcomes under random effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 27 studies were included, including 3 randomized controlled studies, 2 prospective studies, and 22 retrospective studies, with a total of 3737 patients. The presence of perineural invasion (RR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.48, 0.71, P < 0.00001), lymphovascular invasion (RR = 0.68, 95% CI 0.47, 0.99, P = 0.004) and vascular invasion (RR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.45, 0.99, P = 0.04) in SEMS group were significantly higher than those in ES group, and there was no significant difference in lymphatic invasion (RR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.77, 1.09, P = 0.33). The number of lymph nodes harvested in SEMS group was significantly higher than that in ES group (MD = - 3.18, 95% CI - 4.47, - 1.90, P < 0.00001). While no significant difference was found in the number of positive lymph nodes (MD = - 0.11, 95% CI - 0.63, 0.42, P = 0.69) and N stage [N0 (RR = 1.03, 95% CI 0.92, 1.15, P = 0.60), N1 (RR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.87, 1.14, P = 0.91), N2 (RR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.77, 1.15, P = 0.53)].

CONCLUSIONS

SEMS implantation in patients with acute malignant obstructive colorectal cancer may lead to an increase in adverse tumor pathological characteristics, and these characteristics are mostly related to the poor prognosis of colorectal cancer. Although the adverse effect of SEMS on long-term survival has not been demonstrated, their adverse effects cannot be ignored. The use of SEMS as the preferred treatment for patients with resectable obstructive colorectal cancer remains to be carefully weighed, especially when patients are young or the surgical risk is not very high.

Long-term outcomes of colonic stent as a "bridge to surgery"for left-sided malignant large-bowel obstruction

BACKGROUND

The role of self-expandable metallic stents (SEMS) as a bridge to surgery in left-sided malignant colonic obstruction is still debated. Here we assess the morbidity, mortality and long-term oncological outcomes as a bridge to surgery for patients with left-sided malignant colonic obstruction.

METHOD

Prospective observational study with retrospective analysis of patients with left-sided malignant colonic obstruction undergoing stenting. April 2006-April 2018. We assessed all patients with intent-to treat and per protocol analyses and long-term follow-up variables.

RESULTS

Colonic stent was performed in 117 patients. Technical and clinical success of SEMS placement: 94.4% (111/117), only 4.3% perforation. Elective surgery resection following the strategy of SEMS was performed in 83.8% (98/117). A laparoscopic approach was: 25.6% (30/117); 76.9% in the last two years. Primary anastomosis rate: 92.8% (91/98), without protective stoma in any patients. Anastomotic leakage rate: 8.2% (8/97). Median follow-up: 44.5 months (range 0-109). The intent-to-treat analysis showed overall and disease-free survival rates of 63.3% (74/117) and 58.1% (68/117), and local and distant recurrence rates: 9.4% (11/117) and 58.1% (68/117). In the per protocol analysis, overall and disease-free survival rates: 63.2% (62/98) and 60.2% (58/98), and local and distant recurrence rates: 10.2% (10/98) and 36.7% (36/98). Disease progression was predominantly observed during the first 5 years' follow-up as disease recurrence; after five years' follow-up, 60% of the patients were disease-free.

CONCLUSIONS

According to the results of the study SEMS as a bridge to surgery achieves perioperative results comparable to non-occlusive colonic cancer surgery and does not adversely affect long-term oncological outcomes. Further investigations are needed.

Bridge to surgery using a self-expandable metallic stent for stages II-III obstructive colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Bridge to surgery (BTS) using a self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) for the treatment of obstructive colorectal cancer improves the patient's quality of life. This study aimed to examine prognostic factors of obstructive colorectal cancer.

METHODS

We analyzed stage II-III resectable colon cancer cases (Cur A) retrospectively registered between January 2005 and December 2017. Overall, 117 patients with Cur A obstructive colorectal cancer were evaluated: 67 of them underwent emergency surgery (ES Group) and 50 of them after BTS with SEMS placement (BTS group). We compared surgical results and prognoses between the two groups.

RESULTS

A total of 50 patients underwent endoscopic SEMS placement, which technical success of 96% and morbidity rate of 18%. Primary anastomosis rates were 77.6% in ES and 95.7% in BTS (p <  0.001); postoperative complication, 46.3% in ES and 10.5% in BTS (p <  0.001); pathological findings of lymphatic invasion, 66.7% in ES and 100% in BTS (p <  0.001); venous invasion were 66.8% in ES and 92% in BTS (p = 0.04); and recurrence of 25.4% in ES and 39.1% in BTS. The 3-year overall survival was significantly different between two groups (ES, 86.8%:BTS, 58.8%), BTS is worse than ES (log-rank test; p <  0.001). Venous invasion independently predicted worsened recurrence-free and overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

The vascular invasiveness was correlated with tumor progression after SEMS placement, and the survival rate was lower in BTS. SEMS potentially worsens prognostic outcomes in stage II-III obstructive colorectal cancer.

Comprehensive literature review of randomized clinical trials examining novel treatment advances in patients with colon cancer

The treatment of colon cancer has had numerous recent advances, in terms of surgical approach, adjuvant therapies, and more. In this review, the authors examine randomized clinical trials comparing open surgery to laparoscopic surgery (including total mesocolic excision), and also examine the role of robotic surgery. Novel surgical techniques including the no-touch technique, side-to-side anastomosis, suture technique, complete mesocolic excision (CME) with central vascular ligation (CVL), and natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) are outlined. The role of placing endoscopic self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) for colonic obstruction is compared and contrasted with the surgical approach, and the effect that the anti-VEGF inhibitor bevacizumab may have on this side effect profile is further explored. The role of the resection of the primary tumor in the setting of metastatic disease is examined with respect to survival benefit. Pathways of perioperative care which can accelerate post-surgical recovery, including enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) are examined. The role of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with high-risk stage II and patients with stage III disease is examined, along with the role on circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) as well as with the biologic targeted agents cetuximab and bevacizumab. Lastly, the authors detail the postoperative surveillance schedules after surgical resection with respect to survival outcomes.

Surgical outcomes of colonic stents as a bridge to surgery versus emergency surgery for malignant colorectal obstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis of high quality prospective and randomised controlled trials

Self-expanding metallic stent placement as a bridge to surgery has been reported as an alternative to emergency surgery for acute malignant colorectal obstruction. However, results from clinical trials and previous meta-analyses are conflicting. We carried out a meta-analysis to compare the surgical and oncological outcomes between emergency surgery and self-expanding metallic stents for malignant large bowel obstruction. Pubmed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science and Cochrane were searched for prospective and randomised controlled trials. The outcomes of focus included 3- and 5-year overall and disease-free survival, overall tumour recurrence, overall complication and 30-day mortality rate, length of hospital and ICU stay, overall blood loss, number of patients requiring transfusion, total number of lymph nodes harvested, stoma and primary anastomosis rate. Twenty-seven studies were included with a total of 3894 patients. There was no significant difference in terms of 3-year and 5-year disease-free and overall survival. Stenting resulted in less blood loss (mean difference -234.72, P < 0.00001) and higher primary anastomosis rate (RR 1.25, P < 0.00001). For curative cases, bridge to surgery groups had lower 30-day mortality rate (RR 0.65, P = 0.01), lower overall complication rate (RR 0.65, P < 0.0001), more lymph nodes harvested (mean difference 2.51, P = 0.005), shorter ICU stay (mean difference -2.27, P = 0.02) and hospital stay (mean difference -7.24, 95% P < 0.0001). Compared to emergency surgery, self-expanding metallic stent interventions improve short-term surgical outcomes, especially in the curative setting, but have similar long-term oncological and survival outcomes.

Long-term outcomes of stent-related perforation in malignant colon obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The placement of self-expandable metallic stents as a bridge to surgery in malignant colon obstruction is concerning due to the long-term oncological results reported in recent published studies. The aim of this study was to evaluate the oncological consequences of stent-related perforations in patients with malignant colon obstruction and potentially curable disease.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Ovid and ISRCTN Registry were searched, with no restrictions. We performed five meta-analyses to estimate the pooled effect sizes by using a random-effect model. The outcomes were global, locoregional and systemic recurrence rate and 3 and 5 year-survival rate depending on the presence or absence of stent-related perforation.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies (950 patients) were included. The overall rate of stent-related perforation was 8.9%. The global recurrence rate was significantly higher in stent-related perforation group (41.2 vs. 30.8%; OR 1.70; 95%CI: 1.02-2.84; p = 0.04). Locoregional recurrence rate was higher in the perforated group than in the non-perforated group (26.6 vs. 12.5%), with statistically significant differences (OR 2.41; 95% CI:1.33-4.34; p = 0.004). No significant differences were found in systemic recurrence rate (13.6 vs. 20.5%; OR 0.77; 95%CI: 0.35-1.7; p = 0.51); 3-year overall survival rate (65.4 vs. 74.8%; OR 0.63; 95% CI:0.29-1.39; p = 0.25) and 5-year overall survival rate (48.3 vs. 58.6%; OR 0.67; 95%CI: 0.27-1.65; p = 0.38).

CONCLUSION

Stent-related perforation is associated with an increased risk of global and locoregional recurrence. The successful placement of the stent as a bridge to surgery in the curative purpose of patients with obstructed colon cancer does not exclude the presence of underlying perforation, with the consequent danger of disease spread. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020152817.

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.

Fluoroscopic Stenting as a Bridge to Surgery versus Emergency Management for Malignant Obstruction of the Colon

Aim

To investigate the feasibility of a SEMS (self-expandable metallic stent) as a bridge to surgery for malignant colonic obstruction.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 83 patients that were in accordance with inclusion criteria; of these, 33 patients that underwent fluoroscopy-guided SEMS placement followed by elective curative resection were classified as a SEMS group and 50 patients, who received emergency surgery (ES), were classified as an ES group. The clinicopathological characteristics, surgery-related parameters, complications, and three-year survival rate were compared between the two groups.

Results

No significant differences between the two groups were observed in any of the clinicopathologic characteristics except for higher preoperative absolute neutrophil count in the ES group (P < 0.001). Compared to the ES group, the SEMS group has significantly more cases, which featured a laparoscopic approach (72.7% vs. 14.0%, P < 0.001), lower overall stoma rate (0% vs. 34.0%, P < 0.001), and lower overall postoperative morbidity (27.3% vs. 56.0%, P=0.010). The oncological outcomes did not differ significantly between the two groups in terms of three-year overall survival (P=0.125). The technical and clinical success rates of stent placement were 91.7% and 100%, respectively.

Conclusion

Patients treated with the stent-surgery approach had significant short-term superiorities and similar long-term outcomes, compared to patients who had emergency surgery alone. The SEMS is, therefore, safe and feasible as a bridge to surgery for malignant colonic obstruction.

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.

Self-expandable Metal Stent as a Bridge to Surgery for Colorectal Cancer: Safety and Oncological Outcomes

BACKGROUND/AIM

Self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) as a bridge to surgery (BTS) for obstructive colorectal cancer (CRC) raises concerns regarding the short-term as well as oncological outcome. The present study aimed to investigate the safety of SEMS placement and risk factors of worse short-term and oncological outcomes as BTS.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Twenty-four patients with obstructive CRC who underwent SEMS placement as BTS were included. Success rate of SEMS placement and 2-year relapse-free survival (RFS) rates in stage II/III BTS patients were assessed.

RESULTS

Technical and clinical success rates for SEMS placement were 100% and 87.5%, respectively. In Multivariate analyses, longer tumour length, longer interval to surgery, and angular positioning were risk factors related with the complication of stent placement. Two-year RFS rates were significantly higher in the no-complication than in the complication group (100% vs. 75%, log-rank test, p<0.01).

CONCLUSION

A long tumour length, long interval between SEMS insertion and surgery, and angular positioning of the SEMS were identified as risk factors for SEMS-related complications. Moreover, SEMS insertion and/or surgery complications were associated with worse oncological outcome in CRC patients.

Quasi-elective left colectomy after endoscopic colon stenting for obstructive cancer yields comparable oncologic outcome to full-elective operation

PURPOSE

Whether deferring surgery after endoscopic self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement for neoplastic stricture, and operating patients in a quasi-elective situation, may result in similar oncologic outcomes to elective operations is unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the disease-free survival (DFS) rates of patients who underwent an interval colon resection after SEMS placement or an elective operation with comparable cancer stages.

METHODS

From a prospective dataset, we retrospectively selected patients with the following characteristics: (1) left-sided colon cancer and (2) cancer stage I to III. Exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) palliative surgery and (2) emergency operation. Then we stratified patients into two groups: (A) full-elective left colon resection and (B) quasi-elective left colon resection, defined as surgery performed after SEMS placement for obstructive colon cancer. DFS function was studied by the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

After 1:2 matching based on cancer stage, 106 patients of the group A were compared with 53 patients of group B. In each group, there were 9.4% of stage I, 39.4% of stage II, and 50.9% of stage III patients. The rate of technical failure in SEMS placement was 3.8%. After a mean follow-up of 54 months, 16 (15.1%) patients in the full-elective groups and 10 (18.9%) in the quasi-elective group experience cancer recurrence (log rank = 0.588). DFS curve did not reach the median value.

CONCLUSIONS

SEMS placement with interval colon resection for obstructive neoplastic strictures seems to provide similar long-term oncologic outcomes to operations performed in an elective setting when a low rate of technical failure is achieved.

Determining the difference in the efficacy and safety of self-expandable metallic stents as a bridge to surgery for obstructive colon cancer among patients in the CROSS 0 group and those in the CROSS 1 or 2 group: a pooled analysis of data from two Japanese prospective multicenter trials

PURPOSE

This study compared the feasibility and safety of endoscopic placement of self-expandable metallic stents (SEMSs) as a bridge to surgery (BTS) between patients with obstructive colorectal cancer (CRC) classified as ColoRectal Obstruction Scoring System (CROSS) 0 and those with CROSS 1 or 2.

METHODS

We conducted a post hoc analysis of two prospective, observational, single-arm multicenter clinical trials and performed a pooled analysis of the data. In total, 336 consecutive patients with malignant colorectal obstruction underwent SEMS placement. The primary endpoint was clinical success, defined as resolution of symptoms and radiological findings within 24 h. Secondary endpoints were technical success and adverse events.

RESULTS

High clinical (98.0% vs. 98.4%) and technical (96.7% vs. 97.8%) success rates were observed in both groups (CROSS 0 vs. CROSS 1 or 2). The adverse event rate was low. The mean stricture length was lower (3.8 ± 1.2 cm vs. 4.4 ± 1.8 cm) and laparoscopic surgery more common (56.7% vs 52.2%) in the CROSS 0 group than in the CROSS 1 and 2 group.

CONCLUSION

This study was the first to compare the degree of stricture in different CROSS groups and demonstrated comparable results with respect to the short-term efficacy and safety of SEMS placement as a BTS for obstructive CRC in CROSS 0, 1, and 2 patients.

Endoscopic Management of Malignant Colonic Obstruction

Advanced colorectal cancer can cause acute colonic obstruction, which is a life-threatening condition that requires emergency bowel decompression. Malignant colonic obstruction has traditionally been treated using emergency surgery, including primary resection or stoma formation. However, relatively high rates of complications, such as anastomosis site leakage, have been considered as major concerns for emergency surgery. Endoscopic management of malignant colonic obstruction using a self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) was introduced 20 years ago and it has been used as a first-line palliative treatment. However, endoscopic treatment of malignant colonic obstruction using SEMSs as a bridge to surgery remains controversial owing to short-term complications and longterm oncological outcomes. In this review, the current status of and recommendations for endoscopic management using SEMSs for malignant colonic obstruction will be discussed.

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.

Transanal drainage tubes vs metallic stents for acute malignant left-sided bowel obstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The surgical management of acute malignant left-sided bowel obstruction is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Recently, transanal drainage tubes (DTs) and metallic stents (MSs) used as a "bridge to surgery" have become widely used decompression methods compared with emergency surgery. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DTs and MSs for the decompression of acute left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction.

METHODS

All studies were acquired from PubMed, Medline, Embase, CNKI and the Cochrane Library. The data were extracted by two of the coauthors independently and were analyzed with RevMan5.3. Mean differences (MDs), odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. The Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale were used to assess the risk of bias.

RESULTS

Eleven studies, which included three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 8 observational studies, were assessed. The methodological quality of the trials ranged from low to moderate. The pooled results of the technical success rate showed that the difference was not statistically significant between the2 devises. The differences in clinical success rate, operative time and complications were statistically significant between MSs and DTs, and MSs were associated with a better clinical success rate, increased operative time and fewer complications. Sensitivity analysis proved the stability of the pooled results, and the publication bias was low.

CONCLUSION

MS insertion for acute left-sided malignant bowel obstruction is effective and safe with a better technical success rate and with fewer complications than decompression using a DT, and MS insertion can avoid stoma formation. Moreover, MS insertion appears to be a useful treatment strategy for malignant colonic obstruction even if the lesion is located in the right colon. More large-sample, multicenter, high-quality RCTs are needed to verify the outcomes of this meta-analysis.

Laparoscopic Approach to Large Bowel Neoplastic Obstruction After Self-Expandable-Metal-Stent (SEMS) Placement

Endoscopic self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement as a bridge to surgery in large bowel neoplastic obstruction is an alternative to emergency surgery for the obstructive colorectal neoplasms. This study aims to analyze postoperative and long-term outcomes in a series of patients who underwent laparoscopic colorectal resection after SEMS placement. The analysis, after the stratification based on the time elapsed between the onset of the occlusive symptoms and the SEMS positioning, revealed an interesting result, with lower mortality for patients who underwent the procedure within 24 hours of hospitalization (P=0.0159). This trend may indicate the need to reduce the endoscopic time schedules as much as possible, even if an emergency procedure is needed. The laparoscopic approach, after stent placement as bridge therapy, can be a safe alternative to emergency surgery, if the procedure is precociously applied.

Endoscopic stenting in colorectal cancer

Acute malignant large bowel obstruction presents as one of the few emergencies of colorectal cancer (CRC). Management of this condition can either be by (I) upfront surgery or (II) the use of self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) as a bridge to elective surgery. For patients with metastasis, the use of SEMS is reported to enable earlier commencement of chemotherapy. Although the use of SEMS in patients with acute malignant large bowel obstruction looks promising, it is plagued by its own set of complications and divided opinion over its long-term outcomes. Conflicting data are present, and definitive indication requires further evaluation and debate. This article will describe the typical presentation of patients with acute malignant large bowel obstruction. An introduction to the SEMS insertion procedural steps will be undertaken. Following which the article aims to review the safety profile of SEMS and the short- and long-term outcomes of SEMS in both the curative and palliative setting.

Long-term tumour outcomes of self-expanding metal stents as 'bridge to surgery' for the treatment of colorectal cancer with malignant obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To explore the long-term oncological results of self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) as a surgical transition compared with those of simple emergency surgery.

METHODS

A systematic review of studies involving long-term tumour outcomes comparing SEMS with emergency surgery was conducted. All studies included information on 3-year and 5-year survival rates, 3-year and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates, and local and overall recurrence rates; the results were expressed as odds ratios.

RESULTS

Overall, 24 articles and 2508 patients were included, including 5 randomised controlled trials, 3 prospective studies, and 16 retrospective studies. The 3-year survival rate (odds ratio (OR) = 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69-1.12, P = 0.05), 5-year survival rate (OR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.70-1.17, P = 0.67), 3-year DFS rate (OR = 1.14, 95% CI 0.91-1.42, P = 0.65), 5-year DFS rate (OR = 1.35, 95% CI 0.91-2.02, P = 0.17), overall recurrence rate (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.77-1.41, P = 0.14), and local recurrence rate (OR 1.37, 95% CI 0.84-2.23, P = 0.92) were determined. There was no significant difference between the randomised and observational studies in the subgroup analysis, and the 5-year survival rate was higher in studies with a stent placement success rate of ≥ 95%.

CONCLUSION

SEMS implantation was a viable alternative in malignant left colon obstruction as a transition to surgery; its long-term survival results, including 5-year DFS and overall survival, were equivalent to those of emergent surgery.

The long-term recurrence rate and survival of obstructive left-sided colon cancer patients: a stent as a bridge to surgery

BACKGROUND

a colonic stent as a bridge to elective surgery for left-sided malignant colonic obstruction is an alternative to the classical treatment. The aim of our study was to evaluate the recurrence rate as well as the morbidity and mortality of this treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

patients admitted to the Emergency Department with left-sided malignant colonic obstruction between June 2006 and January 2014 were analyzed in a retrospective observational study. Patients who underwent self-expanding metallic stent placement via endoscopy as a bridge to surgery were included. The observation period was performed until May 2017.

RESULTS

fifty-three patients were treated with a colonic stent as a bridge to surgery; nine patients died during the postoperative period. The deceased patients were more frequently male (100% in the deceased vs 62% in the non-deceased, p = 0.02), with a more advanced age (81.4 ± 5.1 vs 71.6 ± 10.8, p < 0.001), lower hemoglobin levels on admission (12.9 vs 13.6 p < 0.001), a greater number of leukocytes (12,918 vs 9,437, p < 0.001) and greater coagulopathy (INR 1.6 vs 1, p < 0.001). Eight patients had a distant relapse with a median disease-free survival of 19.1 months. The variables were compared according to the appearance of distant disease and the mean age was lower in patients with a recurrence (65.9 ± 11.3 vs 74.9 ± 9.9, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

the results of the use of a stent as a bridge to curative surgery in patients with obstructive left colon cancer in our hospital is comparable to previous studies.

Pathological impact of transanal colorectal tube for obstructive colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) with acute colorectal obstruction (ACO) is an emergency. Transanal colorectal tube (TCT) use can be a safe single-stage surgery with laparoscopy-assisted colectomy; it offers long-term outcomes equivalent to emergency surgery for stage-II/III CRC with ACO. Self-expanding metallic stent use, another alternative, may have detrimental pathological and molecular effects, whereas the pathological impact of TCT placement remains unclear. We hypothesized that TCT placement might exert little damage on primary tumor. Hence, the current study analyzed the pathological impact of TCT placement for CRC with ACO compared to emergency surgery.

METHODS

Data from consecutive patients with stage-II/III distal CRC with ACO who underwent surgery between January 2007 and December 2015 were retrospectively reviewed at two Japanese affiliate hospitals. Inflammatory and malignant potential-related parameters were analyzed by a single blinded pathologist. We extracted mRNA from tumor tissues to analyze inflammatory cytokines.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight patients with stage-II/III distal CRC with ACO were identified (surgery: 25 patients; TCT: 43 patients). Baseline characteristics were well balanced between the two groups. TCT showed a significantly lower frequency of abscess (surgery vs TCT, 36.0% vs 11.6%; P = 0.017) and a lower tendency of pathological perforation (surgery vs TCT, 20.0% vs 4.7%, respectively; P = 0.091), compared to the surgery group. There were no significant intergroup differences in oncological factors, including perineural invasion (surgery vs TCT, 52.0% vs 62.8%; P = 0.383), microlymphatic involvement (surgery vs TCT, 52.0% vs 58.1%; P = 0.623), and microvascular involvement (surgery vs TCT, 32.0% vs 25.6%; P = 0.570). No significant intergroup differences were found in interleukin (IL)-6, IL-8, or IL-1β gene expression levels (P = 0.580, 0.250, 0.941).

CONCLUSIONS

TCT placement had no pathologically detrimental effects on the tumor or surrounding tissues and might be an attractive non-invasive strategy for cases of curative distal CRC with ACO.

Outcomes following colonic stenting for malignant left-sided bowel obstruction: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials

PURPOSE

Malignant bowel obstruction is a common presentation and is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Emergency resection is the traditional treatment modality. In recent years, colonic stenting as a bridge to surgery has become more prevalent. However, there is considerable debate surrounding its use. The aim of this review was to examine the technical and clinical success of self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) as a bridge to surgery for obstructing colorectal tumours.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed randomised controlled trials using PubMed, Cochrane and SCOPUS databases. Included studies must have compared outcomes in SEMS as a bridge to surgery with those proceeding straight to emergency resection.

RESULTS

A total of 1245 studies were identified. After removal of duplicates and non-relevant studies, we identified seven articles which met the predefined criteria. This review observed that 81% of SEMS were technically successful, with 76% of patients having restoration of gastrointestinal function. Iatrogenic perforation rate was 5%. One-fifth of patients required emergency surgery following stent placement, and permanent stoma rate was 8.7%.

CONCLUSION

This study observed that SEMS as a bridge to surgery is associated with good technical and clinical success, with low rates of perforation and permanent stoma. SEMS should be part of the treatment armamentarium for obstructing colorectal neoplasms, but careful patient selection and institutional expertise are important factors for success.

Preoperative change of modified Glasgow prognostic score after stenting predicts the long-term outcomes of obstructive colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

Inflammation-based markers predict the long-term outcomes of various malignancies. We investigated the relationship between the modified Glasgow prognostic score (mGPS) and the long-term outcomes of obstructive colorectal cancer in patients who underwent self-expandable metallic colonic stent placement and subsequently received curative surgery.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 63 consecutive patients with pathological stage II and III obstructive colorectal cancer from 2013 to 2018. The mGPS was calculated before stenting and surgery, and the difference of the scores was defined as the d-mGPS.

RESULTS

All d-mGPS = 2 patients were > 70 years of age (p = 0.01). Postoperative complications were more common in the preoperative mGPS = 2 group (p = 0.02). The postoperative hospital stay was significantly longer in the mGPS = 2 group (p = 0.007). Multivariate analyses revealed that d-mGPS was an independent prognostic factor for overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio [HR] = 9.18, p = 0.004) and cancer-specific survival (HR = 9.98, p = 0.01). Preoperative mGPS = 2 was significantly associated with poor OS (HR = 5.53, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

The results indicated that mGPS might serve as a valuable indicator of the immunonutritional status of preoperative patients, and a preoperative change of the status might affect the long-term outcomes of patients with obstructive colorectal cancer.

Better recurrence-free survival after stent bridge to surgery compared to emergency surgery for obstructive left-sided colonic cancer in patients with stage III status of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC): a bicentric retrospective study

PURPOSE

Stenting as a bridge to surgery (SBTS) can transform an emergency surgery (ES) into an elective surgery in patients with symptomatic left-sided malignant colonic obstruction. Concerns have been raised regarding short-term morbidity and long-term oncologic outcomes, with contrasting results reported in the literature. Our main aim is to evaluate not only long-term oncologic outcomes but also short-term postoperative outcomes of stented patients who underwent elective surgery compared to those who had ES.

METHODS

From January 2006 to May 2012, we retrospectively identified patients with confirmed left-sided colorectal cancer obstruction. This was done in two centers of reference of colorectal diseases in southern Spain with patients who were treated with curative intent either with ES or SBTS. The short- and long-term results were compared between both groups.

RESULTS

There were 71 patients in the stenting group and 66 in the emergency surgery group, with similar demographic data. Initial stoma creation rates were lower in the SBTS group (16.9% vs. 54.5%, p < 0.005) and the primary anastomosis rate was higher in the same group (83.1% vs. 45.5%, p < 0.005). Five-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates were comparable between groups (75.3 vs. 59.8%, p = 0.220), but RFS rates at 5 years for AJCC pathologic stage III were higher in the stenting group (69.7% vs 30%, p = 0.004). Both groups were comparable regarding overall and cancer-specific survival outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of SBTS reduces ostomy rates in patients with obstructive colon malignancies. Long-term survival results are similar. Patients in the SBTS group with stage III AJCC status showed a higher 5-year recurrence-free survival rate than those in the ES group.

Optimal management of malignant left-sided large bowel obstruction: do international guidelines agree?

Background

Approximately 20% of patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer will present with left-sided large bowel obstruction. The optimal management of this cohort of patients remains unclear. We aimed to review international guidelines to see if there was a consensus on the treatment of this surgical emergency.

Methods

The PubMed and Medline databases were searched for guidelines on the management of left-sided, malignant large bowel obstruction (MBO) between 2010 and 2018.

Results

Nineteen guidelines were identified spanning a range of continents. There was no clear consensus on the management of potentially resectable disease. Eight guidelines (42%) suggested primary surgery, two guidelines (11%) suggested stenting as a bridge to surgery and nine guidelines (47%) suggested surgery or stenting could be performed. Primary resection with or without anastomosis was the most frequently recommended procedure (n = 6 35%), but over a third of guidelines gave no operative recommendations. There was very limited detail on the stenting procedure and how long elective surgery should be deferred. In the palliative situation, there was general agreement that stents should be offered in preference to surgery.

Conclusion

International guidelines offer limited and contrasting recommendations on the management of left-sided MBO. There is a lack of high-quality evidence to support whether emergency surgery or stenting as a bridge to surgery is the optimal procedure in terms of morbidity, mortality and long-term oncological outcome.