Oncologic outcomes of self-expanding metallic stent insertion as a bridge to surgery in the management of left-sided colon cancer obstruction: comparison with nonobstructing elective surgery. World J Surg. 2009;33:1281-1286. [PMID: 19363580 DOI: 10.1007/s00268-009-0007-5]

The Clinical Outcomes of Preoperative Self-Expandable Metal Stent Placement as Bridge to Surgery for Obstructive Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement for obstructive colorectal cancer (OCRC) is widely performed as a bridge to surgery because of its lower mortality rate than emergency surgery. However, the long-term outcomes remain unclear because of the risk of complications and cancer recurrence. This study investigated the short- and long-term outcomes of SEMS placement for OCRC.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We retrospectively reviewed the clinicopathological data of patients with OCRC who underwent preoperative treatment and tumor resection at our institution between April 2004 and March 2022. Among 113 patients with OCRC, 30 underwent SEMS placement (Group S) and 36 underwent ileus tube insertion (Group T); Group S had more older patients and fewer pT4 cases; no other characteristics differed. Incidence of severe complications was 0% versus 16.7% (p < 0.01); postoperative hospital stay was 14.3 versus 26.6 days (p < 0.01); medical costs were comparable between the groups. The long-term outcomes of Group S and patients with non-OCRC who underwent surgery during the same period were compared after propensity score matching. The 5-year survival rates were 69.5% and 77.1%; the 5-year recurrence-free survival rates were 44.5% and 55.5%, without significant difference.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, SEMS placement was more effective than ileus tube placement in treating OCRC.

Acute Perforated Large Bowel Obstruction Due to Colorectal Malignancy: A Surgical Emergency With Options

Acute large bowel obstruction caused by colorectal cancer is a critical surgical emergency, often presenting as a life-threatening condition. This case involves a 71-year-old male who presented to the emergency department with complete large bowel obstruction secondary to a sigmoid mass, raising concern for malignancy. Initial plans were made for decompression and colonoscopy. However, the patient left the hospital against medical advice and subsequently returned two days later with massive abdominal distension and peritonitis. Emergent exploratory celiotomy revealed a septic abdomen with gross contamination due to perforation in the ascending colon near the hepatic flexure, which was not amenable to repair. At a minimum, a subtotal colectomy was required. The patient underwent a single-stage oncologic subtotal colectomy with a hand-sewn ileosigmoid anastomosis and fascial closure. Pathologic evaluation confirmed stage IIb invasive sigmoid adenocarcinoma with negative margins and 0/43 lymph nodes. The patient was discharged on postoperative day nine without complications. For patients presenting with abdominal sepsis from fecal contamination caused by large bowel perforation due to sigmoid malignancy and obstruction, surgical management options vary widely. These range from damage control surgery with multiple subsequent procedures to single-stage resection and anastomosis. This case underscores the importance of individualized, careful decision-making both preoperatively and intraoperatively. It highlights the factors to consider when evaluating the feasibility of single-stage oncologic surgery and the risks associated with performing a primary anastomosis during emergent operations.

Impact of perforation following self-expandable metal stent as a bridge to surgery for malignant colorectal obstruction: a multicenter study of the Research Group for Stent in the Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) are effective in alleviating malignant colorectal obstruction. However, bowel perforation following SEMS placement remains a significant concern, as it can adversely affect oncological outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the recurrence and overall survival rates associated with SEMS-related bowel perforations.

METHODS

This multicenter, retrospective analysis included patients with obstructive colorectal cancer who underwent SEMS placement as a bridge to surgery. The data collection period spanned from January 2008 to May 2019, with patient matching in a 1:5 ratio based on age, sex, tumor location, pathological stage, and achievement of curative resection.

RESULTS

Among the 412 patients who received SEMS placement, 25 (6.1%) patients experienced SEMS-related perforations (perforation group), with 21 instances classified as overt and four as silent perforations. Compared with 125 matched controls (non-perforation group), the perforation group showed elevated rates of emergent surgery, open surgery, and stoma formation, as well as a reduced interval from SEMS placement to surgery. The 5-year recurrence rate was notably higher in the perforation group than in the no-perforation group (47.4% vs. 21.5%, p < 0.001), whereas the 5-year survival rate was not significantly different between groups (63.8% vs. 80.0%, p = 0.330).

CONCLUSIONS

SEMS-related perforation led to less favorable surgical outcomes and a higher rate of recurrence, although no notable impact on overall survival was observed. Considering the risk of perforation, these findings support the cautious use of SEMS as a bridge to surgery.

Development of colonic stent simulator using three-dimensional printing technique: a simulator development study in Korea

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Colonic stenting plays a vital role in the management of acute malignant colonic obstruction. The increasing use of self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) and the diverse challenges posed by colonic obstruction at various locations underscore the importance of effective training for colonic stent placement.

METHODS

All the components of the simulator were manufactured using silicone molding techniques in conjunction with three-dimensional (3D) printing. 3D images sourced from computed tomography scans and colonoscopy images were converted into a stereolithography format. Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene copolymers have been used in fused deposition modeling to produce moldings.

RESULTS

The simulator replicated the large intestine from the rectum to the cecum, mimicking the texture and shape of the human colon. It enables training for colonoscopy insertion, cecum intubation, loop reduction, and stenting within stenotic areas. Interchangeable stenotic modules for four sites (rectum, sigmoid colon, descending colon, and ascending colon) were easily assembled for training. These modules integrate tumor contours and blood vessel structures with a translucent center, allowing real-time visualization during stenting. Successful and repeatable demonstrations of stent insertion and expansion using the reusable SEMS were consistently achieved.

CONCLUSIONS

This innovative simulator offers a secure colonic stenting practice across various locations, potentially enhancing clinical outcomes by improving operator proficiency during actual procedures.

Management Strategies for Malignant Left-Sided Colonic Obstruction: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials and Propensity Score Matching Studies

BACKGROUND

The optimal treatment strategy for left-sided malignant colonic obstruction remains controversial. Emergency colonic resection has been the standard of care; however, self-expanding metallic stenting as a bridge to surgery may offer short-term advantages, although oncological concerns exist. Decompressing stoma may provide a valid alternative, with limited evidence.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review and Bayesian arm random-effects model network meta-analysis comparing the approaches for management of malignant left-sided colonic obstruction.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases was conducted from inception to August 22, 2023.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials and propensity score-matched studies.

INTERVENTIONS

Emergency colonic resection, self-expanding metallic stent, and decompressing stoma.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Oncologic efficacy, morbidity, successful minimally invasive surgery, primary anastomosis, and permanent stoma rates.

RESULTS

Nineteen of 5225 articles identified met our inclusion criteria. Stenting (risk ratio 0.57; 95% credible interval, 0.33-0.79) and decompressing stomas (risk ratio 0.46, 95% credible interval: 0.18-0.92) resulted in a significant reduction in the permanent stoma rate. Stenting facilitated minimally invasive surgery more frequently (risk ratio 4.10; 95% credible interval, 1.45-13.13) and had lower overall morbidity (risk ratio 0.58; 95% credible interval, 0.35-0.86). A pairwise analysis of primary anastomosis rates showed increased stenting (risk ratio 1.40; 95% credible interval, 1.31-1.49) compared with emergency resection. There was a significant decrease in the 90-day mortality with stenting (risk ratio 0.63; 95% credible interval, 0.41-0.95) compared with resection. There were no differences in disease-free and overall survival rates, respectively.

LIMITATIONS

There is a lack of randomized controlled trials and propensity score matching data comparing short-term and long-term outcomes for diverting stomas compared to self-expanding metallic stents. Two trials compared self-expanding metallic stents and diverting stomas in left-sided malignant colonic obstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides high-level evidence that a bridge-to-surgery strategy is safe for the management of left-sided malignant colonic obstruction and may facilitate minimally invasive surgery, increase primary anastomosis rates, and reduce permanent stoma rates and postoperative morbidity compared with emergency colonic resection.

Colon stenting as a bridge to surgery in obstructive colorectal cancer management

Colonic stent placement is a commonly used bridging strategy for surgery in patients with obstructive colorectal cancer. The procedure involves the placement of a self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) across the obstructive lesion to restore intestinal patency and alleviate the symptoms of obstruction. By allowing patients to receive surgery in a planned and staged manner with time for preoperative optimization and bowel preparation, stent placement may reduce the need for emergency surgery, which is associated with higher complication rates and poorer outcomes. This review focuses on the role of colon stenting as a bridge to surgery in the management of obstructive colorectal cancer. SEMS as a bridge to surgery for left-sided colon cancer has been demonstrated to be particularly useful; however, further research is needed for its application in cases of right-sided colon cancer. Colon stent placement also has limitations and potential complications including stent migration, re-obstruction, and perforation. However, the timing of curative surgery after SEMS placement remains inconclusive. Considering the literature to date, performing surgery at an interval of approximately 2 weeks is considered appropriate. Therefore, colonic stent placement may be an effective strategy as a bridge to surgery in patients with obstructive colorectal cancer.

Colonic stent for bridge to surgery for acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction: A review of the literature after 2020

It has been found that 8%-29% of colorectal cancers are obstructive. The use of “stent as bridge to surgery” is one of the most debated topics in obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer management. The endoscopic placement of a self-expanding metallic stent as bridge to surgery (BTS) could turn an emergency surgery to an elective one, increasing the number of primary anastomoses instead of stoma and facilitating the laparoscopic approach instead of an open one. However, in recent years the possible risk of perforations and microperforations facilitating cancer spread related to the use of self-expanding metallic stent for BTS has been highlighted. Therefore, despite the useful short-term outcomes related to BTS, the recent literature has focused on long-term outcomes investigating the disease-free survival, the recurrence rate and the overall survival. Due to discordant data, international guidelines are still conflicting, and the debate is still open. There is not agreement about using self-expanding metallic stent for BTS as the gold standard.

Perioperative and oncologic outcomes of interval colectomy performed by acute care surgeons after stenting as a bridge to surgery for left-sided malignant colonic obstruction are non-inferior to the outcomes of colorectal surgeons in the elective setting: single center experience

PURPOSE

To analyze if perioperative and oncologic outcomes with stenting as a bridge to surgery (SEMS-BS) and interval colectomy performed by acute care surgeons for left-sided occlusive colonic neoplasms (LSCON) are non-inferior to those obtained by colorectal surgeons for non-occlusive tumors of the same location in the full-elective context.

METHODS

From January 2011 to January 2021, patients with LSCON at University Regional Hospital in Málaga (Spain) were directed to a SEMS-BS strategy with an interval colectomy performed by acute care surgeons and included in the study group (SEMS-BS). The control group was formed with patients from the Colorectal Division elective surgical activity dataset, matching by ASA, stage, location and year of surgery on a ratio 1:2. Stages IV or palliative stenting were excluded. Software SPSS 23.0 was used to analyze perioperative and oncologic (defined by overall -OS- and disease free -DFS-survival) outcomes.

RESULTS

SEMS-BS and control group included 56 and 98 patients, respectively. In SEMS-BS group, rates of technical/clinical failure and perforation were 5.35% (3/56), 3.57% (2/56) and 3.57% (2/56). Surgery was performed with a median interval time of 11 days (9-16). No differences between groups were observed in perioperative outcomes (laparoscopic approach, primary anastomosis rate, morbidity or mortality). As well, no statistically significant differences were observed in OS and DFS between groups, both compared globally (OS:p < 0.94; DFS:p < 0.67, respectively) or by stages I-II (OS:p < 0.78; DFS:p < 0.17) and III (OS:p < 0.86; DFS:p < 0.70).

CONCLUSION

Perioperative and oncologic outcomes of a strategy with SEMS-BS for LSCON are non-inferior to those obtained in the elective setting for non-occlusive neoplasms in the same location. Technical and oncologic safety of interval colectomy performed on a semi-scheduled situation by acute care surgeons is absolutely warranted.

Long-term and short-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open resection following tube decompression for obstructive colorectal cancer: a single-center retrospective study

PURPOSE

The benefits of laparoscopic surgery over open surgery are well documented; however, the suitability of laparoscopic surgery for obstructive colorectal cancer is still controversial. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the clinical benefits of laparoscopic surgery vs. open surgery for obstructive colorectal cancer after tube decompression.

METHODS

We analyzed the outcomes of patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery vs. open surgery for curative resection after tube decompression for obstructive colorectal cancer at our hospital between January, 2007 and March, 2018.

RESULTS

This study comprised 67 patients: 29 patients who underwent open surgery and 38 patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery. The morbidity within 30 days after surgery was comparable between the groups. The 3-year overall survival rates of the open and laparoscopic groups were 83.3 and 79.4%, respectively (p = 0.6244), and the 3-year disease-free survival rates were 59.3 and 71.2%, respectively (p = 0.3200). Multivariate analysis showed that nodal stage (p = 0.021) was an independent prognostic factor for OS and sex (p = 0.010) and side-ness (p = 0.048) were independent prognostic factors for DFS.

CONCLUSION

If adequate decompression is achieved, laparoscopic resection following tube decompression for obstructive colorectal cancer can be a safe alternative to open surgery.

Short-Term Outcomes of Colorectal Stenting Using a Low Axial Force Self-Expandable Metal Stent for Malignant Colorectal Obstruction: A Japanese Multicenter Prospective Study

(1) Background: Endoscopic colorectal stenting with high technical success and safety is essential in discussing the oncological outcomes for the management of malignant colorectal obstruction. Mechanical properties of self-expandable metal stents are usually considered to affect clinical outcomes. (2) Methods: A multicenter, prospective study was conducted in Japan. A self-expandable metal stent with low axial force was inserted endoscopically. The primary endpoint was clinical success, defined as the resolution of symptoms and radiological findings within 24 h. Secondary endpoints were technical success and adverse events. Short-term outcomes of 7 days were evaluated in this study. (3) Results: Two hundred and five consecutive patients were enrolled. Three patients were excluded, and the remaining 202 patients were evaluated. The technical and clinical success rates were 97.5% and 96.0%, respectively. Major stent-related adverse events included stent migration (1.0%), insufficient stent expansion (0.5%), and stent occlusion (0.5%). No colonic perforation was observed. There were two fatal cases (1%) which were not related to stent placement. (4) Conclusions: The placement of self-expandable metal stents with low axial force is safe with no perforation and showed high technical and clinical success rates in short-term outcomes for the management of malignant colorectal obstruction.

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.

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.

Propensity score-matched comparison of stenting as a bridge to surgery and emergency surgery for acute malignant left-sided colonic obstruction

Background

Bridge to elective surgery (BTS) using self-expanding metal stents (SEMSs) is a common alternative to emergency surgery (ES) for acute malignant left-sided colonic obstruction (AMLCO). However, studies regarding the long-term impact of BTS are limited and have reported unclear results.

Methods

A multicenter observational study was performed at three hospitals from April 2012 to December 2019. Propensity score matching (PSM) was introduced to minimize selection bias. The primary endpoint was overall survival. The secondary endpoints included surgical approaches, primary resection types, total stent-related adverse effects (AEs), surgical AEs, length of hospital stay, 30-day mortality and tumor recurrence.

Results

Forty-nine patients in both the BTS and ES groups were matched. Patients in the BTS group more often underwent laparoscopic resection [31 (63.3%) vs. 8 (16.3%), p < 0.001], were less likely to have a primary stoma [13 (26.5%) vs. 26 (53.1%), p = 0.007] and more often had perineural invasion [25 (51.0 %) vs. 13 (26.5 %), p = 0.013]. The median overall survival was significantly lower in patients with stent insertion (41 vs. 65 months, p = 0.041). The 3-year overall survival (53.0 vs. 77.2%, p = 0.039) and 5-year overall survival (30.6 vs. 55.0%, p = 0.025) were significantly less favorable in the BTS group. In multivariate Cox regression analysis, stenting (hazard ratio(HR) = 2.309(1.052–5.066), p = 0.037), surgical AEs (HR = 1.394 (1.053–1.845), p = 0.020) and pTNM stage (HR = 1.706 (1.116–2.607), p = 0.014) were positively correlated with overall survival in matched patients.

Conclusions

Self-expanding metal stents as “a bridge to surgery” are associated with more perineural invasion, a higher recurrence rate and worse overall survival in patients with acute malignant left-sided colonic obstruction compared with emergency surgery.

Obstructing Left-Sided Colonic Cancer: Is Endoscopic Stenting a Bridge to Surgery or a Bridge to Nowhere?

For the 8-29% colorectal cancers that initially manifest with obstruction, emergency surgery (ES) was traditionally considered the only available therapy, despite high morbidity and mortality rates and the need for colostomy creation. More recently, malignant obstruction of the left colon can be temporized by endoscopic placement of a self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS), used as bridge to surgery (BTS), facilitating a laparoscopic approach and increasing the likelihood that a primary anastomosis instead of stoma would be used. Despite these attractive outcomes, the superiority of the BTS approach is not clearly established. Few authors have stressed the potential cancer risk associated with perforations that may occur during endoscopic stent placement, facilitating neoplastic spread and negatively impacting prognosis. For this reason, the current literature focuses on long-term oncologic outcomes such as disease-free survival, overall survival and recurrence rate that do seem not to differ between the ES and BTS approaches. This lack of consensus has spawned differing and sometimes discordant guidelines worldwide. In conclusion, 20 years after the first description of a colonic stent as BTS, the debate is still open, but the growing number of articles about the use of SEMS as a BTS signifies a great interest in the topic. We hope that these data will finally converge on a single set of recommendations supporting a management strategy with well-demonstrated superiority.

Management Considerations for the Surgical Treatment of Colorectal Cancer During the Global Covid-19 Pandemic

OBJECTIVE

The COVID-19 pandemic requires to conscientiously weigh "timely surgical intervention" for colorectal cancer against efforts to conserve hospital resources and protect patients and health care providers.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Professional societies provided ad-hoc guidance at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic on deferral of surgical and perioperative interventions, but these lack specific parameters to determine the optimal timing of surgery.

METHODS

Using the GRADE system, published evidence was analyzed to generate weighted statements for stage, site, acuity of presentation, and hospital setting to specify when surgery should be pursued, the time and duration of oncologically acceptable delays, and when to utilize nonsurgical modalities to bridge the waiting period.

RESULTS

Colorectal cancer surgeries-prioritized as emergency, urgent with imminent emergency or oncologically urgent, or elective-were matched against the phases of the pandemic. Surgery in COVID-19-positive patients must be avoided. Emergent and imminent emergent cases should mostly proceed unless resources are exhausted. Standard practices allow for postponement of elective cases and deferral to nonsurgical modalities of stage II/III rectal and metastatic colorectal cancer. Oncologically urgent cases may be delayed for 6(-12) weeks without jeopardizing oncological outcomes. Outside established principles, administration of nonsurgical modalities is not justified and increases the vulnerability of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic has stressed already limited health care resources and forced rationing, triage, and prioritization of care in general, specifically of surgical interventions. Established guidelines allow for modifications of optimal timing and type of surgery for colorectal cancer during an unrelated pandemic.

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.

Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic approach to colonic obstruction for colon cancer

BACKGROUND

We speculated that a laparoscopic approach to emergent/urgent partial colectomy for colonic obstruction would be associated with less morbidity and shorter length of stay with similar mortality to open colectomy. We compared the outcomes of laparoscopic and open approaches to emergent/urgent partial colectomy for colonic obstruction from colonic cancer using data from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database for the period of 2012-2017.

METHODS

Multivariate analysis compared NSQIP data points following laparoscopic, laparoscopic converted to open, and open colectomy for emergent/urgent colectomy for colonic obstruction from colon cancer from 2012 to 2017.

RESULTS

A total of 1293 patients who underwent emergent colectomy for colon obstruction from colon cancer during 2012-2017 were identified within the NSQIP database. Laparoscopic approach was used for colonic obstruction in 19.3% of operations with a conversion rate of 28.5%. A laparoscopic approach to obstructing colonic cancers was associated with lower morbidity (50% vs. 61.8%, AOR: 0.67, P = 0.01) and shorter hospitalization length (10 days vs. 13 days, mean difference: 3 days, P < 0.01) compared with an open approach. However, the mean operation duration was longer in laparoscopic operations than open operations (159 min vs. 137 min, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

A laparoscopic approach to malignant colonic obstruction is associated with decreased morbidity. This suggests that efforts should be directed towards increasing the utilization of laparoscopic approaches for the surgical treatment of colonic obstruction.

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.

Efficacy and safety of self-expanding metallic stent placement followed by neoadjuvant chemotherapy and scheduled surgery for treatment of obstructing left-sided colonic cancer

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) followed by neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to elective surgery for obstructing left-sided colon cancer.

METHODS

Eleven consecutive patients with obstructing left-sided colon cancer between May 2014 and November 2015 were included retrospectively. All patients received SEMS followed by neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The primary outcome measure was stoma and laparoscopic surgery.

RESULTS

Chemotherapy was with two cycles of CAPOX (54.5%) or three cycles mFOLFOX6 (45.5%). Median serum albumin and hemoglobin levels before surgery were significantly higher than before neoadjuvant chemotherapy (p = 0.01 and p = 0.008 respectively) and before SEMS (p = 0.01 and p = 0.003 respectively). Median bowel wall thickness proximal to the upper edge of tumor was significantly more before neoadjuvant chemotherapy than before stent (p = 0.003), and significantly less before surgery than before neoadjuvant chemotherapy (p = 0.003). No patient underwent stoma creation. Laparoscopic surgery was performed in nine (81.8%) patients. No local recurrence or metastases developed over median cancer-specific follow-up of 44 months (range, 37-55 months).

CONCLUSION

SEMS followed by neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to elective surgery appears to be safe and well tolerated in patients with obstructing left-sided colon cancer.

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.

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.

Acute abdominal obstruction: Colon stent or emergency surgery? An evidence-based review

According to the American Cancer Society and Colorectal Cancer Statistics 2017, colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common malignancies in the United States and the second leading cause of cancer death in the world in 2018. Previous studies demonstrated that 8%-29% of patients with primary CRC present malignant colonic obstruction (MCO). In the past, emergency surgery has been the primary treatment for MCO, although morbidity and surgical mortality rates are higher in these settings than in elective procedures. In the 1990s, self-expanding metal stents appeared and was a watershed in the treatment of patients in gastrointestinal surgical emergencies. The studies led to high expectations because the use of stents could prevent surgical intervention, such as colostomy, leading to lower morbidity and mortality, possibly resulting in higher quality of life. This review was designed to provide present evidence of the indication, technique, outcomes, benefits, and risks of these treatments in acute MCO through the analysis of previously published studies and current guidelines.

Oncological consequence of emergent resection of perforated colon cancer with complete obstruction after stent insertion as a bridge to surgery

PURPOSE

Colonic perforation is a life-threatening complication after colonic stent insertion as a bridge to surgery for acute obstruction caused by colorectal cancer. The oncological consequence of colonic perforation after emergent surgical intervention was unknown. The aim of this short communication was to investigate whether or not the perforation and emergent surgery had obviously impact on the peritoneal recurrence and long-term survival of patients.

METHODS

Data of the patients who underwent colorectal stenting as a bridge to surgery in 5 years from 2012 to 2017 was collected by the Endoscopical Surgery Group of Hubei. The perforated cases treated by emergent operation were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

During 5 years from 2012 to 2017, 116 cases of colorectal stenting as a bridge to surgery had been performed, and 7 patients had perforation after stent placement and treated by emergent surgery, including 1 case of synchronic liver metastasis treated by one-stage metastasectomy. One of the 7 patients died of septic shock after operation, and the remaining patients were followed up for 6-60 months. There was no evidence of abdominal implantation or extra-abdominal metastasis.

CONCLUSION

This small case series implicated that colonic perforation after stent insertion for malignant colorectal obstruction treated by emergent surgery might not obviously increase the peritoneal implantation and metastasis.

A nomogram for predicting bowel obstruction in preoperative colorectal cancer patients with clinical characteristics

BACKGROUND

Bowel obstruction (BO) is a complication that commonly affects patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). BO causes severe outcomes, and its treatment leads to a dilemma for many surgeons. Moreover, the factors correlated to BO in preoperative CRC patients remain unclear. The objectives of this study were to investigate the clinical characteristics of BO to identify risk predictors and to construct a BO prediction model with preoperative CRC patients.

METHODS

A large-scale, retrospective cohort, population-based study analyzed the data of 11,814 patients obtained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results and Medicare claims-linked databases (SEER-M database). Patients aged ≥ 66 years and primarily diagnosed with CRC from 1992 to 2009 were divided into BO and non-BO groups. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to determine predictors, and then, a nomogram was constructed by those predictors.

RESULTS

A total of 11,814 patients (5293 men and 6251 women) were identified. In multivariate analysis, 14 factors were found to be associated with BO including age, race, marital status, residence location, T category, M category, primary tumor site, histologic type, histologic grade, tumor size, history of alcoholism, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, abdominal pain, and anemia. A nomogram predicting the 90- and 180-day rates of BO was built for the preoperative CRC patients with a C-index of 0.795.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified 14 BO-related factors, and a statistical model was constructed to predict the onset of BO in preoperative CRC patients. The obtained data may guide decision-making for the intervention of patients at risk for BO.

2017 WSES guidelines on colon and rectal cancer emergencies: obstruction and perforation

ᅟ

Obstruction and perforation due to colorectal cancer represent challenging matters in terms of diagnosis, life-saving strategies, obstruction resolution and oncologic challenge. The aims of the current paper are to update the previous WSES guidelines for the management of large bowel perforation and obstructive left colon carcinoma (OLCC) and to develop new guidelines on obstructive right colon carcinoma (ORCC).

METHODS

The literature was extensively queried for focused publication until December 2017. Precise analysis and grading of the literature has been performed by a working group formed by a pool of experts: the statements and literature review were presented, discussed and voted at the Consensus Conference of the 4th Congress of the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) held in Campinas in May 2017.

RESULTS

CT scan is the best imaging technique to evaluate large bowel obstruction and perforation. For OLCC, self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS), when available, offers interesting advantages as compared to emergency surgery; however, the positioning of SEMS for surgically treatable causes carries some long-term oncologic disadvantages, which are still under analysis. In the context of emergency surgery, resection and primary anastomosis (RPA) is preferable to Hartmann's procedure, whenever the characteristics of the patient and the surgeon are permissive. Right-sided loop colostomy is preferable in rectal cancer, when preoperative therapies are predicted.With regards to the treatment of ORCC, right colectomy represents the procedure of choice; alternatives, such as internal bypass and loop ileostomy, are of limited value.Clinical scenarios in the case of perforation might be dramatic, especially in case of free faecal peritonitis. The importance of an appropriate balance between life-saving surgical procedures and respect of oncologic caveats must be stressed. In selected cases, a damage control approach may be required.Medical treatments including appropriate fluid resuscitation, early antibiotic treatment and management of co-existing medical conditions according to international guidelines must be delivered to all patients at presentation.

CONCLUSIONS

The current guidelines offer an extensive overview of available evidence and a qualitative consensus regarding management of large bowel obstruction and perforation due to colorectal cancer.

Colonic stent versus emergency surgery as treatment of malignant colonic obstruction in the palliative setting: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common malignancy and the third leading cause of cancer death worldwide. Malignant colonic obstruction (MCO) due to CRC occurs in 8 % to 29 % of patients.The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs comparing colonic SEMS versus emergency surgery (ES) for MCO in palliative patients. This was the first systematic review that included only randomized controlled trials in the palliative setting.

METHODS

A literature search was performed according to the PRISMA method using online databases with no restriction regarding idiom or year of publication. Data were extracted by two authors according to a predefined data extraction form. Primary outcomes were: mean survival, 30-day adverse events, 30-day mortality and length of hospital stay. Stoma formation, length of stay on intensive care unit (ICU), technical success and clinical success were recorded for secondary outcomes. Technical success (TS) was defined as successful stent placement across the stricture and its deployment. Clinical success (CS) was defined as adequate bowel decompression within 48 h of stent insertion without need for re-intervention.

RESULTS

We analyzed data from four RCT studies totaling 125 patients. The 30-day mortality was 6.3 % for SEMS-treated patients and 6.4 % for ES-treated patients, with no difference between groups (RD: - 0.00, 95 % CI [-0.10, 0.10], I 2 : 0 %). Mean survival was 279 days for SEMS and 244 days for ES, with no significant difference between groups (RD: 20.14, 95 % CI: [-42.92, 83.21], I 2 : 44 %). Clinical success was 96 % in the ES group and 86.1 % in the SEMS group (RD: - 0.13, 95 % CI [-0.23, - 0.02], I 2 : 51 %). Permanent stoma rate was 84 % in the ES group and 14.3 % in the SEMS group (RR: 0.19, 95 % CI: [0.11, 0.33], I 2 : 28 %). Length of hospital stay was shorter in SEMS group (RD: - 5.16, 95 % CI: [-6.71, - 3.61], I 2 : 56 %). There was no significant difference between groups regarding adverse events (RD 0.18, 95 % CI: [-0.19, 0.54;]) neither regarding ICU stay. (RD: - 0.01, 95 % CI: [-0.08, 0.05], I 2 : 7 %). The most common stent-related complication was perforation (42.8 % of all AE).

CONCLUSION

Mortality, mean survival, length of stay in the ICU and early complications of both methods were similar. SEMS may be an alternative to surgery with the advantage of early hospital discharge and lower risk of permanent stoma.

Ten-year survival after endoscopic stent placement as a bridge to surgery in obstructing colon cancer

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Self-expandable metal stents are used increasingly in the treatment of obstructing colorectal cancer (CRC). Although endoscopic colon stenting is widely accepted in palliation, disagreement exists about its role in a curative setting. This study aims to describe long-term survival data in a large patient group treated with colon stenting as a bridge to surgery for CRC.

METHODS

This prospective study included 97 patients who presented in a Belgian hospital between 1998 and 2013 with obstructing, although potentially curable, CRC. All patients underwent endoscopic stenting as a bridge to surgery. Procedure-related adverse events and long-term follow-up data were retrospectively collected and compared with the CRC mortality in Belgium in the same time span.

RESULTS

Overall survival in this observational cohort did not differ significantly from survival in all Belgian patients with CRC in the same period (P = .14). One-year, 5-year, and 10-year survival rates were similar in both groups (95.9% vs 79.0%; 54.7% vs 51.2%; 41.0% vs 35.6%, respectively). The technical success rate was 94.8%. Seventy-three patients did not experience any adverse event. Stent migration occurred in 9 patients, whereas micro-perforations and macro-perforations were observed in 14 patients, without influence on survival. Incidence rates of peritoneal metastases did not differ between patients with and without any type of perforation (22.2% vs 15.2%, respectively; P = .47). The type of stent influenced the overall adverse event risk, mainly driven by a significant increase in stent migration in case of Wallstent enteral (Boston Scientific Corporation, Natick, Mass).

CONCLUSIONS

Colon stenting before surgery is effective and did not worsen the survival outcome in patients with obstructing CRC who were treated with curative intent, which affirms the role for stenting as a bridge to surgery.

Long-term oncologic outcomes of stent as a bridge to surgery versus emergency surgery in malignant left side colonic obstructions: a meta-analysis

Background

The placement of a metallic stent as a bridge to surgery (SBTS) could represents an option for the treatment of left-sided malignant colonic obstruction in centres with adequate skills. Several meta-analyses demonstrated better short-term outcomes after SBTS when compared with emergency surgery (ES); however, some studies reported a higher local recurrence rate. The aim of the present review is to investigate the long-term outcomes of stent bridge to surgery as compared to ES.

Methods

A systematic review was performed to retrieve studies comparing long-term oncologic outcomes of SBTS and ES. Local and overall recurrence rate, overall and disease-free survival were retrieved and results were expressed as risk ratios.

Results

Seventeen studies and a total of 1,333 patients were included in the analysis. No significant differences were reported in recurrence rate [risk ratio (RR) =1.11; 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.84-1.47, P=0.47], 3-year mortality (RR =0.90; 95% CI: 0.73-1.12, P=0.34) and 5-year mortality (RR =1.00; 95% CI: 0.82-1.22, P=0.99). There were no differences among randomized and observational studies.

Conclusions

SBTS has similar long-term oncologic outcomes to ES and in centres with appropriate skill should be considered the best treatment option for left-sided malignant colonic obstructions.

Safety and efficacy of self-expandable metal stents for obstructive proximal and distal large bowel cancer

Self-expandable metal stents are often used to treat obstructive large bowel cancers. This study assessed the safety and efficacy of colonic stent insertion carried out in a district general hospital. Methods A retrospective review was carried out between 1 January 2007 and 28 February 2014 to identify patients who underwent stent insertion for malignant colorectal obstruction. Results Seventy-five patients (median age 75.2 years, 70.6% male) with primary colorectal cancer underwent stent insertion - 53 underwent semi-elective self-expanded metal stent insertion (for subacute bowel obstruction) and 22 had emergency stent inserted (for acute bowel obstruction). The majority (88%) had self-expanded metal stents inserted for palliation. Technical and clinical success rates were 98.7% and 91.2%, respectively. One patient had stent-related perforation; there was no procedure-related mortality. Conclusion This study shows that self-expanded metal stent insertion in malignant colorectal obstruction is safe and effective and can be successfully delivered in a district general hospital with high technical and clinical success rates.

Endoscopic colostomy with percutaneous colopexy: an animal feasibility study

BACKGROUND

Indications for colostomy in colorectal diseases are obstruction of the large bowel, such as in cancer, diverticular disease in the acute phase, post-radiotherapy enteritis, complex perirectal fistulas, anorectal trauma and severe anal incontinence. Some critically ill patients cannot tolerate an exploratory laparotomy, and laparoscopic assisted colostomy also requires general anesthesia.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the feasibility, safety and efficacy of performing colostomy assisted by colonoscopy and percutaneous colopexy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Five pigs underwent endoscopic assisted colostomy with percutaneous colopexy. Animals were evaluated in post-operative days 1, 2, 5 and 7 for feeding acceptance and colostomy characteristics. On day 7 full colonoscopy was performed on animals followed by exploratory laparotomy.

RESULTS

Average procedure time was 27 minutes (21-54 min). Postoperative mobility and feeding of animals were immediate after anesthesia recovery. Position of the colostomy, edges color, appearance of periostomal area, as well as its function was satisfactory in four animals. Retraction of colostomy was present in one pig. The colonoscopy and laparotomy control on the seventh day were considered as normal. A bladder perforation that was successfully repaired through the colostomy incision occurred in one pig. The main limitation of this study is its experimental nature.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic assisted colostomy with percutaneous colopexy proves to be a safe and effective method with low morbidity for performing colostomy in experimental animals, with possible clinical application in humans.

Long-Term Oncological Outcomes of Endoscopic Stenting as a Bridge to Surgery Versus Emergency Surgery for Malignant Colorectal Obstruction: A Comparative Study

AIM

With consideration of the theoretical link between the stent insertion and the increased risk of tumor cells spillaged, which may lead to distant metastases, there is a concern about long-term clinical outcomes after the usage of self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) as a "bridge to surgery" in the malignant colorectal obstruction (MCO) treatment. This cohort study aimed to compare the long-term oncological outcomes of SEMS as a bridge to surgery (SEMS group) with those of emergency surgery (ES group) for MCO.

METHODS

Twenty-seven patients who underwent semielective curative resection after endoscopic SEMS insertion were included from October 2007 to December 2012 in the SEMS group were compared with 33 patients who underwent emergency curative surgery for MCO during the same period in the ES group. The clinical pathologic characteristics and the overall survival (OS) rate were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in demographics, tumor stage, location, and histology between the SEMS and ES groups. The median OS times were 37 months for the SEMS group and 23 months for the ES group. The proportions of patients who received postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy were comparable (SEMS group versus ES group, 70.4% versus 45.5%; P = .138). There were no significant differences in terms of the long-term oncological outcome between two groups in the 3-year OS rate (55.6% versus 39.4%; P = .2119) and the 5-year OS rate (48.1% versus 36.4%; P = .3570).

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term oncological outcomes of the SEMS group were comparable to those of the ES group.

Obstructive Left Colon Cancer Should Be Managed by Using a Subtotal Colectomy Instead of Colonic Stenting

PURPOSE

This study compared a subtotal colectomy to self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) insertion as a bridge to surgery for patients with left colon-cancer obstruction.

METHODS

Ninety-four consecutive patients with left colon-cancer obstruction underwent an emergency subtotal colectomy or elective SEMS insertion between January 2007 and August 2014. Using prospectively collected data, we performed a retrospective comparative analysis on an intention-to-treat basis.

RESULTS

A subtotal colectomy and SEMS insertion were attempted in 24 and 70 patients, respectively. SEMS insertion technically failed in 5 patients (7.1%). The mean age and rate of obstruction in the descending colon were higher in the subtotal colectomy group than the SEMS group. Sex, underlying disease, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status, and pathological stage showed no statistical difference. Laparoscopic surgery was performed more frequently in patients in the SEMS group (62 of 70, 88.6%) than in patients in the subtotal colectomy group (4 of 24, 16.7%). The overall rate of postoperative morbidity was higher in the SEMS group. No Clavien-Dindo grade III or IV complications occurred in the subtotal colectomy group, but 2 patients (2.9%) died from septic complications in the SEMS group. One patient (4.2%) in the subtotal colectomy group had synchronous cancer. The total hospital stay was shorter in the subtotal colectomy group. The median number of bowel movements in the subtotal colectomy group was twice per day at postoperative 3-6 months.

CONCLUSION

A subtotal colectomy for patients with obstructive left-colon cancer is a clinically and oncologically safer, 1-stage, surgical strategy compared to SEMS insertion as a bridge to surgery.

Endoscopic stenting as bridge-to-surgery (BTS) in left-sided obstructing colorectal cancer: Experience with conformable stents

BACKGROUND

Compared to emergency surgery, self-expandable metallic stents are effective and safe when used as bridge-to-surgery (BTS) in operable patients with acute colorectal cancer obstruction. In this study, we report data on the new conformable colonic stents.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate clinical effectiveness of conformable stents as BTS in patients with acute colorectal cancer obstruction.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective study.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at six Italian Endoscopic Units.

PATIENTS

Data about patients with acute malignant colorectal obstruction were collected between 2007 and 2012.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

All patients were treated with conformable stents as BTS. Technical success, clinical success, rate of primary anastomosis and colostomy, early and late complications were evaluated.

RESULTS

Data about 88 patients (62 males) were reviewed in this study. Conformable SEMS were correctly deployed in 86 out of 88 patients, with resolution of obstruction in all treated patients. Tumor resection with primary anastomosis was possible in all patients. A temporary colostomy was performed in 40. Early complications did not occur. Late complications occurred in 11 patients. Stent migration was significantly higher in patients treated with partially-covered stents compared to the uncovered group (35% vs. 0%, P<0.001). Endoscopical re-intervention was required in 12% of patients. One patient with rectal cancer had an anastomotic dehiscence after surgery and he was successfully treated with endoscopic clipping. One year after surgery, all patients were alive and local recurrence have not been documented.

LIMITATIONS

This was a retrospective and uncontrolled study.

CONCLUSIONS

Preliminary data from this large case series are encouraging, with a high rate of technical and clinical success and low rate of clinically relevant complications. Partially-covered SEMS should be avoided in order to reduce the risk of endoscopic re-intervention.

Colonic self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) as a bridge to surgery in left-sided malignant colonic obstruction: an 8-year review

INTRODUCTION

Colonic stenting has evolved to be an alternative to emergency laparotomy in the management of acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction. This retrospective comparative study aimed to review the outcomes of colonic stent as bridge to surgery with emergency operation in a regional hospital in Hong Kong.

METHOD

Consecutive patients who were admitted from January 2006 to July 2014 with diagnosis of malignant left-sided colonic obstruction (from splenic flexure to rectosigmoid colon) were included. Patients with peritonitis or disseminated disease were excluded. Colonic stenting was attempted in all eligible patients when fluoroscopy was available in the endoscopy suite during office hour. Otherwise, emergency operation was performed. For patients with clinical success in colonic stenting, interval colectomies were performed. The postoperative outcomes, including the 30-days mortality, the stoma creation rate, the complication rate as well as the survival data were analyzed on an intention-to-treat (ITT) basis.

RESULTS

From January 2006 to July 2014, 62 patients underwent colonic stenting and 40 patients underwent emergency operations. The technical success rate and the clinical success rate of stenting were 95.2 and 83.9 %, respectively. Laparoscopic resection was achieved in 74.2 % in the stenting group. More primary anastomoses were performed in the stenting group (71.0 vs. 27.5 %, p = 0.000). The stenting group had a significantly lower permanent stoma rate (16.1 vs. 52.5 %, p < 0.000), fewer Dindo grade III to IV postoperative morbidity (16.1 vs. 40 %, p = 0.007), and the 30-day mortality rate was lower (3.2 vs. 17.5 %, p = 0.018), translating into a better overall 5-year survival rate. The disease-free survival was comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Colonic self-expanding metal stent is effective in the management of acute left-sided colonic obstruction. It is associated with reduced stoma creation rate and postoperative morbidity. The oncological safety is not jeopardized by stenting and the interval operation.

Surgery or stenting for colonic obstruction: A practice management guideline from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma

BACKGROUND

Colonic obstruction is a surgical emergency, and delay in decompression results in added morbidity and mortality. Advances have led to less invasive procedures such as stenting as a bridge for definitive surgery. The aim of this article was to perform a systematic review regarding colon obstruction (malignant or benign) and to provide recommendations following the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted using the PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases of published studies. The search was last performed on January 2, 2015. Two independent reviewers extracted the desired variables from the studies. For our meta-analysis, we used Review Manager X.6 (RevMan). Recommendations are provided using GRADE methodology. A single POPULATION, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome (PICO) question with two outcomes was addressed as follows:

POPULATION

in adult patients with a colonic obstruction (malignant or benign).

INTERVENTION

should surgery be performed.Comparator: versus endoscopic stenting.

OUTCOMES

decreased mortality and decreased emergency, nonplanned procedures?

RESULTS

The search yielded 210 results. Screening of the titles excluded 102 articles, leaving 108 for review. After abstract review, 71 additional articles were excluded because of failure to address the PICO questions of this guideline. Thirty-seven articles were reviewed in their entirety, of those six randomized control trials that evaluated the use of stents versus emergency surgery in colonic obstruction caused by malignant disease were included in the final qualitative review.

CONCLUSION

We conditionally recommend endoscopic, colonic stenting (if available) as initial therapy for colonic obstruction. In our review, stent use was associated with decreased mortality and rates for emergency, nonplanned procedures to include reoperations. This conditional recommendation is limited to those with malignancy because of the lack of literature supporting this practice in benign colonic disease.

Deviating colostomy construction versus stent placement as bridge to surgery for malignant left-sided colonic obstruction

BACKGROUND

Acute colonic decompression using a deviating colostomy (DC) or a self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) has been shown to lead to fewer complications and permanent stomas compared to acute resection in elderly patients with malignant left-sided colonic obstruction (LSCO). However, no consensus exists on which decompression method is superior, especially in patients treated with curative intend. This retrospective study therefore aimed to compare both decompression methods in potentially curable LSCO patients.

METHODS

All LSCO patients treated with curative intent between 2004 and 2013 in two teaching hospitals were retrospectively identified. In one institution, a DC was the standard of care, whereas in the other all patients were treated with SEMS.

RESULTS

In total, 88 eligible LSCO patients with limited disease and curative treatment options were included; 51 patients had a SEMS placed and 37 patients a DC constructed. All patients eventually underwent a subsequent elective resection. In sum, 235 patients were excluded due to benign or inoperable disease. No significant differences were found for hospital stay, morbidity, disease-free and overall survival and mortality. Major complications were seen in 13/51 (25.5 %) patients in the SEMS group and were mostly due to stent dysfunction (n = 7). Also, one stent-related perforation occurred. Major complications occurred in 4/37 (10.8 %) patients in the DC group, including abdominal sepsis (n = 3) and wound dehiscence (n = 1). Long-term complication rate was significantly higher in the DC group (29.7 vs. 9.8 %, p = 0.01), mainly due to a high incisional hernia rate. Fewer patients had a temporary colostomy following elective resection after SEMS placement (62.2 vs. 17.6 %, p < 0.01). Permanent colostomy rate was not significantly different.

CONCLUSION

SEMS and DC are both effective decompression methods for curable LSCO patients with comparable short- and long-term oncological outcomes; however, more surgical procedures are performed after DC due to an increased number of temporary colostomies and incisional hernia repairs.

Evidence-based Clinical Management of Acute Malignant Colorectal Obstruction

Acute malignant colorectal obstruction (AMCO) is an emergency associated with colorectal cancer (CRC). Emergency surgery is standard therapy for AMCO, and 1-stage surgery without colostomy is preferable, but it is occasionally difficult in the emergency setting. A self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) enables noninvasive colonic decompression and subsequent 1-stage surgery, which has been widely applied for CRC with AMCO. However, recent accumulation of high-quality evidence has highlighted some problems and the limited efficacy of SEMS for AMCO. In palliative settings, SEMS placement reduces hospital stay and short-term complication rates, whereas it increases the frequency of long-term complications, such as delayed perforation. SEMS placement does not seem compatible with recent standard chemotherapy including bevacizumab. As a bridge to surgery, while SEMS placement provides a lower clinical success rate than emergency surgery, it can facilitate primary anastomosis without stoma. However, evidence regarding long-term survival outcomes with SEMS in both palliative and bridge to surgery settings is lacking. The efficacy of transanal colorectal tube placement, another endoscopic treatment, has been reported, but its clinical evidence level is low due to the limited number of studies. This review article comprehensively summarizes the current knowledge about surgical and endoscopic management of CRC with AMCO.

Reevaluation of Self-Expanding Metal Stents as a Bridge to Surgery for Acute Left-Sided Malignant Colonic Obstruction: Six Years Experience

Introduction

Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) as a bridge to surgery have been used as an alternative for acute malignant left-sided colonic obstruction. However, the benefits are uncertain. The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy no longer recommends their use in patients with low surgical risk because of the risk of tumor recurrence.

Methods

Patients admitted for acute malignant left-sided colonic obstruction who underwent SEMS as a bridge to elective surgery or urgent surgery were retrospectively evaluated. Postoperative morbidity/mortality, stent complications and survival were recorded. Our aim was to compare the outcome between preoperative SEMS and direct emergent surgery in acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction.

Results

42 patients were included (SEMS group: 27 and surgery group: 15). There were no differences between groups in relation to age, ASA classification and tumor stage. The technical success of SEMS was 88.9% and the clinical success was 85.2%. There were three SEMS related perforations. In the surgery group, the stoma rate was higher (86.7% vs 25.9%, p < 0.001) and there was a trend for a lower length of hospital stay (18.9 days vs 26.3 days, p = 0.051).

SEMS verses surgery group: There were no differences in the rate of temporary stoma (57.1% vs 61.5%, p = 0.84), definitive stoma (42.8% vs 38.5%, p = 0.84), success of primary anastomosis (86.7% vs 66.7%, p = 0.22) and Clavien–Dindo classification (≥III: 36% vs 58.2% p = 0.24). Overall survival at 1/5 years was identical in the two groups 100%/56% in the SEMS group vs 93%/43% in the surgery group, p = 0.14), as well as tumor recurrence at 3/5 years (24%/50% vs 20%/36% respectively, p = 0.68).

Conclusions

SEMS are associated with a lower overall stoma rate and a higher primary anastomosis rate. However, there are no differences in complications, overall survival and recurrence between the groups.

Value of endoscopic intestinal stent placement in treatment of colorectal cancer complicated with intestinal obstruction

AIM: To evaluate the safety, efficacy and value of endoscopic intestinal stent placement in the treatment of colorectal cancer complicated with acute intestinal obstruction.

METHODS: A total of 263 patients with colorectal cancer complicated with intestinal obstruction treated at our hospital from January 2010 to December 2014 were included. Stenting treatment was performed under endoscopy and (or) X-ray. The rate of success, the incidence of postoperative complications, the rate of symptom remission, the rate of surgical excision and other indicators were evaluated.

RESULTS: Stent implantation was successful in 258 (98.1%) cases. The rates of adverse events were: perforation, 1.1% (3 cases); hemorrhage, 3.8% (10 cases); fever, 4.6% (12 cases), and others such as stent dislocation and migration, 3.0% (8 cases). The rates of symptom remission were: abdominal pain, 97.3% (256 cases); abdominal distension, 97.3% (258 cases); and anal dysfunction, 98.1% (258 cases). The rates of surgical resection were: 60 cases for palliative treatment, 198 cases for surgical resection 5-13 d after stent implantation after intestinal preparation, and 143 cases for removal of the tumor by one-stage operation.

CONCLUSION: The symptoms of intestinal obstruction can be relieved by endoscopic intestinal stenting. Emergency endoscopic stenting can be used as a bridge treatment before operation, and it can turn emergency operation to elective surgery, turn two-stage operation to one-stage operation, reduce the difficulty and risk of operation for clinicians, reduce the incidence of postoperative complications, relieve pain, and improve survival quality.

Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes Between Emergency Surgery and Bridge to Surgery for Malignant Obstruction in Right-Sided Colon Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Malignant obstruction in right-sided colon (MORC) has traditionally been treated by emergency resection with primary anastomosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate short-term postoperative and long-term oncologic outcomes according to the surgical approach adopted for MORC.

METHODS

A total of 1785 patients who underwent curative surgery for stage II or III colon cancer in seven hospitals were reviewed retrospectively. Seventy-four of 1785 patients had MORC. We compared the postoperative outcome and long-term oncologic outcome between the emergency surgery (ES) group (49 patients) and the bridge to surgery (BS) group (25 patients) for 74 patients with MORC.

RESULTS

There were no differences in the length of the distal and proximal resection margin (p = 0.820 and p = 0.620) or the number of metastatic lymph nodes (p = 0.221). There were no differences in flatus passage (p = 0.242), start of diet (p = 0.336), hospital stay (p = 0.444), or postoperative morbidity (p = 0.762). The 5-year overall survival rates were 73.2 % in the ES group and 90.7 % in the BS group (p = 0.172). Moreover, the 5-year disease-free survival rates were 71.9 % in the ES group and 76.2 % in the BS group (p = 0.929).

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of the above results, the postoperative course of the ES group was similar to that of the BS group. In addition, the long-term oncologic outcome of the BS group was similar or slightly better than that of the ES group. BS after colonic stent may be an alternative option for MORC.

Long-term outcomes after stenting as a “bridge to surgery” for the management of acute obstruction secondary to colorectal cancer

Obstructive symptoms are present in 8% of cases at the time of initial diagnosis in cases of colorectal cancer. Emergency surgery has been classically considered the treatment of choice in these patients. However, in the majority of studies, emergency colorectal surgery is burdened with higher morbidity and mortality rates than elective surgery, and many patients require temporal colostomy which deteriorates their quality of life and becomes permanent in 10%-40% of cases. The aim of stenting by-pass to surgery is to transform emergency surgery into elective surgery in order to improve surgical results, obtain an accurate tumoral staging and detection of synchronous lesions, stabilization of comorbidities and performance of laparoscopic surgery. Immediate results were more favourable in patients who were stented concerning primary anastomosis, permanent stoma, wound infection and overall morbidity, having the higher surgical risk patients the greater benefit. However, some findings laid out the possible implication of stenting in long-term results of oncologic treatment. Perforation after stenting is related to tumoral recurrence. In studies with perforation rates above 8%, higher recurrences rates in young patients and lower disease free survival have been shown. On the other hand, after stenting the number of removed lymph nodes in the surgical specimen is larger, patients can receive adjuvant chemotherapy earlier and in a greater percentage and the number of patients who can be surgically treated with laparoscopic surgery is larger. Finally, there are no consistent studies able to demonstrate that one strategy is superior to the other in terms of oncologic benefits. At present, it would seem wise to assume a higher initial complication rate in young patients without relevant comorbidities and to accept the risk of local recurrence in old patients (> 70 years) or with high surgical risk (ASA III/IV).