A longer interval after stenting compromises the short- and long-term outcomes after curative surgery for obstructive colorectal cancer

Oncologic investigation of the interval from stent placement to surgery in patients with obstructive colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

Self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placement is widely used as a bridge to surgery (BTS) procedure for obstructive colorectal cancer. However, evidence regarding the optimal interval between SEMS placement and elective surgery is lacking.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected data from patients with BTS between January 2013 and October 2021. Inverse probability treatment-weighted propensity score analyses were used to compare short- and long-term outcomes between the short-interval (SI) and long-interval (LI) groups, using a cutoff of 20 days.

RESULTS

In total, 138 patients were enrolled in this study (SI group, n = 63; LI group, n = 75). In the matched cohort, the patients' backgrounds were well balanced. The incidence of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ II postoperative complications was not significantly different between the SI and LI groups (19.0% vs. 14.0%, P = 0.47). There were no significant differences between the SI and LI groups in the 3-year recurrence-free survival (68.0% vs. 76.4%, P = 0.73) or 3-year overall survival rates (86.0% vs. 90.6%, P = 0.72).

CONCLUSIONS

A longer interval did not deteriorate the oncological outcomes. Individual perioperative management with an appropriate interval to improve the patient's condition is required to ensure safe surgery.

The optimal surgery timing after stenting in colorectal cancer patients with malignant obstruction: additionally compared with emergency surgery

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to determine short-term and long-term outcomes according to time intervals after stenting and compared them with those of emergency surgery (ES) in colorectal cancer (CRC) with malignant obstruction.

METHODS

CRC with malignant obstructions was reviewed retrospectively between January 2008 and July 2018. Of a total of 539 patients who visited the emergency room and underwent ES, 133 were enrolled in the ES group. Of a total of 567 patients who initially received stenting and subsequently underwent elective surgery, 220 were enrolled in the SEMS group. The interval between SEMS placement and elective surgery was classified as < 11 days, 11-17 days, and > 17 days.

RESULTS

For those who received SEMS (n = 220), those with a time interval of 11-17 days (n = 97) had fewer hospital days than those with a time interval of < 11 days (n = 68) (8 days vs. 15 days) and less stoma formation than those with a time interval of > 17 days (n = 55) (1.0% vs. 14.6%). Multivariable analysis revealed a decreased risk of death for the group with a time interval of 11-17 days (20.6%) compared to the ES group (31.6%) (hazard ratio: 0.48; 95% confidence interval: 0.24-0.97). Disease-free survival was comparable between the SEMS and ES groups regardless of the time interval (log-rank p = 0.52).

CONCLUSIONS

The time interval of 11-17 days after stenting to elective surgery appeared to be associated with the most favorable outcomes.

Long-term outcomes between self-expandable metallic stent and transanal decompression tube for malignant large bowel obstruction: A multicenter retrospective study and meta-analysis

AIM

To compare the oncological outcomes between self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) as a bridge to surgery and transanal decompression tube (TDT) placement for malignant large bowel obstruction (MLBO).

METHODS

A total of 287 MLBO patients who underwent SEMS (n = 137) or TDT placement (n = 150) were enrolled in this multicenter retrospective study. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) between the two groups were compared. A meta-analysis was performed using random-effects models to calculate odd ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Postoperative complications of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥II and ≥III occurred frequently in the TDT group compared with the SEMS group (P = 0.002 and 0.005, respectively). The 3-y OS in the overall cohort and 3-y DFS in the pathological stage II/III cohort in the SEMS and TDT groups were 68.6% and 71.4%, and 71.0% and 72.6%, respectively. The survival differences were not significantly different in the OS and DFS analyses (P = 0.819 and P = 0.892, respectively). A meta-analysis of nine studies (including our cohort data) demonstrated no significant difference between the SEMS and TDT groups for 3-y OS and DFS (OR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.57-1.62, P = 0.89 and OR = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.46-1.04, P = 0.07, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrated that SEMS placement had no inferiority regarding long-term outcomes, including OS and DFS, compared with TDT placement. Considering the short-term benefits of SEMS placement, this could be a preferable preoperative decompression method for MLBO.

A decreased preoperative platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, systemic immune-inflammation index, and pan-immune-inflammation value are associated with the poorer survival of patients with a stent inserted as a bridge to curative surgery for obstructive colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

Inflammation is one of the hallmarks of cancer, and inflammation-based markers that are calculated easily from laboratory results have shown predictive abilities. We investigated the prognostic values of the preoperative platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), systemic immune-inflammation index (SII), and pan-immune-inflammation value (PIV) in patients with non-metastatic obstructive colorectal cancer (OCRC) and a self-expandable metallic stent inserted as a bridge to curative surgery.

METHODS

The subjects of this retrospective study were 86 patients with pathological stage I to III OCRC. We examined the associations of these biomarkers with short- and long-term outcomes.

RESULTS

Multivariate analyses revealed that a preoperative PLR < 149, SII < 597, and PIV < 209 were independently associated with poorer relapse-free survival (RFS) (P = 0.007, P < 0.001, and P = 0.002, respectively) and that a PIV < 209 was independently associated with poorer cancer-specific survival (P = 0.030). A platelet count < 240 was significantly associated with worse RFS, whereas the lymphocyte count was not. Pre-stenting PLR < 221 was an independent poor prognostic factor for RFS (P = 0.045).

CONCLUSION

This study showed that decreased preoperative PLR, SII, PIV, and pre-stenting PLR were associated with poorer RFS, contrary to the findings of most previous studies. Our results suggest that platelets and obstruction contributed primarily to the opposite relationships, which might provide new insight into the possible pathophysiology of platelet-tumor interactions generated in the OCRC environment.

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.

Colon cancer patient with long-term colon stent placement: Case report and literature review

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer and the second leading cause of cancer mortality globally. Large bowel obstruction (occurring in 15-30% of patients with CRCs) accounts for approximately 80% of medical emergencies related to CRC. Currently, there is no standard treatment of this condition. The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) recommends self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) as a bridge (two weeks) to surgery for left-sided obstructing colon cancer. In the present report, we describe an 81-year-old male with colon cancer who underwent colon stent placement for 32 months, but later underwent radical resection. A follow-up of more than four-months revealed that his condition was normal. The history as well as application and advantages of SEMS are discussed in this report.

Differences in clinical outcomes according to the time interval between the bridge to surgery stenting and surgery for left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction

BACKGROUND

Self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement is commonly used as a bridge to surgery (BTS) for left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction (MCO). However, the optimal time interval between BTS stenting and surgery for left-sided MCO is unclear, and the results of previous studies are conflicting. This study aimed to determine the differences in clinical outcomes according to the time interval between BTS stenting and surgery in left-sided MCO.

METHODS

Data from 594 patients who underwent SEMS placement for MCO between January 2009 and December 2018 were reviewed. Among them, 148 patients who underwent SEMS placement as BTS treatment and curative surgery were enrolled. The enrolled patients were divided into three groups according to the interval between BTS stenting and surgery: group 1 (interval ≤2 weeks), group 2 (interval 2-3 weeks), and group 3 (interval >3 weeks).

RESULTS

Group 2 and 3 patients underwent significantly higher rates of laparoscopic surgery than those in group 1 (83.7, 81.0 vs. 53.2 %, respectively; P=0.003, P=0.003, respectively). Also, rates of stoma formation directly after resection were significantly higher in group 1 compared to groups 2 and 3 (21.3 vs 2.3, 6.9%, respectively; P=0.008, P=0.043, respectively). Bridging interval had no effect on SEMS-related complications, resection-related complications, 90-day mortality, permanent stoma formation, 3-year disease-free survival, and 3-year overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

A bridging interval of > 2 weeks between BTS stenting and surgery for left-sided MCO is preferable for lower stoma formation rates and higher rates of laparoscopic approach operation, with no difference in short-term and long-term outcomes including complication, mortality, and survival.