Should patients With obstructing colorectal cancer have proximal diversion?

The dynamics of the lipopolysaccharide-binding protein (LBP) level in assessing the risk of adverse outcomes in operated colorectal cancer patients

BACKGROUND

The main aim of this study is to analyze changes in the lipopolysaccharide-binding protein (LBP) level in blood serum over time and assess it as a potential risk factor for the development of SIRS, infectious and inflammatory complications, organ dysfunction and mortality in patients operated on colorectal cancer (CRC).

METHODS

90 CRC patients were divided into 2 groups: Group 1-50 patients operated on for CRC without acute bowel obstruction (ABO); Group 2-40 patients operated on for CRC with ABO. To determine LBP by ELISA method venous blood was taken 1 h before surgery and 72 h after it (3rd day).

RESULTS

LBP level on the 3rd day after surgery was lower in CRC patients with SIRS, postoperative complications, organ dysfunction and in dead patients. With an LBP value on the 3rd day after surgery being at ≤821.95 ng/mL, the risk of SIRS occurrence is 3.5 times higher, that of the postoperative complications is 5.2 times higher and death is 12.9 times higher than with its higher level (OR 3.5, CI 1.46-8.4; OR 5.2, CI 1.80-15.12; OR 12.9, CI 1.54-108.21, respectively). If the LBP value on the 3rd day after surgery is ≤ 700.15 ng/mL, the risk of organ dysfunctions is 13.5 times higher than with its higher level (OR 13.5, CI 3.536-51.54).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that in the patients with CRC, the LBP can be used as a predictive criterion for the development of SIRS, postoperative infectious and inflammatory complications, organ dysfunction, and mortality.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Pre-Treatment Loop Colostomy for Fecal Diversion in Rectal Cancer Patients: Is Laparoscopic Colostomy Better?

Diversion colostomy plays a crucial role in the management of carcinoma rectum in low- and middle-income countries as significant number of patients present with partial intestinal obstruction. The aim of this study was to compare laparoscopic and open approaches for fecal diversion done in patients with adenocarcinoma of the rectum as a pretreatment procedure. The primary end point of our study was time to initiation of neoadjuvant chemo radiation. It was a retrospective study that included all patients diagnosed to have carcinoma rectum and underwent a pretreatment fecal diversion between 2012 and 2014. A total of 55 patients underwent pretreatment diversion colostomy of which 33 were performed via the laparoscopic approach while 22 had open diversion. The time for initiation of neoadjuvant therapy was shorter in the laparoscopic group compared to the open approach (16 days vs. 20.5 days, P = 0.31). The study concluded that pretreatment diversion colostomy using the laparoscopic approach was a safe option in low- and middle-income countries as it was associated with faster recovery and early initiation of neoadjuvant therapy in patients with partially obstructed locally advanced carcinoma rectum.

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.

Overall readmissions and readmissions related to dehydration after creation of an ileostomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Hospital readmissions after creation of an ileostomy are common and come with a high clinical and financial burden. The aim of this review with pooled analysis was to determine the incidence of dehydration-related and all-cause readmissions after formation of an ileostomy, and the associated costs.

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted for studies reporting on dehydration-related and overall readmission rates after formation of a loop or end ileostomy between January 1990 and April 2021. Analyses were performed using R Statistical Software Version 3.6.1.

Results

The search yielded 71 studies (n = 82,451 patients). The pooled incidence of readmissions due to dehydration was 6% (95% CI 0.04–0.09) within 30 days, with an all-cause readmission rate of 20% (CI 95% 0.18–0.23). Duration of readmissions for dehydration ranged from 2.5 to 9 days. Average costs of dehydration-related readmission were between $2750 and $5924 per patient. Other indications for readmission within 30 days were specified in 15 studies, with a pooled incidence of 5% (95% CI 0.02–0.14) for dehydration, 4% (95% CI 0.02–0.08) for stoma outlet problems, and 4% (95% CI 0.02–0.09) for infections.

Conclusions

One in five patients are readmitted with a stoma-related complication within 30 days of creation of an ileostomy. Dehydration is the leading cause for these readmissions, occurring in 6% of all patients within 30 days. This comes with high health care cost for a potentially avoidable cause. Better monitoring, patient awareness and preventive measures are required.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10151-022-02580-6.

Surgical Risk and Pathological Results of Emergency Resection in the Treatment of Acutely Obstructing Colorectal Cancers: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Purpose

The treatment of acutely obstructing colorectal cancers is still a matter of debate. The prevailing opinion is that an immediate resection should be performed whenever possible. This study sought to determine whether immediate resection is safe and oncologically valid.

Methods

We completed a retrospective 2-center cohort study using the medical records of patients admitted for acutely obstructing colorectal cancer under the care of the Colorectal Team, Noble’s Hospital, Isle of Man, and the Emergency Surgery Unit, Umberto I University Hospital, Rome, from March 2013 to May 2017. The primary endpoints were 90-day mortality and morbidity, reoperation rate, and length of stay. The secondary endpoints were status of margins, number of lymph nodes retrieved, and the rate of adequate nodal harvest.

Results

Sixty-three patients were retrospectively enrolled in the study. Mortality was associated with age > 80 years and Dukes B tumors. The length of hospital stay was shorter in patients who had their resection less than 24 hours from their admission, in those who had laparoscopic resection and in those with distal tumors. The number of lymph nodes retrieved and rate of R0 resections were similar to those reported in elective colorectal surgery and were greater in laparoscopic resections and in patients operated on within 24 hours, respectively.

Conclusion

Immediate resection is a safe and reliable option in patients with acutely obstructing colorectal cancer.