Placement of stents in proximal colonic obstructions using a percutaneous retroperitoneal colostomy

Percutaneous Antegrade Colonic Stent Insertion Using a Proximal Trans-peritoneal Colopexy Technique

INTRODUCTION

Conventionally, colonic stents are inserted with a retrograde trans-anal approach-however, stenting of right-sided or proximal transverse colon lesions may pose a challenge due to tortuosity or long distances. We report three successful cases of percutaneous antegrade colonic stenting in patients using a proximal trans-peritoneal colopexy technique.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three patients underwent a proximal trans-peritoneal colopexy technique for antegrade colonic stent placement. The patients included three males, ages 89, 92 and 55, who were unsuitable for conventional methods. All patients had a colopexy with the aid of three gastropexy sutures performed under CT or fluoroscopic guidance and subsequent colonic access, followed by the crossing lesion and subsequent deployment of an uncovered colonic stent. A 10-Fr pigtail catheter was exchanged for the sheath, capped and left in place along with the colopexy suture anchors.

RESULTS

Percutaneous antegrade colonic stent placement was technically successful in all patients with no complications. Follow-up at 10 days, a tubogram confirmed stent patency. The pigtail drain and suture anchors were subsequently removed.

CONCLUSION

Antegrade colonic stenting with the use of a three point colopexy is a straightforward well-tolerated procedure and is a useful technique in a cohort of patients in whom conventional stenting has failed/is unsuitable. Additionally, we believe we have reported the first two cases involving transverse colon access for stenting.

Oncological outcome of malignant colonic obstruction in the Dutch Stent-In 2 trial

BACKGROUND

The Stent-In 2 trial randomized patients with malignant colonic obstruction to emergency surgery or stent placement as a bridge to elective surgery. The aim of this study was to compare the oncological outcomes.

METHODS

Disease recurrence, and disease-free, disease-specific and overall survival were evaluated, including a subgroup analysis of patients with a stent- or guidewire-related perforation.

RESULTS

Of 98 patients included in the original Stent-In 2 trial, patients with benign (16) or incurable (23) disease were excluded from this study, along with a patient who had withdrawn from the trial. Of the remaining 58 patients, 32 were randomized to emergency surgery (31 resection, 1 stoma only) and 26 to stenting. Unsuccessful stenting required emergency surgery in six patients owing to wire or stent perforation. Locoregional or distant disease recurrence developed in nine of 32 patients in the emergency surgery group and 13 of 26 in the stent group. Disease-free survival was worse in the subgroup with stent- or guidewire-related perforation. Five of six patients in this subgroup developed a recurrence, compared with nine of 32 in the emergency surgery group and eight of 20 who had unperforated stenting.

CONCLUSION

Stent placement for malignant colonic obstruction was associated with a risk of recurrence in this trial, but the numbers are small. There is not enough evidence to refute the approach strongly.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN46462267 ( http://www.controlled-trials.com).

Colonic stenting: a practical update

Colonic stenting is part of the UK service provision guidelines for colorectal cancer. However, there are issues about availability and expertise within the UK, and controversies remain regarding various clinical and technical aspects of the technique. Based on the current evidence, this article will provide a practical update on the indications, the clinical and technical considerations and the remaining unanswered questions regarding colonic stenting.

Update on the indications and use of colonic stents

Self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement is a minimally invasive option for achieving acute colonic decompression in obstructed colorectal cancer. Colorectal stenting offers nonoperative, immediate, and effective colon decompression and allows bowel preparation for an elective oncologic resection. Patients who benefit the most are high-risk surgical patients and candidates for laparoscopic resection with complete obstruction, because emergency surgery can be avoided in more than 90% of patients. Colonic stent placement also offers effective palliation of malignant colonic obstruction, although it carries risks of delayed complications. When performed by experienced endoscopists, the technical success rate is high with a low procedural complication rate. Despite concerns of tumor seeding following endoscopic colorectal stent placement, no difference exists in oncologic long-term survival between patients who undergo stent placement followed by elective resection and those undergoing emergency bowel resection. Colorectal stents have also been used in selected patients with benign colonic strictures. Uncovered metal stents should be avoided in these patients, and fully covered stents are associated with high risk of migration. Patients with benign colonic stricture with acute colonic obstruction who are at high risk for emergency surgery can gain temporary relief of obstruction after SEMS placement; the stent can be removed en bloc with the colon specimen at surgery. This article reviews the techniques and indications of SEMS placement for benign and malignant colorectal obstructions.