Long-term outcome of stenting as a bridge to surgery for acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction

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.

Management of left-sided malignant colorectal obstructions with curative intent: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Several management options exist for colonic decompression in the setting of malignant large bowel obstruction, including oncologic resection, surgical diversion, and SEMS as a bridge-to-surgery. Consensus has yet to be reached on optimal treatment pathways. The aim of the present study was to perform a network meta-analysis comparing short-term postoperative morbidity and long-term oncologic outcomes between oncologic resection, surgical diversion, and self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) in left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction with curative intent.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL were systematically searched. Articles were included if they compared two or more of the following in patients presenting with curative left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction: (1) emergent oncologic resection; (2) surgical diversion; and/or (3) SEMS. The primary outcome was overall 90-day postoperative morbidity. Pairwise meta-analyses were performed with inverse variance random effects. Random-effect Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

From 1277 citations, 53 studies with 9493 patients undergoing urgent oncologic resection, 1273 patients undergoing surgical diversion, and 2548 patients undergoing SEMS were included. Network meta-analysis demonstrated a significant improvement in 90-day postoperative morbidity in patients undergoing SEMS compared to urgent oncologic resection (OR0.34, 95%CrI0.01-0.98). Insufficient RCT data pertaining to overall survival (OS) precluded network meta-analysis. Pairwise meta-analysis demonstrated decreased five-year OS for patients undergoing urgent oncologic resection compared to surgical diversion (OR0.44, 95%CI0.28-0.71, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Bridge-to-surgery interventions may offer short- and long-term benefits compared to urgent oncologic resection for malignant colorectal obstruction and should be increasingly considered in this patient population. Further prospective study comparing surgical diversion and SEMS is needed.

Case report: Stent-first strategy as a potential approach in the management of malignant right-sided colonic obstruction with cardiovascular risks

In obstructing left-sided colonic or rectal cancer, endoscopic stent placement with the purpose of decompression and bridge to elective colon resection has been widely utilized and accepted. However, in malignant right-sided colonic obstruction, stent placement prior to colectomy is still highly controversial, due to lower clinical success and high anastomotic leak. We report a case of malignant right-sided colonic obstruction based on the radiological findings of irregular thickening of ascending colon wall and dilation of proximal large bowel on enhanced computed tomography scan. The 72-year-old woman presented with obvious abdominal distension. Due to concerning cardiovascular complications as intermittent chest pain and a long history of type 2 diabetes, a three-step therapeutic plan was instigated. Initially, a self-expandable metallic stent was placed palliatively to relieve the bowel obstruction. Consecutively, coronary angiography was performed, and two coronary stents were implanted to alleviate more than 80% stenosis of two main coronary arteries. One month later, laparoscopic radical resection of right colon and lymphadenectomy were successfully performed, with a blood loss less than 50 millimeters and a harvest of 29 lymph nodes, 1 being positive. The patient was discharged one week postoperatively with no complications, and received adjuvant chemotherapy one month later. During a follow-up of more than one year, the patient was in complete remission with no recurrence and cardiovascular events. In patients presenting with malignant right-sided colonic obstruction and peril of high cardiovascular risks, we propose colonic and coronary stent-first strategy to emergency surgery as a potential approach so as to ensure sufficient cardiovascular preparation improving perioperative safety. Moreover, the anatomical location of the tumor would be significantly achievable thus granting high-quality radical colon resection and lymphadenectomy.

Endoscopic stent versus diverting stoma as a bridge to surgery for obstructive colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS), an alternative to diverting stoma (DS), has been used as a "bridge to surgery" (BTS) to decompress acute obstruction of colorectal cancer (CRC) for decades. However, whether SEMS is a safe technique for obstruction of CRC without compromising the long-term survival of patients remains unidentified compared to those of DS. The aim of the present study was to elucidate the safety and survival outcomes of SEMS and DS.

METHODS

Embase, PubMed, and Medline were searched for qualified studies published until October, 2020, in which SEMS or DS was performed as a BTS without resection at the same stage. The last search was on December 5th, 2020. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of included studies. The major complication rate, mortality, 3-year overall survival (OS), and permanent stoma rate were estimated as outcomes.

RESULTS

The present study was registered on INPLASY (No. 2020100079). Seven eligible studies were included, involving 646 and 712 patients who underwent SEMS and DS treatments, respectively. The Clavien-Dindo I/II grade complication rate was significantly lower in the SEMS group than in the DS group (8.68 vs. 16.85%; RR, 0.59; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41-0.84; P = 0.004). The Clavien-Dindo III/IV grade complication rate was comparable in two groups (7.69 vs. 8.79%; RR, 0.82; 95% CI 0.54-1.27; P = 0.37). There were no statistical differences in the short-term mortality (5.16 vs. 4.53%; RR, 1.25; 95% CI 0.75-2.08; P = 0.39), 3-year OS (71.91 vs. 76.60%; RR, 0.93; 95% CI 0.86-1.01; P = 0.10), and permanent stoma rate (22.08 vs. 27.54%; RR, 0.84; 95% CI 0.67-1.06; P = 0.14) between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

To some extent, SEMS is a safe BTS technique for acute obstructive CRC, without significant adverse effect on the survival of patients. Given the advantage of minimal invasion, SEMS may be a better alternative to DS for obstructive CRC. However, the conclusions remain to be discussed because of lacking high-quality randomized controlled trails.

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.

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.

Short-term outcomes after self-expandable metal stent insertion for obstructing colon cancer: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) are used as a bridge to surgery for colon cancer patients as an alternative to emergency surgery. Currently, there is a paucity of literature from Saudi Arabia on the preoperative usage of SEMS.

OBJECTIVE

Determine whether SEMS are associated with a higher rate of complications.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study SETTINGS: Tertiary care hospital in Saudi Arabia.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In patients diagnosed with obstructing colon cancer, up-front surgical resection was compared with insertion of SEMS followed by surgical resection between the years 2009 and 2013.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Rate of stent-related short-term complications. Secondary endpoint, postoperative complications.

SAMPLE SIZE

65.

RESULTS

Twenty-four (36.9%) patients underwent SEMS placement; 41 (63.1%) underwent primary surgery. The median (interquartile range) hospital stay was significantly higher among the SEMS group (13 [8.5] days versus 7 [3] days in the primary surgery group, P<.001). Five patients (20.8%) in the SEMS group developed complications: 2 (8.3%) perforations, 2 (8.3%) obstructions, and 1 (4.2%) stent migrations.

CONCLUSION

SEMS is associated with longer hospital stays and short-term serious complications. Further research should be conducted, preferably with a larger sample size.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective design, small sample size.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

None.

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.

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.

Preoperative Colonic Decompression With Decompression Tube Insertion Versus Stent Insertion in Patients With Malignant Left Colonic Obstruction

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical effectiveness of preoperative colonic decompression (PCD) performed with stent or decompression tube insertion in patients with malignant left colonic obstruction (MLCO).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between September 2014 and September 2018, 63 patients with MLCO underwent PCD (decompression tube: 35; stent: 28) in our center. Elective surgery was performed for patients with clinical success of PCD.

RESULTS

The rates of technical success for PCD with tube and stent insertion were 91.4% (32/35) and 96.4% (27/28), respectively (P=0.773). Clinical success rates for PCD with tube and stent insertion were 90.6% (29/32) and 85.2% (23/27), respectively (P=0.811). Tumor resection with primary anastomosis was performed in all patients with clinical success in both groups. No significant differences were found between 2 groups regarding the duration of surgery and rates of postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

Decompression tube and stent insertion had similar effectiveness for PCD in patients with MLCO.

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.

Comparison of the long-term outcomes of the self-expandable metallic stent and transanal decompression tube for obstructive colorectal cancer

AIM

Endoscopic decompression using the self-expandable metallic colonic stent (SEMS) or transanal decompression tube (TDT) can convert emergency surgery into elective one-stage surgery for obstructive colorectal cancer (OCRC). The aim of the present study was to clarify the effect of SEMS and TDT on long-term oncological outcomes.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 76 consecutive pathological stage II and III OCRC patients who were inserted with SEMS or TDT as a bridge to curative surgery between 2009 and 2018.

RESULTS

There were 53 SEMS cases and 23 TDT cases. The tumor was located in the left colon in 58 cases and in the right colon in 18 cases. The interval between the decompression and the surgery was 16.5 days in the SEMS group and 13.0 days in the TDT group (P = 0.09). Technical and clinical success rates were 100% and 100% for SEMS, and 95% and 91% for TDT, respectively. Stoma was created in four patients in the SEMS group, and in five in the TDT group (P = 0.08). Three-year overall survival rates of the SEMS and TDT groups were 82% and 86% (P = 0.94), and disease-free survival rates were 68% and 62% (P = 0.79), respectively. The recurrence pattern was not significantly different.

CONCLUSION

This study found no statistically significant differences between the effects of SEMS and TDT for OCRC as a bridge to surgery on long-term outcomes.

Is bridge to surgery stenting a safe alternative to emergency surgery in malignant colonic obstruction: a meta-analysis of randomized control trials

BACKGROUND

Despite studies showing superior results in terms of reduced stoma rate and higher primary anastomosis rate, the safety of bridge to surgery stenting (BTS stent) for left-sided malignant colonic obstruction, especially in oncological terms, remains a concern.

AIM

The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate whether BTS stent is a safe alternative to emergency surgery (EmS).

METHODS

Randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing BTS stent and EmS for left-sided colonic obstruction caused by primary cancer of the colon, up to Sep 2018, were retrieved from the Pubmed, Embase database, clinical trials registry of U. S. National Library of Medicine and BMJ and Google Search.

RESULTS

There were seven eligible RCTs, involving a total of 448 patients. Compared to EmS, BTS stent had a significantly lower risk of overall complications (RR = 0.605; 95% CI 0.382-0.958; p = 0.032). However, the overall recurrence rate was higher in the BTS stent group (37.0% vs. 25.9%; RR = 1.425; 95% CI 1.002-2.028; p = 0.049). BTS stent significantly increased the risk of systemic recurrence (RR = 1.627; 95% CI 1.009-2.621; p = 0.046). This did not translate into a significant difference in terms of 3-year disease-free survival or 3-year overall survival.

CONCLUSION

BTS stent is associated with a lower rate of overall morbidities than EmS. However, BTS stent was associated with a greater chance of recurrence, especially systemic recurrence. Clinicians ought to be aware of the pros and cons of different interventions and tailor treatments for patients suffering from left-sided obstructing cancer of the colon.

Impact on surgical and oncological results of the use of colonic stents as a bridge to surgery for potentially curable occlusive colorectal neoplasms

INTRODUCTION

The outcomes of patients treated with colonic stents as a bridge to surgery (BTS) have recently been questioned in terms of safety and long-term oncologic outcomes. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effects on surgical and oncologic outcomes of colonic stents as a BTS for potentially resectable obstructive colorectal cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients operated on for potentially resectable obstructive colorectal cancer with or without distant disease between September 2002 and October 2015, comparing the patients treated with a colonic stent as a BTS (Stent group) with those directly operated on (Surgery group).

RESULTS

Twenty patients underwent urgent surgery, while stent placement as a BTS was attempted in 57 patients. The Stent group had more patients treated with a laparoscopic approach (64.9 vs. 5%, P<.001), higher primary anastomosis rate (91.2 vs. 55%, P=.001), less need for stomata (10.5 vs. 50%, P=.001) and shorter postoperative hospital stay (7 vs. 12 days, P=.014). Thirty-day morbidity was reduced in the Stent group, although not significantly (29.8 vs. 50%, P=.104). However, 30-day mortality was significantly lower (1.8 vs. 20%, P=.015). Regarding the long-term oncologic outcomes, no significant differences were found when comparing overall survival, disease-free survival, local recurrence-free survival, distant recurrence-free survival or progression-free survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Colonic stenting as a BTS for potentially resectable obstructive colorectal cancer seems to offer better surgical and equal long-term oncologic outcomes when compared to those of patients directly operated on.

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.

Efficacy of loop colostomy construction for acute left-sided colonic obstructions: a cohort analysis

PURPOSE

Acute primary resection as treatment for left-sided colonic obstruction (LSCO) is notorious for its high morbidity and mortality rates. Both stenting and loop colostomy construction can serve as a bridge to surgery, hereby avoiding the high morbidity and mortality rates associated with emergency resections. This study aims to investigate the safety of a loop colostomy in patients presenting with acute LSCO.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of all patients that received a loop colostomy for LSCO between 2003 and 2015 was performed. Primary outcomes were mortality, major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo grades III-IV) and minor morbidity (Clavien-Dindo grades I-II).

RESULTS

One hundred forty-six patients presenting with acute LSCO received a diverting colostomy. After colostomy construction, mortality occurred in four patients (2.7%) and major complications were reported in 20 patients (13.7%). In 61 patients, the diverting colostomy served as a palliative measure, because of metastatic disease or unfitness for major surgery. The remaining 85 patients all underwent delayed resection, resulting in an overall mortality, major morbidity and minor morbidity of 6.9% (n = 6), 14.0% (n = 12) and 26.7% (n = 23), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Diverting colostomy construction is a minimally invasive and safe treatment option for LSCO. It can serve as a definite palliative measure, as well as a bridge to elective surgery. A diverting colostomy as a bridge to surgery might even be a valid alternative for emergency resections, since mortality and morbidity rates following colostomy construction and delayed resection appear lower than reported outcomes following primary resection.

A bridging stent to surgery in patients with esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer has a dramatic negative impact on patient survival: A retrospective cohort study through data acquired from a prospectively maintained national database

This study aimed to assess the impact of esophageal stenting on postoperative complications and survival in patients with obstructing esophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. All patients treated without neoadjuvant therapy that had an R0-resection performed for esophageal and GEJ cancer between January 2003 and December 2010 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Data on stenting, postoperative mortality, morbidity, recurrence-free survival, complications, and length of hospital stay were collected. Kaplan-Meier plots for survival and recurrence-free survival curves were constructed for R0 resected patients. Data were compared between the stent and no-stent group by nonparametric tests. Two hundred seventy three consecutive R0 resected patients with esophageal or GEJ cancer were identified. Of these patients, 63 had a stent as a bridge to surgery. The male/female ratio was 2.64 (198/75) with a median age in the stent group (SG) of 65.1 versus 64.3 in the no stent group (NSG). Patients were comparable with respect to gender, age, smoking, TNM-classification, oncological treatment, hospital stay, tumor location, and histology. The median survival in the SG was 11.6 months compared with 21.3 months for patients treated without a bridging stent (P < 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in 30-day mortality between the two groups, but NSG patients exhibited a significantly better two-year survival (P = 0.017). The median recurrence-free survival was 9.1 months for the SG compared with 15.2 months for the NSG. The use of a stent as a bridging procedure to surgery in patients treated without neaoadjuvant therapy for an esophageal or GEJ cancer that later underwent R0 resection decreased the two year survival and the recurrence-free survival.

Palliative Stent Insertion for Acute Malignant Colorectal Obstruction: Long-term Patency and Survival

PURPOSE

To investigate the long-term outcome of palliative stent insertion for acute malignant colorectal obstruction.

METHODS

From May 2009 to February 2015, consecutive patients with acute malignant colorectal obstruction underwent palliative stent insertion in our center. Technical success, clinical success, and long-term outcomes were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

A total of 45 patients with acute malignant colorectal obstruction underwent palliative stent insertion. Technical success was achieved in 42 of 45 patients. Clinical success was achieved in 41 of 42 patients. During a follow-up of 5 days to 25 months (mean, 6.9±4.5 mo), the cumulative 6- and 12-month patency rates were 88.6% and 72.7%, respectively. The cumulative 6- and 12-month survival rates were 60.1% and 14.3%, respectively. The independent predictor of prolonging survival was subsequent chemotherapy after stenting (P=0.017).

CONCLUSION

Palliative colorectal stent insertion can provide a good long-term outcome in patients with malignant colorectal obstruction.

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.

Comparison between metallic stent and transanal decompression tube for malignant large-bowel obstruction

BACKGROUND

The short-term safety and efficacy of a self-expandable metallic colonic stent (SEMS) insertion followed by elective surgery, "bridge to surgery (BTS)", for malignant large-bowel obstruction (MLBO) have been well described comparing with emergency surgery. The aim of this study was to compare short-term outcomes of endoscopic decompression using a SEMS versus a transanal decompression tube (TDT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From January 2005 to November 2014, a total of 101 patients with MLBO underwent surgery at our single institution were retrospectively identified. Among them, 73 patients who underwent preoperative complete insertion of a decompression device (TDT, n = 45; SEMS, n = 28) were finally included in this study. Six patients with incomplete insertion of a decompression device (TDT, n = 5; SEMS, n = 1) were also excluded. The primary endpoints of this study were the postoperative morbidity and mortality rates. The secondary endpoints were decompression-related outcomes. Additionally, propensity score matched (PSM) analysis was conducted in short-term outcomes between the groups.

RESULTS

The SEMS group had significantly higher proportion of right-sided tumor and bigger tumor size compared with those of the TDT group. The SEMS group had a significantly higher proportion of patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery, and consequently, a longer surgical duration than did the TDT group. Higher rates of insertion failure and perforation were recognized in the TDT group than in the SEMS group (10.0% versus 3.6% and 8.9% versus 0.0%, respectively), although these differences were not statistically significant (P = 0.406 and 0.291, respectively). The two groups showed similar occurrences of anastomotic leakage, bowel obstruction, overall complications, and mortality. Compared with the TDT group, the SEMS group had a significantly lower rate of surgical site infection (24.4% versus 3.6%, respectively; P = 0.023 and P = 0.025 after PSM) and a shorter length of hospital stay (median, 21 d [interquartile range, 18-29 d] versus 38 d [interquartile range, 28-45 d], respectively; P = 0.015 and P = 0.003 after PSM). Solid food intake after decompression and preoperative temporary discharge occurred only in the SEMS group.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative SEMS insertion for MLBO is effective with at least equivalent short-term outcomes and superior preoperative quality of life compared with decompression using TDT.

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.

Stenting as a Bridge to Surgery for Obstructive Colon Cancer: Does It Have Surgical Merit or Oncologic Demerit?

PURPOSE

To evaluate the surgical and oncologic outcomes of patients undergoing self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placement with elective curative surgery.

METHODS

Data from patients admitted with obstructing colon cancer between 2000 and 2012 were analyzed retrospectively. Patients underwent either SEMS placement as a bridge to surgery (stent group, n = 67) or emergency surgery (surgery group, n = 35). Surgical and oncologic outcomes of the groups were compared.

RESULTS

Placement of SEMS was technically successful in 98.5% and clinically successful in 89.6% of cases. There were eight (11.9%) stent-related complications, including three migrations (4.5%), four occlusions (6.0%), and one perforation (1.5%). The stent group had a higher laparoscopic resection rate (67.2 vs. 31.4%, p = 0.001) with a lower conversion rate (4.3 vs. 35.3%, p = 0.003). The wound infection rate was significantly higher in the surgery group (37.1 vs. 11.9%, p = 0.003) with no differences in the rate of other complications. The rates of local recurrence and distant metastasis, recurrence-free, and overall survival were not significantly different between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Stenting and elective surgery was associated with a higher laparoscopy rate, a lower conversion rate, and a lower wound infection rate compared to emergency surgery but did not affect recurrence or survival.

Surgical Management of Complicated Colon Cancer

The management of complicated colon cancer (locally invasive, obstructed, or perforated cancers) can pose diagnostic and therapeutic challenges to surgical management. Adherence to traditional surgical oncologic principles must often be balanced with the patients' clinical presentation and other parameters. While the goal of an R0 (no residual microscopic disease) resection must always be kept in mind, situations sometimes arise which can make this difficult to achieve. Recognition of complicated disease and availability of varied therapeutic modalities is important to ensure favorable patient outcomes. This review will discuss the surgical management of complicated colon cancer, with special focus on locally advanced disease.

Placement of the Decompression Tube as a Bridge to Surgery for Acute Malignant Left-Sided Colonic Obstruction

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to investigate the feasibility, safety, and effectiveness of placing the decompression tube as a bridge to surgery for acute malignant left-sided colonic obstruction.

METHODS

From January 2009 to August 2014, consecutive patients with acute malignant left-side colonic obstruction underwent placement of the decompression tube as a bridge to surgery in our center. The technical and clinical success of placing the decompression tube was evaluated. Clinical success was defined as relief of obstructive symptoms within 48 h after placing the decompression tube. Elective tumor resection was performed 7-9 days after colonic decompression. The types of surgery, primary anastomosis rate, and follow-up findings were analyzed.

RESULTS

Twenty patients with acute malignant left-side colonic obstruction underwent placement of the decompression tube as a bridge to surgery. Placement of decompression tube was technically successful in all patients. No procedure-related complication occurred. Clinical success was achieved in 19 patients. Elective tumor resection and primary anastomosis were successfully performed in all 19 patients. The postoperative complications included wound infection (n = 2) and anastomotic stenosis (n = 1).

CONCLUSION

Decompression tube can serve as an easy, safe, and effective bridge to subsequent surgery for patients with acute malignant left-sided colonic obstruction.

Comparison of long-term outcomes of colonic stent as "bridge to surgery" and emergency surgery for malignant large-bowel obstruction: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The short-term safety and efficacy of insertion of a self-expandable metallic colonic stent followed by elective surgery, bridge to surgery (BTS), for malignant large-bowel obstruction (MLBO) have been well described. However, long-term oncological outcomes are still debated. Hence, this study is conducted to evaluate long-term outcomes of colonic stent insertion followed by surgery for MLBO.

METHODS

A comprehensive electronic literature search through May 2014 was performed to identify studies comparing long-term outcomes between BTS and emergency surgery for MLBO. The main outcome measures were overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and recurrence. A meta-analysis was performed using random-effects models to calculate risk ratios (RRs) with 95 % confidence intervals (95 % CIs).

RESULTS

There were 11 studies that matched the criteria for inclusion, yielding a total of 1136 patients, of whom 432 (38.0 %) underwent BTS and 704 (62.0 %) underwent emergency surgery. In OS analyses of all patients and patients who underwent curative resection, BTS was similar to emergency surgery [(RR = 0.95; 95 % CI 0.75-1.21; P = 0.66) (RR = 0.96; 95 % CI 0.67-1.37; P = 0.82), respectively]. DFS (RR = 1.06; 95 % CI 0.91-1.24; P = 0.43) and recurrence (RR = 1.13; 95 % CI 0.82-1.54; P = 0.46) did not differ significantly between the BTS and emergency surgery groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Results of this meta-analysis on long-term as well as well-described short-term outcomes suggest that BTS could be a promising alternative strategy for MLBO patients.