Elective (planned) colectomy in patients with colorectal obstruction after placement of a self-expanding metallic stent as a bridge to surgery: the results of a prospective study

Upfront Surgery vs. Endoscopic Stenting Bridge to Minimally Invasive Surgery for Treatment of Obstructive Left Colon Cancer: Analysis of Surgical and Oncological Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Left colon cancer obstruction treatment is a debated topic in the literature. Stent placement is effective as a bridge-to-surgery strategy, but there are some concerns about the oncological safety for the reported higher risk of local and peritoneal recurrence. This study aims to compare the surgical and oncological outcomes of patients treated with stent followed by elective surgery with those treated with primary resection.

METHODS

This is a retrospective observational study. We included patients of both sexes, ≥18 years old, with a histological diagnosis of intestinal adenocarcinoma, and admitted to our hospital for left colon cancer obstruction demonstrated by CT scan without metastasis or perforation. They were treated through primary resection (PR) or stent placement followed by elective surgery (SR). The two groups were compared for general characteristics, surgical outcomes, and oncological outcomes (metastasis and local recurrence) at 30 days, 90 days, 1 year, and 3 years. Post-operative quality of life (QoL) was also investigated.

RESULTS

The SR group showed a shorter hospital stay, a lower post-operative mortality, a lower stoma rate at 1 year, and a higher number of minimally invasive procedures. Oncological outcomes were not different compared to the PR group. The SR group demonstrated better QoL in two out of six items on the EQ-5D-5L test.

CONCLUSIONS

Stent placement as a bridge-to-surgery strategy is feasible and provides better surgical outcomes in terms of post-operative complications, surgical approach, stoma rate, and QoL. Oncological outcomes were not reported differently, but further studies should be conducted to better evaluate this aspect.

Stenting as bridge to surgery versus upfront emergency resection for non-metastatic left sided obstructing colorectal cancer: risk of peritoneal recurrence and long-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Oncological outcomes of stenting as a bridge to surgery (SBTS) remain a major concern, despite perioperative benefits it offers. This study aims to evaluate the differences in recurrence patterns and survival in patients with non-metastatic, obstructing left sided colon cancers treated by SBTS versus upfront emergency surgery (ES).

METHODS

This is a retrospective, single-centre cohort study of 227 consecutive patients with non-metastatic, obstructing left sided colon cancer between 2007 and 2016. Primary outcomes were pattern of recurrence, and survival. Univariate, bivariate and multivariate logistic regression were done to determine relationships between factors and recurrence. Kaplan Meier curves and log rank tests were used to analyse survival outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 227 patients included, 62 underwent SBTS and 165 underwent upfront ES. There was a higher rate of peritoneal recurrence in SBTS group (27.4 vs 15.2% p = 0.034), with no difference observed in overall, liver or lung recurrences. No significant difference in overall survival (p = 0.11), cancer specific survival (p = 0.35), or recurrence free survival (p = 0.107) was observed. Univariate analysis showed that SBTS (OR 2.12, p = 0.036), diabetes mellitus (DM) (OR 2.58, p = 0.013), T4 (OR 2.81, p = 0.001), N + (OR 4.02, p = 0.001), lymphovascular invasion (OR 2.43, p = 0.011) contributed to a higher rate of peritoneal recurrence. Bivariate analysis showed synergistic relationship between T4 tumors and SBTS: in T4 tumors that underwent SBTS, the odds of having peritoneal recurrence was 6.8 times higher when compared to ES (p = 0.004); whilst in T2/3 tumors there was no significant difference observed (OR 1.33, p = 0.55). Multivariable analysis showed SBTS (OR 2.60, p = 0.04), DM (OR 2.88, p = 0.012), N + (OR 2.97, p = 0.026) were significant predictors for peritoneal recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

There are concerns over oncological safety of SBTS even with low rates of stent-related perforation. Higher rates of peritoneal recurrence are seen especially with T4 colon cancers treated with SBTS. SBTS, DM and nodal stage were significant predictors for peritoneal recurrence.

Efficacy and Safety of Fluoroscopy-Guided Self-Expandable Metal Stent Placement for Treatment of Malignant Colorectal Obstruction

AIM

To investigate long-term outcomes after SEMS insertion in patients with malignant colorectal obstruction and to identify the risk factors for complications.

METHODS

The data of 119 patients with malignant colorectal obstruction who received SEMS insertion between March 2014 and February 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups according to the intent of treatment, i.e., stenting as "bridge to surgery" (surgical group) and stenting for palliation (palliative group). Technical and clinical success rates and incidence of complications were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

The overall technical and clinical success rates were 97.5% and 96.6%, respectively. The technical and clinical success rates and complication rate were comparable between the two groups. In the palliative group, the mean stent patency time was 230 days. Patency rates were not significantly different between primary CRC and recurrent CRC. Incidence of complications was higher in the palliative group than in the surgical group. In multivariate analysis, chemotherapy before stent implantation may increase the risk of stent-related complications, whereas chemotherapy after stent implantation did not. Additionally, the factors independently associated with complications were female sex and preoperative chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

SEMS under fluoroscopic guidance is a safe and effective treatment for malignant colorectal obstruction. For patients with resectable CRC, stent placement can serve as a bridge to elective surgery. It is worth noting that adjuvant chemotherapy between SEMS and surgery did not increase the complications. For patients with recurrent CRC, stent placement can relieve symptoms, alleviate pain, and improve quality of life.

Stenting as a bridge to surgery in obstructing colon cancer: Long-term recurrence pattern and competing risk of mortality

BACKGROUND

Stenting as a bridge to curative surgery (SBTS) for obstructing colon cancer (OCC) has been associated with possibly worse oncological outcomes.

AIM

To evaluate the recurrence patterns, survival outcomes, and colorectal cancer (CRC)-specific death in patients undergoing SBTS for OCC.

METHODS

Data from 62 patients undergoing SBTS at a single tertiary centre over ten years between 2007 and 2016 were retrospectively examined. Primary outcomes were recurrence patterns, overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and CRC-specific death. OS and CSS were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier curves. Competing risk analysis with cumulative incidence function (CIF) was used to estimate CRC-specific mortality with other cause-specific death as a competing event. Fine-Gray regressions were performed to determine prognostic factors of CRC-specific death. Univariate and multivariate subdistribution hazard ratios and their corresponding Wald test P values were calculated.

RESULTS

28 patients (45.2%) developed metastases after a median period of 16 mo. Among the 18 patients with single-site metastases: Four had lung-only metastases (14.3%), four had liver-only metastases (14.3%), and 10 had peritoneum-only metastases (35.7%), while 10 patients had two or more sites of metastatic disease (35.7%). The peritoneum was the most prevalent (60.7%) site of metastatic involvement (17/28). The median follow-up duration was 46 mo. 26 (41.9%) of the 62 patients died, of which 16 (61.5%) were CRC-specific deaths and 10 (38.5%) were deaths owing to other causes. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS probabilities were 88%, 74%, and 59%; 1-, 3-, and 5-year CSS probabilities were 97%, 83%, and 67%. The highest CIF for CRC-specific death at 60 mo was liver-only recurrence (0.69). Liver-only recurrence, peritoneum-only recurrence, and two or more recurrence sites were predictive of CRC-specific death.

CONCLUSION

The peritoneum was the most common metastatic site among patients undergoing SBTS. Liver-only recurrence, peritoneum-only recurrence, and two or more recurrence sites were predictors of CRC-specific death.

Definition of large bowel obstruction by primary colorectal cancer: A systematic review

AIM

Controversies on therapeutic strategy for large bowel obstruction by primary colorectal cancer mainly concern acute conditions, being essentially different from subacute obstruction. Clearly defining acute obstruction is important for design and interpretation of studies as well as for guidelines and daily practice. This systematic review aimed to evaluate definitions of obstruction by colorectal cancer in prospective studies.

METHOD

A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library. Eligibility criteria included randomized or prospective observational design, publication between 2000 and 2019, and the inclusion of patients with an obstruction caused by colorectal cancer. Provided definitions of obstruction were extracted with assessment of common elements.

RESULTS

A total of 16 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 99 prospective observational studies were included. Obstruction was specified as acute in 28 studies, complete/emergency in five, (sub)acute or similar terms in four and unspecified in 78. Five of 16 RCTs (31%) and 37 of 99 cohort studies (37%) provided a definition. The definitions included any combination of clinical symptoms, physical signs, endoscopic features and radiological imaging findings in 25 studies. The definition was only based on clinical symptoms in 11 and radiological imaging in six studies. Definitions included a radiological component in 100% of evaluable RCTs (5/5) vs. 54% of prospective observational studies (20/37, P = 0.07).

CONCLUSION

In this systematic review, the majority of prospective studies did not define obstruction by colorectal cancer and its urgency, whereas provided definitions varied hugely. Radiological confirmation seems to be an essential component in defining acute obstruction.

Stenting as a Bridge to Surgery or a Palliative Treatment

Endoscopic stenting of the colorectum has emerged as a viable alternative to surgical interventions in a selected group of patients. The main indication for stenting is bowel obstruction. As such stenting can be used to palliate patients with metastatic disease or bridge patients to surgical intervention. The main advantages of stenting in the emergency setting include lower morbidity and mortality, lower incidence of stoma formation, shorter hospitalization, and better quality of life. For patients with unresectable disease and short life expectancy, stenting can be considered. However, for patients with longer life expectancy, the potential long-term complications of a metal stent such as erosion, migration, or obstruction have engendered debate whether such patients are better served by operative intervention. Stenting as a bridge to surgery is an alternative to surgery in patients who are high risk for emergency surgery but concerns remain regarding its impact on oncologic outcome in potentially curable patients.

Endoscopic stenting in colorectal cancer

Acute malignant large bowel obstruction presents as one of the few emergencies of colorectal cancer (CRC). Management of this condition can either be by (I) upfront surgery or (II) the use of self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) as a bridge to elective surgery. For patients with metastasis, the use of SEMS is reported to enable earlier commencement of chemotherapy. Although the use of SEMS in patients with acute malignant large bowel obstruction looks promising, it is plagued by its own set of complications and divided opinion over its long-term outcomes. Conflicting data are present, and definitive indication requires further evaluation and debate. This article will describe the typical presentation of patients with acute malignant large bowel obstruction. An introduction to the SEMS insertion procedural steps will be undertaken. Following which the article aims to review the safety profile of SEMS and the short- and long-term outcomes of SEMS in both the curative and palliative setting.

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.

Predictors of outcome for endoscopic colorectal stenting: a decade experience

PURPOSE

Endoscopic stenting is used with increasing frequency to treat colorectal conditions. Little is known about what influences outcome. This study aimed to determine the impact of various factors on the short- and long-term results of colorectal stenting.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted of all endoscopic stenting procedures performed by a colorectal surgeon at a tertiary referral institution between 2003 and 2013. Main outcome measures included technical success, clinical success, complications, and predictors of outcome.

RESULTS

Of the stent procedures, 183 were performed in 165 patients. The majority of patients (90 %) presented with a malignant obstruction (intrinsic colonic vs. extrinsic non-colonic). Carcinomatosis was present in 22 % of patients with malignancy, and it was associated with lower technical success compared to non-carcinomatosis (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.2 [95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.1-0.8]; p = 0.021). Colonic malignancy was associated with higher clinical success compared to non-colonic malignancy (AOR 3.8 [95 % CI 1.4-10.3]; p = 0.009). Carcinomatosis increased the risk of complications compared to non-carcinomatosis (AOR 3.2 [95 % CI 1.0-10.0]; p = 0.049). The risk of complication was higher when a stent was deployed in the rectum compared to the colon (AOR 4.1 [95 % CI 1.5-11.7]; p = 0.008). The use of a covered stent was associated with higher complication rate compared to a non-covered stent (AOR 13.6 [95 % CI 2.6-71.2]; p = 0.002). Balloon dilation was associated with an increased risk of complications (AOR 4.6 [95 % CI 1.3-16.2]; p = 0.017).

CONCLUSIONS

Carcinomatosis was associated with lower technical success rate. Clinical success was higher in patients with a primary colonic malignancy. The use of a covered stent, balloon dilation of stricture, lesions in the rectum, and carcinomatosis were associated with higher risk for complications.

Stents for colorectal obstruction: Past, present, and future

Since the development of uncovered self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) in the 1990s, endoscopic stents have evolved dramatically. Application of new materials and new designs has expanded the indications for enteral SEMS. At present, enteral stents are considered the first-line modality for palliative care, and numerous types of enteral stents are under development for extended clinical usage, beyond a merely palliative purpose. Herein, we will discuss the current status and the future development of lower enteral stents.

Colonic strictures: dilation and stents

Colonic strictures, both benign and malignant, are commonly encountered in clinical practice. Benign strictures are most commonly treated by balloon dilation and less frequently with stents. Balloon dilation can help forestall or obviate surgery in some patients. Colonic strictures of malignant etiology generally need to be managed by stents and/or surgery. This article reviews endoscopic approaches to the management of colonic strictures.

Colonic perforation either during or after stent insertion as a bridge to surgery for malignant colorectal obstruction increases the risk of peritoneal seeding

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic colorectal stenting may be performed as a bridge to surgery in patients with malignant colorectal obstruction, and has been reported to be associated with a high rate of successful primary anastomosis, low rate of stoma formation, and shorter hospital stay. However, the results of recent studies suggest that colorectal stenting could potentially worsen the prognosis. This study aimed to compare outcomes between patients who underwent colorectal stenting as a bridge to surgery and patients who underwent curative surgery only for malignant colorectal obstruction.

METHODS

This study included patients with malignant colorectal obstruction and symptomatic bowel dilatation who were treated by stenting as a bridge to surgery (stent group, n = 27) or surgical resection only (surgery-only group, n = 29) between May 2009 and May 2012. The short-term outcomes evaluated were the primary anastomosis rate, length of hospital stay, and rates of emergency and open surgery. The long-term outcomes evaluated were overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS).

RESULTS

The primary outcomes were similar in the two groups. There were no significant differences between the stent and surgery-only groups in 3-year OS (85.2 vs. 82.8%; p = 0.655) or 3-year RFS (80.7 vs. 78.6%; p = 0.916). The odds ratio for seeded metastasis after perforation either during or after stent placement was 46.0 (95% CI, 2.0-1,047.8; p = 0.016).

CONCLUSIONS

Colorectal stenting as a bridge to surgery showed no significant short- or long-term benefits compared with surgery only, and was associated with peritoneal seeding after perforation. Stenting before surgery should therefore only be considered in patients with a high risk of complications associated with emergency surgery.

Efficacy and complications in the use of self-expanding colonic stents: an analysis of 15 years' experience

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the efficacy and safety of the procedure for placing self-expanding stents in the colon. To evaluate the factors associated with complications. To analyze the dose of radiation delivered in the procedure.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This was a retrospective descriptive study of 478 procedures done at a single center to place self-expanding metallic stents in the colon. A total of 423 nitinol stents and 79 stainless steel stents were placed. We included all colonic obstructions, of which 446 had malignant causes and 8 had benign causes. We excluded patients with intestinal perforation, severe colonic bleeding, short life expectancy, or lesions located less than 5 cm from the anus. We collected the dosimetric data and analyzed the technical success, clinical success, and complications during follow-up.

RESULTS

The procedure was a technical success in 92.26% of cases (n=441) and a clinical success in 78.45% (n=375); complications occurred during follow-up in 18.5% of cases. Complications occurred more frequently with the stainless steel stents than with the nitinol stents (OR: 3.2; 95% CI: 1.8-5.7). The mean value of the dose area product was 35 Gy*cm(2). When instead of being done by the interventional radiologist working together with an endoscopist the procedure was done exclusively by the interventional radiologist, the time under fluoroscopy (p=0.001), dose area product (p=0.029), and kinetic energy released per unit mass (p=0.001) were greater.

CONCLUSION

The procedure for placing self-expanding colonic stents is efficacious and safe with an acceptable rate of complications. The doses of radiation delivered were low, and the radiation doses and time under fluoroscopy were lower when the procedure was done together with an endoscopist.

Perforation in colorectal stenting: a meta-analysis and a search for risk factors

BACKGROUND

Recent studies suggest that there is a substantial risk of perforation after colorectal stent placement.

OBJECTIVE

To identify risk factors for perforation from colonic stenting.

DESIGN

A meta-analysis of 86 studies published between 2005 and 2011.

SETTING

Multicenter review.

PATIENTS

All patients who underwent colorectal stent placement.

INTERVENTION

Colorectal stent placement.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

The occurrence of perforation with subgroup analyses for stent design, stricture etiology, stricture dilation, and concomitant chemotherapy, including the use of bevacizumab.

RESULTS

A total of 4086 patients underwent colorectal stent placement; perforation occurred in 207. Meta-analysis revealed an overall perforation rate of 7.4%. Of the 9 most frequently used stent types, the WallFlex, the Comvi, and the Niti-S D-type had a higher perforation rate (>10%). A lower perforation rate (<5%) was found for the Hanarostent and the Niti-S covered stent. Stenting benign strictures was associated with a significantly increased perforation rate of 18.4% compared with 7.5% for malignant strictures. Dilation did not increase the risk of perforation: 8.5% versus 8.5% without dilation. The subgroup of post-stent placement dilation had a significantly increased perforation risk of 20.4%. With a perforation rate of 12.5%, bevacizumab-based therapy was identified as a risk factor for perforation, whereas the risk for chemotherapy without bevacizumab was 7.0% and not increased compared with the group without concomitant therapies during stent therapy (9.0%).

LIMITATIONS

Heterogeneity; a considerable proportion of data is unavailable for subgroup analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The perforation rate of colonic stenting is 7.4%. Stent design, benign etiology, and bevacizumab were identified as risk factors for perforation. Intraprocedural stricture dilation and concomitant chemotherapy were not associated with an increased risk of perforation.

Management of large bowel obstruction with self-expanding metal stents. A multicentre retrospective study of factors determining outcome

AIM

UK cancer guidelines recommend patients with colonic obstruction due to suspected malignancy be considered for stenting with a self-expanding metal stent (SEMS). Considerable variation in practice exists due to a lack of expertise, technical difficulties and other, as yet ill-defined features. This retrospective multi-centre study aims to determine the outcome following colonic stenting for large bowel obstruction and identify factors associated with successful intervention.

METHOD

A regional programme of colonic stenting for large bowel obstruction, in five UK centres from 2005 to 2010 was evaluated for outcome including technical and clinical success, survival, complications and reoperation.

RESULTS

A SEMS was inserted in 334 patients, including 264 (79.0%) for palliation and 52 (15.6%) as a bridge to surgery. Technical success was achieved in 292 (87.4%) patients, with 46 (13.8%) experiencing a complication or technical failure. Reoperation was required in 39 (14.8%) patients stented for palliation of colorectal cancer of whom 16 (6.1%) subsequently required a colostomy. A one-stage primary anastomosis was achieved in 35 (67.3%) of the 52 patients undergoing stenting as a bridge to resection. Technical success did not vary by indication or site of obstruction (P = 0.60) but was higher for operators who had performed more than 10 procedures (OR 3.34, P = 0.001). ASA grade ≥3 predicted a worse clinical outcome (OR 0.43, P = 0.04). The through-the-scope (TTS) endoscopy technique was more successful than radiological placement alone (90.3% vs 74.8%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Experienced operators using a TTS technique achieved a better outcome for the emergency management of large bowel obstruction. Older, sicker patients and those with extracolonic and benign strictures fared less well.

Self-expandable metal stents for malignant colonic obstruction: data from a retrospective regional SIED-AIGO study

BACKGROUND

Self-expandable metal stents are a non-surgical option for the treatment of symptomatic malignant colorectal obstruction as palliative treatment or as a bridge to surgery.

AIMS

To report data from a regional study on self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement for malignant colorectal obstruction.

METHODS

Two hundred and four patients (male 54.9%, mean age of 69.5 ± 14.2) were retrospectively evaluated and data on technical and clinical success, and complications, were analyzed.

RESULTS

Technical and clinical success rates were 99% and 94.6% respectively, with 36.7% treated on an emergency basis and 63.3% electively. Palliative treatment was administered to 70.1%, and as a bridge to surgery for 29.9%. Complications were 17 neoplastic ingrowths, 10 stent migrations, and 4 perforations. Palliative treatment was associated with a higher risk of stent ingrowth (p=0.003), and chemotherapy with a lower risk of stent ingrowth (p=0.009).

CONCLUSION

This regional study, although it has certain limitations, confirms the positive role of self-expandable metal stents in the treatment of symptomatic malignant colorectal obstruction, and that chemotherapy decreases the risk of ingrowth.

Status and literature review of self-expandable metallic stents for malignant colorectal obstruction

Use of colorectal stents has increased dramatically over the last decades. Colorectal stents offer an alternative way to relieve fatal intestinal obstruction and can take place of emergency surgery, which associated with significant morbidity and mortality and a high incidence of stoma creation, to elective resection. Although there remain a few concerns regarding the use of stents as a bridge to surgical resection, use of self-expandable metallic stents for palliation in patients with unresectable disease has come to be generally accepted. Advantages of colorectal stents include acute restoration of luminal patency and allowance of time for proper staging and surgical optimization, and the well-known disadvantages are procedure-related complications including perforation, migration, and stent failure. General indications, procedures, and clinical outcomes as well as recent evidences regarding the use of colorectal stents will be discussed in this review.

The new nitinol conformable self-expandable metal stents for malignant colonic obstruction: a pilot experience as bridge to surgery treatment

Introduction. Self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) are a nonsurgical option for treatment of malignant colorectal obstruction also as a bridge to surgery approach. The new nitinol conformable stent has improved clinical outcomes in these kinds of patients. We report a pilot experience with nitinol conformable SEMS placement as bridge to surgery treatment in patients with colorectal obstruction. Materials and Methods. Between April and August 2012, we collected data on colonic nitinol conformable SEMS placement in a cohort of consecutive symptomatic patients, with malignant colorectal obstruction, who were treated as a bridge to surgery. Technical success, clinical success, and adverse events were recorded. Results. Ten patients (7 male (70%)), with a mean age of 69.2 ± 10.1, were evaluated. The mean length of the stenosis was 3.6 ± 0.6 cm. Five patients (50%) were treated on an emergency basis. The median time from stent placement to surgery was 16 days (interquartile range 7–21). Technical and clinical success was achieved in all patients with a significant early improvement of symptoms. No adverse events due to the SEMS placement were observed. Conclusion. This pilot study confirmed the important role of nitinol conformable SEMS as a bridge to surgery option in the treatment of symptomatic malignant colorectal obstruction.

Is stenting as "a bridge to surgery" an oncologically safe strategy for the management of acute, left-sided, malignant, colonic obstruction? A comparative study with a propensity score analysis

OBJECTIVE AND BACKGROUND

Self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) insertion has been suggested as a promising alternative to emergency surgery for left-sided malignant colonic obstruction (LMCO). However, the literature on the long-term impact of SEMS as "a bridge to surgery" is limited and contradictory.

METHODS

From January 1998 to June 2011, we retrospectively identified patients operated on for LMCO with curative intent. The primary outcome criterion was overall survival. Short-term secondary endpoints included the technical success rate and overall success rate and long-term secondary endpoints included 5-year overall survival, 5-year cancer-specific mortality, 5-year disease-free survival, the recurrence rate, and mean time to recurrence. Patients treated with SEMS were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. Overall survival was analyzed after using a propensity score to correct for selection bias.

RESULTS

There were 48 patients in the SEMS group and 39 in the surgery-only group. In the overall population, overall survival (P = 0.001) and 5-year overall survival (P = 0.0003) were significantly lower in the SEMS group than in the surgery-only group, and 5-year cancer-specific mortality was significantly higher in the SEMS group (48% vs 21%, respectively (P = 0.02)). Five-year disease-free survival, the recurrence rate, and the mean time to recurrence were better in the surgery-only group (not significant). For patients with no metastases or perforations at hospital admission, overall survival (P = 0.003) and 5-year overall survival (30% vs 67%, respectively, P = 0.001) were significantly lower in the SEMS group than in the surgery-only group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study results suggest worse overall survival of patients with LMCO with SEMS insertion compared with immediate surgery.

Colorectal resection after stent insertion for obstructing cancer: comparison between open and laparoscopic approaches

AIM

To evaluate surgical outcomes after stent insertion for obstructing colorectal malignancy and to compare between laparoscopic and open approach.

METHODS

Surgical resection was performed after stent insertion for malignant colorectal obstruction in 36 patients with a median age of 73 years. Eighteen patients were treated with open resection, whereas 18 underwent a laparoscopic resection. The outcomes were evaluated and comparison was made between patients with laparoscopic and open resection.

RESULTS

The mean interval between stent insertion and surgery was 11 days. One patient died within 30 days (2.8%). The overall incidence of postoperative morbidity was 22% and reoperation was required in 3 patients (8.8%). The median postoperative hospital stay was 8.5 days for the open surgery group and 5.5 days for the laparoscopic group (P = 0.004). The postoperative morbidity rates for the open and laparoscopic groups were 33.3% and 11.1%, respectively (P = 0.228). In those patients with nonmetastatic disease, with the median follow-up of 20 months, the 5-year survival rate was 49.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our experience showed that after successful endoscopic stent insertion for malignant colorectal obstruction, elective surgical resection could be performed safely. The combined endoscopic and laparoscopic procedure provides a less invasive alternative to the multistage open operations and is feasible for patients with obstructing colon cancer.

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.

Does use of a metallic colon stent as a bridge to surgery modify the pathology data in patients with colonic obstruction? A case-matched study

BACKGROUND

In a recent propensity score study, we established that overall- and disease-free survival were worse after use of a colonic stent (CS) than after emergency surgery for colonic obstruction. The present study sought to explain the association between CS use and poor survival by analyzing pathological specimens.

METHODS

From January 1998 to December 2011, all patients with left obstructive colon cancer and having been operated on with curative intent were included in the study. The primary end point involved a comparison of pathological data from the CS- and the surgery-only groups in a case-matched analysis (with the groups matched for the T stage). In a series of secondary analyses, we studied a range of factors known to be associated with adverse outcomes (microscopic perforation, vascular embolism, perineural invasion, and lymph node invasion) in the study population as a whole (in order to evaluate stenting as an adverse factor) and in the CS group alone (in order to identify factors associated with a poor prognosis in this specific group of patients).

RESULTS

A total of 84 patients were included in the study (50 in the CS group). Stenting was mentioned in only 70 % of the pathology lab reports (n = 35/50). Twenty-five patients in the CS group were matched with 25 patients of the surgery-only group. Tumor ulceration (p < 0.0001), peritumor ulceration (p < 0.0001), perineural invasion (p = 0.008), and lymph node invasion (p = 0.005) were significantly more frequent in the CS group. In a multivariate analysis of the CS group, T4 status and tumor size were significant risk factors for microscopic perforation, perineural invasion, and lymph node invasion.

CONCLUSION

The CS- and surgery-only groups differed significantly in terms of ulceration at or near the tumor, perineural invasion, and lymph node invasion. Explanation of the adverse outcomes associated with CS use will probably require further investigation.

A comparative study of short- and medium-term outcomes comparing emergent surgery and stenting as a bridge to surgery in patients with acute malignant colonic obstruction

BACKGROUND

The use of self-expanding metal stents as a bridge to surgery in the setting of malignant colorectal obstruction has been advocated as an acceptable alternative to emergency surgery. However, concerns about the safety of stenting have been raised following recent randomized studies.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the current study was to compare outcomes.

DESIGN

This was an observational, comparative study.

SETTINGS

This study was conducted at a tertiary referral center and university teaching hospital.

PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS

Patients with malignant colonic obstruction (n = 49) treated by either emergency surgery (n = 26) or with stent placement (n = 23) as a bridge to surgery were identified and followed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Short-term outcomes including stoma rates and postoperative morbidity and medium-term oncological outcomes were compared based on an "intention-to-treat" analysis.

RESULTS

Patients in both groups were well matched on clinicopathological parameters. Technical and clinical successful stent deployment was achieved in 91% and 83%. This did not adversely impact cancer-specific and overall survival (log rank = nonsignificant). No difference was observed in stoma rates, primary anastomosis rates, perioperative mortality rates, or reoperation rates between the 2 groups. Significantly fewer patients underwent total colectomy in the stent group in comparison with the emergency surgery group (1/23 vs 6/26: p = 0.027). There was no difference in postoperative morbidity (59% vs 66%: p = 0.09). There was a significant reduction in readmission rates in the stent group (5/26 vs 0/23: p = 0.038).

LIMITATIONS

The small sample size of this study could lead to type II error. In addition, the study was nonrandomized and demonstrated a limited length of follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Despite a high rate of technical and clinical success in selected patients with colonic obstruction, stenting has no impact on stoma rates. Despite concerns about the rate of stent-associated perforation, stenting does not adversely impact disease progression or survival. Future comparative trials are essential to better define the role of stenting in this setting and to ensure that we are not using costly technology to create an elective operative situation without concomitant patient benefits.

Stenotic ischemic colitis treated with laparoscopy-assisted surgery

Ischemic colitis is the most common type of intestinal ischemia. The etiology of this condition is multifactorial, and the diagnosis is based on a combination of clinical symptoms, as well as endoscopic and histological findings. Although conservative therapy is effective in most cases, surgery still plays a key role in the treatment of ischemic colitis. Here, we describe a case of a 73-year-old man in whom laparoscopy-assisted left colectomy was performed 80 d after the onset of ischemic colitis. He recovered completely after surgery, and the pathological findings were consistent with ischemic colitis. To the best of our knowledge, there are no detailed reports of laparoscopic surgery for chronic segmental stenotic ischemic colitis. We discussed the usefulness of laparoscopic surgery, comparing it with endoscopic treatment, and we propose an optimal treatment strategy from a viewpoint of stenosis length and duration of disease.

Colonic stenting as a bridge to surgery in malignant large-bowel obstruction: a report from two large multinational registries

OBJECTIVES

To date, this is the largest prospective series in patients with malignant colorectal obstruction to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of colonic self-expanding metal stents (SEMSs) as an alternative to emergency surgery. SEMSs allow restoration of bowel transit and careful tumor staging in preparation for elective surgery, hence avoiding the high morbidity and mortality associated with emergency surgery and stoma creation.

METHODS

This report is on the SEMS bridge-to-surgery subset enrolled in two multicenter international registries. Patients were treated per standard of practice, with documentation of clinical and procedural success, safety, and surgical outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 182 patients were enrolled with obstructive tumor in the left colon (85%), rectum (11%), or splenic flexure (4%). Of these patients, 86% had localized colorectal cancer without metastasis. Procedural success was 98% (177/181). Clinical success was 94% (141/150). Elective surgery was performed in 150 patients (9 stomas) and emergency surgery in 7 patients for treatment of a complication (3 stomas). The overall complication rate was 7.8% (13/167), including perforation in 3% (5/167), stent migration in 1.2% (2/167), bleeding in 0.6% (1/167), persistent colonic obstruction in 1.8% (3/167), and stent occlusion due to fecal impaction in 1.2% (2/167). One patient died from complications related to surgical management of a perforation.

CONCLUSIONS

SEMSs provide an effective bridge to surgery treatment with an acceptable complication rate in patients with acute malignant colonic obstruction, restoring luminal patency and allowing elective surgery with primary anastomosis in most patients.

Stenting for malignant colorectal obstruction: a single-center experience with 101 patients

BACKGROUND

Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) are used for colorectal obstruction preoperatively and palliatively. Limited data on the use of stents for obstruction caused by extracolonic malignancies exist, and the results are unclear. Our goal was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SEMS for patients stented as a bridge to surgery and as palliation for colorectal cancer or extracolonic malignancies.

METHODS

Between 1998 and 2009, a total of 101 patients underwent 108 stenting procedures for malignant colorectal obstruction. The results were studied retrospectively.

RESULTS

Of the study cohort, 11 patients were stented as a bridge to surgery. For palliatively stented patients, the etiology of obstruction was colorectal cancer in 66 patients and extracolonic malignancy in 24. Overall technical success was 99% and clinical success 88%. Complications occurred for 20 (20%) patients in 22 of 108 procedures. Complications included perforation (n = 6), recurrent obstruction (n = 8), and stent migration (n = 4). A median time to complication was 81.5 days. The overall stent placement-related mortality was 2/101 (2%). For patients stented as a bridge to surgery, a primary anastomosis in elective operations was achieved for 90% (9/10). In the palliation groups, patients with colorectal cancer had significantly higher clinical success rates than patients with extracolonic malignancies (94% vs. 65%, P = 0.0005). There was no difference in complications, operation, and stoma rates between the palliation groups.

CONCLUSIONS

SEMS is a safe and effective treatment for patients stented as a bridge to surgery or as palliation due to colorectal cancer. Stents are also useful in relieving obstruction due to extracolonic malignancies, but the clinical failure rate is higher than for colorectal cancer.

Enteral stents

The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) Technology Committee provides reviews of existing, new, or emerging endoscopic technologies that have an impact on the practice of GI endoscopy. Evidence-based methodology is used, with a MEDLINE literature search to identify pertinent clinical studies on the topic and a MAUDE (U.S. Food and Drug Administration Center for Devices and Radiological Health) database search to identify the reported complications of a given technology. Both are supplemented by accessing the "related articles" feature of PubMed and by scrutinizing pertinent references cited by the identified studies. Controlled clinical trials are emphasized, but in many cases, data from randomized, controlled trials are lacking. In such cases, large case series, preliminary clinical studies, and expert opinions are used. Technical data are gathered from traditional and Web-based publications, proprietary publications, and informal communications with pertinent vendors. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are drafted by 1 or 2 members of the ASGE Technology Committee, reviewed and edited by the committee as a whole, and approved by the Governing Board of the ASGE. When financial guidance is indicated, the most recent coding data and list prices at the time of publication are provided. For this review, the MEDLINE database was searched through August 2010 for articles related to enteral, esophageal, duodenal, and colonic stents. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are scientific reviews provided solely for educational and informational purposes. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are not rules and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating, requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment or payment for such treatment.

Self-expanding metal stents in malignant colonic obstruction: experiences from Sweden

BACKGROUND

Acute surgery in the management of malignant colonic obstruction is associated with high morbidity and mortality. The use of self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) is an alternative method of decompressing colonic obstruction. SEMS may allow time to optimize the patient and to perform preoperative staging, converting acute surgery into elective. SEMS is also proposed as palliative treatment in patients with contraindications to open surgery.

AIM

To review our experience of SEMS focusing on clinical outcome and complications. The method used was a review of 75 consecutive trials at SEMS on 71 patients based on stent-protocols and patient charts.

FINDINGS

SEMS was used for palliation in 64 (85%) cases and as a bridge to surgery in 11 (15%) cases. The majority of obstructions, 53 (71%) cases, were located in the recto-sigmoid. Technical success was achieved in 65 (87%) cases and clinical decompression was achieved in 60 (80%) cases. Reasons for technical failure were inability to cannulate the stricture in 5 (7%) cases and suboptimal SEMS placement in 3 (4%) cases. Complications included 4 (5%) procedure-related bowel perforations of which 2 (3%) patients died in junction to post operative complications. Three cases of bleeding after SEMS occurred, none of which needed invasive treatment. Five of the SEMS occluded. Two cases of stent erosion were diagnosed at the time of surgery. Average survival after palliative SEMS treatment was 6 months.

CONCLUSION

Our results correspond well to previously published data and we conclude that SEMS is a relatively safe and effective method of treating malignant colonic obstruction although the risk of SEMS-related perforations has to be taken into account.

Expandable metal stents for malignant colorectal strictures

The surgical management of malignant colorectal obstruction is still controversial and has higher associated mortality and complication rates compared with elective surgery. Placement of self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) has been proposed as an alternative therapeutic approach for colonic decompression of patients with acute malignant obstruction. SEMS placement may be used both as a bridge to surgery in patients who are good candidates for curative resection and for palliation of those patients presenting with advanced stage disease or with severe comorbid medical illnesses.

Malignant bowel obstruction: a review of current treatment strategies

Malignant bowel obstruction is common in individuals with intra-abdominal and pelvic malignancies and results in considerable suffering. Treatments target both the resolution of obstruction and symptom management. Emerging procedures include stents placement in the bowel to return patency and newer surgical procedures that are evolving to be less invasive. The use of medical interventions like corticosteroids, alone or in concert with additional drugs, can be utilized to achieve resolution of obstruction. Throughout treatment, it is important to also aggressively treat obstructive symptoms like pain and nausea/vomiting. This can mostly be achieved with medications, but use of venting percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) can also relieve symptoms. Parenteral hydration and nutrition use remain controversial with this population. The factor most closely tied to prognosis is performance status.

Guidelenines in the management of obstructing cancer of the left colon: consensus conference of the world society of emergency surgery (WSES) and peritoneum and surgery (PnS) society

BACKGROUND

Obstructive left colon carcinoma (OLCC) is a challenging matter in terms of obstruction release as well of oncological issues. Several options are available and no guidelines are established. The paper aims to generate evidenced based recommendations on management of OLCC.

METHODS

The PubMed and Cochrane Library databases were queried for publications focusing on OLCC published prior to April 2010. A extensive retrieval, analyses, and grading of the literature was undertaken. The findings of the research were presented and largely discussed among panellist and audience at the Consensus Conference of the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) and Peritoneum and Surgery (PnS) Society held in Bologna July 2010. Comparisons of techniques are presented and final committee recommendation are enounced.

RESULTS

Hartmann's procedure should be preferred to loop colostomy (Grade 2B). Hartmann's procedure offers no survival benefit compared to segmental colonic resection with primary anastomosis (Grade 2C+); Hartmann's procedure should be considered in patients with high surgical risk (Grade 2C). Total colectomy and segmental colectomy with intraoperative colonic irrigation are associated with same mortality/morbidity, however total colectomy is associated with higher rates impaired bowel function (Grade 1A). Segmental resection and primary anastomosis either with manual decompression or intraoperative colonic irrigation are associated with same mortality/morbidity rate (Grade 1A). In palliation stent placement is associated with similar mortality/morbidity rates and shorter hospital stay (Grade 2B). Stents as a bridge to surgery seems associated with lower mortality rate, shorter hospital stay, and a lower colostomy formation rate (Grade 1B).

CONCLUSIONS

Loop colostomy and staged procedure should be adopted in case of dramatic scenario, when neoadjuvant therapy could be expected. Hartmann's procedure should be performed in case of high risk of anastomotic dehiscence. Subtotal and total colectomy should be attempted when cecal perforation or in case of synchronous colonic neoplasm. Primary resection and anastomosis with manual decompression seems the procedure of choice. Colonic stents represent the best option when skills are available. The literature power is relatively poor and the existing RCT are often not sufficiently robust in design thus, among 6 possible treatment modalities, only 2 reached the Grade A.

Guidelenines in the management of obstructing cancer of the left colon: consensus conference of the world society of emergency surgery (WSES) and peritoneum and surgery (PnS) society

BACKGROUND

Obstructive left colon carcinoma (OLCC) is a challenging matter in terms of obstruction release as well of oncological issues. Several options are available and no guidelines are established. The paper aims to generate evidenced based recommendations on management of OLCC.

METHODS

The PubMed and Cochrane Library databases were queried for publications focusing on OLCC published prior to April 2010. A extensive retrieval, analyses, and grading of the literature was undertaken. The findings of the research were presented and largely discussed among panellist and audience at the Consensus Conference of the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) and Peritoneum and Surgery (PnS) Society held in Bologna July 2010. Comparisons of techniques are presented and final committee recommendation are enounced.

RESULTS

Hartmann's procedure should be preferred to loop colostomy (Grade 2B). Hartmann's procedure offers no survival benefit compared to segmental colonic resection with primary anastomosis (Grade 2C+); Hartmann's procedure should be considered in patients with high surgical risk (Grade 2C). Total colectomy and segmental colectomy with intraoperative colonic irrigation are associated with same mortality/morbidity, however total colectomy is associated with higher rates impaired bowel function (Grade 1A). Segmental resection and primary anastomosis either with manual decompression or intraoperative colonic irrigation are associated with same mortality/morbidity rate (Grade 1A). In palliation stent placement is associated with similar mortality/morbidity rates and shorter hospital stay (Grade 2B). Stents as a bridge to surgery seems associated with lower mortality rate, shorter hospital stay, and a lower colostomy formation rate (Grade 1B).

CONCLUSIONS

Loop colostomy and staged procedure should be adopted in case of dramatic scenario, when neoadjuvant therapy could be expected. Hartmann's procedure should be performed in case of high risk of anastomotic dehiscence. Subtotal and total colectomy should be attempted when cecal perforation or in case of synchronous colonic neoplasm. Primary resection and anastomosis with manual decompression seems the procedure of choice. Colonic stents represent the best option when skills are available. The literature power is relatively poor and the existing RCT are often not sufficiently robust in design thus, among 6 possible treatment modalities, only 2 reached the Grade A.

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.

Outcome of patients after endoluminal stent placement for benign colorectal obstruction

OBJECTIVE

Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) have been successfully used as a "bridge to surgery" or as palliation for acute malignant colorectal obstruction. Little data on the use of stents for benign obstruction exists and the results vary. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SEMS in benign colorectal obstruction.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 21 patients with 23 SEMS procedures between the years 1998 and 2008 were retrospectively studied. Eight patients had an obstruction in the surgical anastomosis. In addition, there were two patients with anastomotic strictures due to Crohn's disease. In 10 patients the obstruction was caused by diverticular disease and one patient had a stricture after radiation therapy.

RESULTS

Technical success was achieved for all the patients. Clinical success was achieved for 76% (16/21) of the patients. The anastomotic strictures were resolved with SEMS in 5 out of 8 cases (63%). Three patients with diverticular stricture (30%) were eventually resolved with SEMS. Nine (43%) patients in 10 out of 23 procedures (43%) had a complication, the majority being in patients with diverticular stricture.

CONCLUSIONS

SEMS is a good treatment option for patients with anastomotic stricture of the colon and for patients with benign colonic stricture who are unfit for surgery. SEMS can be used as a bridge to surgery in diverticular obstruction but there seems to be a considerable risk of complications. If a SEMS is placed into a diverticular stricture, the planned bowel resection should be performed within a month.