Colonic stenting as bridge to surgery versus emergency surgery for management of acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction: a multicenter randomized trial (Stent-in 2 study)

Transforming outcomes: the pivotal role of self-expanding metal stents in right- and left-sided malignant colorectal obstructions-bridge to surgery: a comprehensive review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) are an alternative to emergency surgery (ES) for malignant colorectal obstruction. This study aimed to compare surgical outcomes between SEMS as a bridge to surgery (BTS) and ES in patients with malignant colorectal obstruction.

METHODS

A comprehensive database search was conducted until October 2023 to compare outcomes between SEMS as a BTS and ES. A subgroup analysis of results by malignancy site was performed.

RESULTS

We analyzed 57 studies, including 7,223 patients over a mean duration of 35.4 months. SEMS as a BTS showed clinical and technical success rates of 88.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 86.1%-90.1%; I2=68%) and 91.6% (95% CI, 89.7%-93.7%; I2=66%), respectively. SEMS as a BTS revealed reduced postoperative adverse events (odds ratio [OR], 0.51; 95% CI, 0.41-0.63; I2=70%; p<0.001) and 30-day mortality (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.37-0.72; I2=10%; p<0.001) compared to ES. Subgroup analysis showed postoperative mortality of 5% and 1.5% for left- and right-sided malignancies, respectively. Adverse events were 15% and 33% for the right and left colon, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

SEMS as a BTS demonstrated a higher success rate, fewer postoperative adverse events, and a reduced 30-day mortality rate than ES, supporting its use as the preferred initial intervention for right- and left-sided obstructions and indicating broader clinical adoption.

Beyond Obstruction: Evaluating Self-Expandable Metallic Stents (SEMSs) vs. Emergency Surgery for Challenging pT4 Obstructive Colon Cancer: Multicentre Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Colon cancer presents as an obstruction in almost 30% of patients. Self-expandable metallic stents emerged as an alternative to emergency surgery, despite early controversies around their use. Improved techniques led to stent incorporation in clinical guidelines. Our objective is to compare colectomies performed after the insertion of self-expandable metallic stents versus emergency surgeries in pT4 obstructive left colon cancer, analysing postoperative and oncological outcomes.

METHODS

This is an observational retrospective multicentre study involving 50 hospitals and analysing data from patients with pT4 obstructive tumours treated for curative intent between 2015 and 2017. Patients with left-sided obstructive colon cancer were included, with exclusion criteria being palliative surgery or incomplete resection. Primary outcomes were local, peritoneal, and systemic recurrence rates, overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS). Secondary outcomes were postoperative complications and the rate of surgeries without major complications.

RESULTS

In total, 196 patients were analysed, 128 undergoing emergency surgery and 68 receiving colonic stents. Stents more frequently allowed for minimally invasive surgeries: 33.8% vs. 4.7% (p < 0.01). The stent group showed fewer major complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3) at 4.5% vs. 22.4% (p < 0.01), fewer infectious complications at 13.2% vs. 23.1% (p = 0.1), and fewer organ-space infections at 3.3% vs. 15.9% (p = 0.03). No significant differences in recurrence rates, 29.4% vs. 28.1% (p = 0.8); disease-free survival, 44.5 vs. 44.3 months (p = 0.5); or overall survival, 50.5 vs. 47.6 months (p = 0.4), were found between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Self-expandable metallic stents are a safe alternative for pT4 obstructive left colon cancer, improving postoperative outcomes without compromising short- and medium-term oncological results. Consideration of experienced clinicians and potential referral to centres with advanced stenting capabilities may enhance patient care.

Stent as bridge to surgery decreases postoperative complications without worsening oncological outcomes: retrospective unicentric cohort study and stent placement protocol

BACKGROUND

Even if the use of stent as bridge to surgery (BTS) for obstructive colon cancer was described long ago, there is still much controversy on their use. Patient recovery before surgery and colonic desobstruction are just some of the reasons to defend this management that can be found in several available articles.

METHODS

This is a single-center, retrospective cohort study, including patients with obstructive colon cancer treated between 2010 and 2020. The primary aim of this study is to compare medium-term oncological outcomes (overall survival, disease-free survival) between stent as BTS and ES groups. The secondary aims are to compare perioperative results (in terms of approach, morbidity and mortality, and rate of anastomosis/stomas) between both groups and, within the BTS group, analyze whether there are any factors that may influence oncological outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 251 patients were included. Patients belonging to the BTS cohort presented a higher rate of laparoscopic approach, required less intensive care management, less reintervention, and less permanent stoma rate, when comparing with patients who underwent urgent surgery (US). There were not significant differences in terms of disease-free survival and overall survival between the two groups. Lymphovascular invasion negatively affected oncological results but was not related with stent placement.

CONCLUSION

The stent as a bridge to surgery is a good alternative to urgent surgery, which leads to a decrease in postoperative morbidity and mortality without significantly worsening oncological outcomes.

Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of emergency surgery for adult emergency hospital admissions with common acute gastrointestinal conditions: the ESORT study

Background

Evidence is required on the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of emergency surgery compared with non-emergency surgery strategies (including medical management, non-surgical procedures and elective surgery) for patients admitted to hospital with common acute gastrointestinal conditions.

Objectives

We aimed to evaluate the relative (1) clinical effectiveness of two strategies (i.e. emergency surgery vs. non-emergency surgery strategies) for five common acute conditions presenting as emergency admissions; (2) cost-effectiveness for five common acute conditions presenting as emergency admissions; and (3) clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the alternative strategies for specific patient subgroups.

Methods

The records of adults admitted as emergencies with acute appendicitis, cholelithiasis, diverticular disease, abdominal wall hernia or intestinal obstruction to 175 acute hospitals in England between 1 April 2010 and 31 December 2019 were extracted from Hospital Episode Statistics and linked to mortality data from the Office for National Statistics. Eligibility was determined using International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision, diagnosis codes, which were agreed by clinical panel consensus. Patients having emergency surgery were identified from Office of Population Censuses and Surveys procedure codes. The study addressed the potential for unmeasured confounding with an instrumental variable design. The instrumental variable was each hospital’s propensity to use emergency surgery compared with non-emergency surgery strategies. The primary outcome was the ‘number of days alive and out of hospital’ at 90 days. We reported the relative effectiveness of the alternative strategies overall, and for prespecified subgroups (i.e. age, number of comorbidities and frailty level). The cost-effectiveness analyses used resource use and mortality from the linked data to derive estimates of incremental costs, quality-adjusted life-years and incremental net monetary benefits at 1 year.

Results

Cohort sizes were as follows: 268,144 admissions with appendicitis, 240,977 admissions with cholelithiasis, 138,869 admissions with diverticular disease, 106,432 admissions with a hernia and 133,073 admissions with an intestinal obstruction. Overall, at 1 year, the average number of days alive and out of hospitals at 90 days, costs and quality-adjusted life-years were similar following either strategy, after adjusting for confounding. For each of the five conditions, overall, the 95% confidence intervals (CIs) around the incremental net monetary benefit estimates all included zero. For patients with severe frailty, emergency surgery led to a reduced number of days alive and out of hospital and was not cost-effective compared with non-emergency surgery, with incremental net monetary benefit estimates of –£18,727 (95% CI –£23,900 to –£13,600) for appendicitis, –£7700 (95% CI –£13,000 to –£2370) for cholelithiasis, –£9230 (95% CI –£24,300 to £5860) for diverticular disease, –£16,600 (95% CI –£21,100 to –£12,000) for hernias and –£19,300 (95% CI –£25,600 to –£13,000) for intestinal obstructions. For patients who were ‘fit’, emergency surgery was relatively cost-effective, with estimated incremental net monetary benefit estimates of £5180 (95% CI £684 to £9680) for diverticular disease, £2040 (95% CI £996 to £3090) for hernias, £7850 (95% CI £5020 to £10,700) for intestinal obstructions, £369 (95% CI –£728 to £1460) for appendicitis and £718 (95% CI £294 to £1140) for cholelithiasis. Public and patient involvement translation workshop participants emphasised that these findings should be made widely available to inform future decisions about surgery.

Limitations

The instrumental variable approach did not eliminate the risk of confounding, and the acute hospital perspective excluded costs to other providers.

Conclusions

Neither strategy was more cost-effective overall. For patients with severe frailty, non-emergency surgery strategies were relatively cost-effective. For patients who were fit, emergency surgery was more cost-effective.

Future work

For patients with multiple long-term conditions, further research is required to assess the benefits and costs of emergency surgery.

Study registration

This study is registered as reviewregistry784.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (IHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 11, No. 1. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Self-Expanding Metal Stents Do Not Adversely Affect Long-term Outcomes in Acute Malignant Large-Bowel Obstruction: A Retrospective Analysis

BACKGROUND

Self-expanding metal stents as a bridge to surgery in acute malignant large-bowel obstruction has gained popularity. However, long-term oncologic outcomes have not been well established.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate long-term oncologic outcomes of patients undergoing curative resection after the placement of a colonic stent compared with emergency surgery for acute malignant large-bowel obstruction.

DESIGN

This is a retrospective study.

SETTING

All patients presenting at 3 tertiary care centers between April 2002 and December 2012 with a diagnosis of complete malignant large-bowel obstruction were reviewed. Patients with disease distal to the hepatic flexure were selected for analysis.

PATIENTS

One hundred twenty-two patients who underwent either emergency surgery or placement of a colonic stent with curative intent were included.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients receiving emergency surgery within 24 hours of presenting with obstructive symptoms, including those with failed stents, were included in the emergency surgery group. All patients with clinically successful stent deployment before surgery were included in the stent group.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Overall survival and disease-free survival were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

Sixty-four patients underwent emergency surgery, and 58 patients underwent placement of a self-expanding metal stent. Groups were similar in terms of sex, tumor stage and grade, and Charlson and Charlson-Age Comorbidity Index scores. Patients in the surgery group were older than patients in the stent group. There were no differences in the number of lymph nodes harvested, positive nodes, rates of vascular and perineural invasion, or utilization of chemotherapy. Thirty-day mortality after resection was similar between groups (7.41% vs 4.41%; p > 0.05). Patients who underwent colonic stenting as a bridge to surgery had similar 10-year overall survival (40.5% vs 32.7%; p = 0.13) and 10-year disease-free survival (40.2% vs 33.8%; p = 0.26) compared with those who underwent emergency surgery. Similar results were seen on intention-to-treat analysis.

LIMITATIONS

This was a small retrospective study.

CONCLUSIONS

Stent insertion followed by oncologic resection is associated with similar overall survival and disease-free survival compared with emergency resection. Stent insertion as a bridge to surgery should be considered in patients presenting with malignant colorectal obstruction. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B714Los Stents Metálicos Autoexpandibles No Afectan Negativamente Los Resultados A Largo Plazo En La Obstrucción Maligna Aguda Del Colon: Un Análisis Retrospectivo.

ANTECEDENTES

Los stents metálicos autoexpandibles como puente a una cirugía en la obstrucción maligna aguda del colon han ganado popularidad. Sin embargo, no se han establecido bien los resultados oncológicos a largo plazo.

OBJETIVO

Investigar los resultados oncológicos a largo plazo de los pacientes sometidos a resección curativa después de la colocación de un stent colónico en comparación con la cirugía de urgencia para la obstrucción maligna aguda del colon.

DISEO

Estudio retrospectivo.

MBITO

Entre abril de 2002 y diciembre de 2012, se revisaron todos los pacientes que acudieron a tres centros de tercer nivel con un diagnóstico de obstrucción maligna completa del colon. Se seleccionaron para el análisis los pacientes con enfermedad distal al ángulo hepático.

PACIENTES

Se incluyeron 122 pacientes que fueron operados de urgencia o a una colocación de un stent colónico con intención curativa.

PROCEDIMIENTOS

Los pacientes que se sometieron a cirugía de urgencia dentro de las 24 horas posteriores a la presentación de síntomas obstructivos; se incluyeron aquellos con stents fallidos en el grupo de cirugía de urgencia. Todos los pacientes con colocación clínicamente exitosa del stent antes de la cirugía se incluyeron en el grupo de stent.

PRINCIPALES VARIABLES ANALIZADAS

La sobrevida global y la sobrevida libre de enfermedad se calcularon mediante el método de Kaplan-Meier.

RESULTADOS

Sesenta y cuatro pacientes fueron llevados a cirugía urgente y en 58 pacientes se colocó de un stent metálico autoexpandible. Los grupos fueron similares en relación a sexo, estadio y grado del tumor, puntuación de comorbilidad de Charlson y Charlson-Age. Los pacientes del grupo de cirugía eran mayores que los del grupo de stents. No hubo diferencias en el número de ganglios linfáticos recolectados, ganglios positivos, tasas de invasión vascular y perineural o utilización de quimioterapia. La mortalidad a los 30 días después de la resección fue similar entre los grupos (7,41% frente a 4,41%; p> 0,05). Los pacientes que se sometieron a la colocación de un stent colónico como puente a la cirugía tuvieron una sobrevida general a diez años similar (40,5% vs 32,7%; p = 0,13) y una sobrevida libre de enfermedad a diez años (40,2% vs 33,8%, respectivamente; p = 0,26) en comparación a los operados de urgencia. Se observaron resultados similares en el análisis por intención de tratamiento.

LIMITACIONES

Estudio retrospectivo reducido.

CONCLUSIONES

La utilización de un stent y posteriormente la resección oncológica se asocia a una sobrevida general y una sobrevida libre de enfermedad similar en comparación con la resección de urgencia. La utilización de un stent como puente a la cirugía debe considerarse en pacientes que presentan obstrucción colorrectal maligna. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B714. (Traducción-Dr. Lisbeth Alarcon-Bernes).

A Systematic Review of Patient-reported Outcomes in Randomized Controlled Trials of Unplanned General Surgery

Unplanned general surgery represents a major workload and requires comprehensive evaluation with appropriate outcomes. This study aimed to summarize current reporting of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in unplanned general surgery. A systematic review identified RCTs reporting PROs in the commonest six areas of unplanned general surgery. Details of the PRO measures were examined using the CONSORT extension for PRO reporting in RCTs. Extracted information about each PRO domain included the reporting of baseline PROs, rationale for PRO selection and whether PRO findings were used in conjunction with clinical outcomes to inform treatment recommendations. The internal validity of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. 12,519 abstracts were screened and 20 RCTs containing data from 2037 patients included. Included studies used 14 separate PRO measures covering 35 different health domains. A visual analogue assessment of pain was most frequently reported (n = 13). Reporting of baseline PRO data was uncommon (11/35 PRO domains). The rationale for PRO data collection and a PRO-specific hypothesis were provided for 9 (25.7 %) and 5 (14.3 %) domains, respectively. Seventeen RCTs (85.0 %) used the PRO data alongside clinical outcomes to inform treatment recommendations. Of the 116 risk of bias assessments, 77 (66.0 %) were judged as high or unclear. There is a lack of well designed, and conducted RCTs in unplanned general surgery that include PROs. Future work to define relevant PROs and methods for optimal assessment are needed to inform health care decision-making.

Stenting in malignant colonic obstruction--is it a real therapeutic option?

BACKGROUND

Malignant colonic obstruction is commonly treated surgically. Colonic stents are a therapeutic option for palliation or used as a bridge to surgery or chemotherapy.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to evaluate the clinical success rate of stenting as a bridge to one-step surgery, chemotherapy, or as a palliative measure.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective observational study.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at a university-affiliated tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS

From 2007 to 2014, 45 patients with malignant colonic obstruction were referred for stent insertion.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Patients were grouped according to three pre-defined treatment goals: group 1: restorative one-step procedure without an ostomy, group 2: completion of scheduled chemotherapy before surgery, and group 3: palliation without surgical intervention.

RESULTS

Group 1 included 11 patients. Three patients (27.3 %) met the treatment goal of one-step surgery. Eight patients (72.7 %) did not reach the primary goal due to stent insertion failure (four patients), stent-related complications (two patients), and failure to perform a one-step surgery after successful stent insertion (two patients). Group 2 included 12 patients. Chemotherapy was successfully completed prior to surgery in six patients (50 %). Six patients (50 %) did not achieve treatment goal due to stent insertion failure (two patients), stent migration (two patients), stent-related perforation (one patient), and mortality (one patient). Group 3 included 20 patients. Long-term palliation without surgical intervention was achieved in eight patients (40 %). Stent insertion failed in seven patients (35 %). Five patients (25 %) needed urgent surgery due to stent complications (three migrations and two perforations).

LIMITATIONS

The study was limited by its retrospective nature and small sample size.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates only a modest success rate of colonic stents in the treatment of malignant colonic obstruction. Although colonic stenting seems to be an effective method of relieving colonic obstruction, high failure rates limits its applicability.

The outcome of self-expanding metal stents in elderly patients

Background and Objectives:

Emergency surgery for large bowel obstruction is associated with high morbidity and mortality rates, especially in elderly patients. Colonic self-expanding metal stents may provide temporary relief of obstructions and enable preoperative evaluation. The aim of this retrospective study was to assess the clinical outcomes of emergency stenting in elderly patients with large bowel obstructions.

Methods:

Between 1997 and 2010, patients presenting with large bowel obstructions were treated predominantly with self-expanding metal stent insertion. Clinical data, including age, site of obstruction, success rate, and surgery and mortality rates, were collected. Patients were divided into 3 groups (I, II, and III) according to age: <69, 70 to 79, or >80 years.

Results:

One hundred thirty-two consecutive patients underwent stent implantation, with a mean age of 72.1 years (range, 28–95 years). Similar diversity of sex, indication, and stricture location was found. There were no significant differences in clinical success (88.7%, 73.8%, and 78.4%, P = .16) and stent-related mortality (2.1%, 3.3%, and 3.6%, P = 1.00). Similar rates of stoma creation were also found (59.3%, 46.7%, and 60.0%, P = .76). In contrast, rates of surgery were lower in older patients (50.9%, 38.1%, and 13.5%, P = .0013), and mortality during the same admission was significantly higher in patients >70 years of age (4.0%, 15.0%, and 22.2%, P = .027). Kaplan-Meier 30-day survival curves for the 3 groups showed a trend toward earlier death among patients >70 years of age.

Conclusions:

This study demonstrates that stenting provides similar success rates in all age groups but is associated with higher mortality rates in older patients.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

REGISTRATION NUMBER

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

Enteral stents for the management of malignant colorectal obstruction

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the 3^rd most common cancer in the United States with more than 10000 new cases diagnosed annually. Approximately 20% of patients with CRC will have distant metastasis at time of diagnosis, making them poor candidates for primary surgical resection. Similarly, 8%-25% of patients with CRC will present with bowel obstruction and will require palliative therapy. Emergent surgical decompression has a high mortality and morbidity, and often leads to a colostomy which impairs the patient’s quality of life. In the last decade, there has been an increasing use of colonic stents for palliative therapy to relieve malignant colonic obstruction. Colonic stents have been shown to be effective and safe to treat obstruction from CRC, and are now the therapy of choice in this scenario. In the setting of an acute bowel obstruction in patients with potentially resectable colon cancer, stents may be used to delay surgery and thus allow for decompression, adequate bowel preparation, and optimization of the patient’s condition for curative surgical intervention. An overall complication rate (major and minor) of up to 25% has been associated with the procedure. Long term failure of stents may result from stent migration and tumor ingrowth. In the majority of cases, repeat stenting or surgical intervention can successfully overcome these adverse effects.

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.

Evidence-based recommendations on colorectal stenting: a report from the stent study group of the korean society of gastrointestinal endoscopy

Recently, placement of self-expandable metallic stents has been used for the treatment of colorectal obstruction. As domestic awareness of colorectal cancer has increased, the number of colorectal stenting procedures performed has also increased. We aimed to provide evidence-based recommendations for colorectal stenting to aid gastroenterologists in making informed decisions regarding the management of patients who present with colorectal obstruction. The working group consisted of eight gastroenterologists who actively practice and conduct research in the field of colorectal stenting and are the members of the Stent Study Group of the Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. A literature search was conducted using the PubMed, Embase, KoreaMed, and the Cochrane Library databases to identify relevant articles published between January 2001 and June 2012. Based on the modified Delphi process, 10 recommendation statements regarding indications, usefulness, methodology and complications of colorectal stenting, and alternative treatments for malignant colorectal obstruction were determined. The contents will be widely distributed, and periodically revised to reflect the latest knowledge. These evidence-based recommendations for colorectal stenting will provide gastroenterologists and patients with appropriate and balanced information, and will improve the quality of care.

Long-term release of a malignant ileal obstruction by placement of a colorectal self-expandable metal stent

An 84-year-old man underwent the Hartmann procedure with an R1 resection for advanced rectal cancer. One year after surgery, the patient presented with abdominal pain and vomiting. Abdominal radiography and computed tomography revealed an expanding small bowel and ileal obstruction caused by invasion of local, recurrent rectal cancer. In order to release the ileal obstruction, a colorectal self-expandable metal stent was placed via a through-the-scope technique using a colonoscope inserted through a stoma in the transverse colon. After stent placement, the patient's clinical symptoms and signs improved and the symptoms of obstruction did not recur. No major complications associated with the placement of the stent were observed during the 7-month follow-up period. Thus, self-expandable metal stents are a safe and effective palliative treatment for malignant gastroduodenal or colorectal obstructions, and as a bridge to surgery. However, endoscopic placement of these stents in cases of malignant small bowel obstruction is not yet feasible because of the limitations of endoscopic access and the stent delivery system. To our knowledge, this is the first report of malignant ileal obstruction treated with a colorectal self-expandable metal stent using a colonoscope. This case indicates that colorectal self-expandable metal stents can be effectively and safely used to treat malignant ileal obstructions.

Large bowel obstruction due to colorectal carcinoma can be safely treated by colonic stent insertion--case series from a UK district general hospital

AIM

The aim of this study is to audit our outcomes and experience of colonic stent insertion for malignant bowel obstruction.

METHOD

Retrospective audit of all stent insertions in a single district general hospital between August 2003 and December 2009. All patients had presented with acute bowel obstruction caused by malignant colorectal disease and details were collected prospectively and contemporaneously onto a database. Stent insertion was a combined endoscopic and fluoroscopic procedure involving a colorectal surgeon and consultant radiologist.

RESULTS

Stenting was attempted on 62 occasions in 54 patients. The technical success rate was 86% and the clinical success rate 84%. The indications for stenting were for relief of acute bowel obstruction, palliation and as a bridge to surgery. There were complications in 14 cases (22.5%) including three perforations and one perioperative mortality. There were three cases of stent migration, six cases of re-stenosis and two stents became impacted with stool. There were no incidents of acute or delayed haemorrhage in any patients.

CONCLUSION

Our experience shows that stenting for obstructing colorectal cancer is a safe and effective method of alleviating acute and impending bowel obstruction and can be provided safely and effectively in a district general hospital.

Laparoscopic management for acute malignant colonic obstruction

PURPOSE

We aimed to evaluate the feasibility of staged laparoscopic colectomy for acute malignant colon obstruction.

METHODS

Through a laparoscopic approach, emergency blowhole colostomy and subsequent elective resection were performed.

RESULTS

There were 14 men and 8 women, ages ranging from 42 to 79 years. All patients underwent laparoscopic blowhole colostomy for fecal diversion. Of these stomas, 6 were located at the splenic flexure, 7 at the descending colon, and 9 at the sigmoid colon. Subsequently, 20 of the 22 patients achieved an elective laparoscopic resection including takedown of the stoma. They were left hemicolectomy in 11 and anterior resection in 9. The mean total length of hospital stay was 20 ± 4.6 days (range, 16 to 33 d) in these 20 patients. The remaining 2 patients did not undergo reversal of the colostomy. The median follow-up period was 23 months. Seven patients died of disease progression and 15 patients remained alive and well.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that staged laparoscopic colon resection is a feasible and effective technique for acute malignant colonic obstruction. The length of hospital stay is justified as compared with conventional single-staged resection. Our technique can also be recommended when colonic stenting is not available.

Patient-reported outcomes in palliative gastrointestinal stenting: a Norwegian multicenter study

BACKGROUND

The clinical effect of stent treatment has been evaluated by mainly physicians; only a limited number of prospective studies have used patient-reported outcomes for this purpose. The aim of this work was to study the clinical effect of self-expanding metal stents in treatment of malignant gastrointestinal obstructions, as evaluated by patient-reported outcomes, and compare the rating of the treatment effect by patients and physicians.

METHODS

Between November 2006 and April 2008, 273 patients treated with SEMS for malignant GI and biliary obstructions were recruited from nine Norwegian hospitals. Patients and physicians assessed symptoms independently at the time of treatment and after 2 weeks using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 questionnaire supplemented with specific questions related to obstruction.

RESULTS

A total of 162 patients (99 males; median age = 72 years) completed both assessments and were included in the study. A significant improvement in the mean global health score was observed after 2 weeks (from 9 to 18 on a 0-100 scale, P < 0.03) for all stent locations. Both patients and physicians reported a significant reduction in all obstruction-related symptoms (>20 on the 0-100 scale, P < 0.006) after SEMS treatment. The physicians reported a larger mean improvement in symptoms than did the patients, mainly because they reported more severe symptoms before treatment.

CONCLUSION

SEMS treatment is effective in relieving symptoms of malignant GI and biliary obstruction, as reported by patients and physicians. The physicians, however, reported a larger reduction in obstructive symptoms than did the patients. A prospective assessment of patient-reported outcomes is important in evaluating SEMS treatment.

Self-expanding metallic stents drainage for acute proximal colon obstruction

AIM: To clarify the usefulness of the self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) in the management of acute proximal colon obstruction due to colon carcinoma before curative surgery.

METHODS: Eighty-one colon (proximal to spleen flex) carcinoma patients (47 males and 34 females, aged 18-94 years, mean = 66.2 years) treated between September 2004 and June 2010 for acute colon obstruction were enrolled to this study, and their clinical and radiological features were reviewed. After a cleaning enema was administered, urgent colonoscopy was performed. Subsequently, endoscopic decompression using SEMS placement was attempted.

RESULTS: Endoscopic decompression using SEMS placement was technically successful in 78 (96.3%) of 81 patients. Three patients’ symptoms could not be relieved after SEMS placement and emergent operation was performed 1 d later. The site of obstruction was transverse colon in 18 patients, the hepatic flex in 42, and the ascending colon in 21. Following adequate cleansing of the colon, patients’ abdominal girth was decreased from 88 ± 3 cm before drainage to 72 ± 6 cm 7 d later, and one-stage surgery after 8 ± 1 d (range, 7-10 d) was performed. No anastomotic leakage or postoperative stenosis occurred after operation.

CONCLUSION: SEMS placement is effective and safe in the management of acute proximal colon obstruction due to colon carcinoma, and is considered as a bridged method before curative surgery.

Self-expanding metallic stent as a bridge to surgery versus emergency surgery for obstructive colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The use of a colonic stent as a bridge to surgery aims to provide patients with elective one-stage surgical resection while reducing stoma creation and postoperative complications. This study used meta-analytic techniques to compare the outcomes of stent use as a bridge to surgery and emergency surgery in the management of obstructive colorectal cancer.

METHODS

A literature search of Medline, Embase, Cochrane controlled trials registry, and the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database was performed on all studies comparing stent as a bridge to surgery and emergency surgery for obstructive colorectal cancer. A meta-analysis of the included studies was carried out to identify the differences in outcomes between the two procedures.

RESULTS

Eight studies matched the criteria for inclusion and reported on the outcomes of 601 patients, of whom 232 (38.6%) underwent stent insertion and 369 (61.4%) underwent emergency surgery. Fewer patients in the stent group needed intensive care (risk ratio [RR], 0.42; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.19-0.93; p = 0.03) and stoma creation (RR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.50-0.99; p = 0.04). The primary anastomosis rate in the stent group was higher (RR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.21-2.16; p = 0.001). Overall complications (RR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.24-0.71; p = 0.001), including anastomotic leakage (RR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.14-0.69; p = 0.004), were reduced by stent insertion. Stent placement before elective surgery did not adversely affect mortality and long-term survival.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a stent as a bridge to surgery for obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer could increase the chance of primary anastomosis and reduce the need for stoma creation and postprocedural complications. Stent insertion before subsequent surgery has no effect on perioperative mortality and long-term survival.

Collagen levels are normalized after decompression of experimentally obstructed colon

AIM

Our aim was to define the dynamics in collagen concentrations in the large bowel wall following decompression of experimental obstruction.

METHOD

Colonic obstruction was created in 28 male rats by the placement of a silicone ring around the distal colon. The ring was removed after 4 days to mimic endoscopical decompression by stent deployment. Colon circumference and collagen concentration were measured proximal to the obstructed segment immediately and at 3 and 10 days after decompression. The corresponding colonic sites of 23 sham-operated and eight nonoperated control animals were subjected to identical analyses.

RESULTS

Four days of obstruction resulted in a more than twofold increase in colonic circumference (20 vs 8 mm), with a concomitant 43% reduction (P = 0.001) in collagen concentration in the bowel wall proximal to the obstruction compared with sham animals. Three days after decompression, collagen concentrations remained reduced (P < 0.05), while there was no significant difference after 10 days with either sham-operated or nonoperated controls. Colonic circumference of the obstructed colon remained slightly distended (11 mm) on day 10 and tended to correlate (r(S) = 0.51, P = 0.053) with total matrix metalloproteinase activity.

CONCLUSION

The marked reduction in collagen concentration in an experimentally obstructed colon is normalized 10 days after decompression. These findings may have clinical implications for the timing of surgical resection.

Colonic stenting versus emergency surgery for acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction: a multicentre randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Colonic stenting as a bridge to elective surgery is an alternative for emergency surgery in patients with acute malignant colonic obstruction, but its benefits are uncertain. We aimed to establish whether colonic stenting has better health outcomes than does emergency surgery.

METHODS

Patients with acute obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer were enrolled from 25 hospitals in the Netherlands and randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) to receive colonic stenting as a bridge to elective surgery or emergency surgery. The randomisation sequence was computer generated with permuted blocks and was stratified by centre; treatment allocation was concealed by use of a web-based application. Investigators and patients were unmasked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome was mean global health status during a 6-month follow-up, which was assessed with the QL2 subscale of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality-of-life questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30). Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered, number ISRCTN46462267.

FINDINGS

Between March 9, 2007, and Aug 27, 2009, 98 patients were assigned to receive colonic stenting (n=47 patients) or emergency surgery (n=51). Two successive interim analyses showed increased 30-day morbidity in the colonic stenting group, with an absolute risk increase of 0.19 (95% CI -0.06 to 0.41) in analysis of the first 60 patients (14 of 28 patients receiving colonic stenting vs 10 of 32 receiving emergency surgery), and an absolute risk increase of 0.19 (-0.01 to 0.37) in analysis of the first 90 patients (23 of 47 patients vs 13 of 43). In accordance with the advice of the data safety monitoring committee, the study was suspended on Sept 18, 2009, and ended on March 12, 2010. At the final analysis of 98 patients, mean global health status during follow-up was 63.0 (SD 23.8) in the colonic stenting group and 61.4 (SD 21.9) in the emergency surgery group; after adjustment for baseline values, mean global health status did not differ between treatment groups (-4.7, 95% CI -14.8 to 5.5, p=0.36). No difference was recorded between treatment groups in 30-day mortality (absolute risk difference -0.01, 95% CI -0.14 to 0.12, p=0.89), overall mortality (-0.02, -0.17 to 0.14, p=0.84), morbidity (-0.08, -0.27 to 0.11, p=0.43), and stoma rates at latest follow-up (0.09, -0.10 to 0.27, p=0.35). However, the emergency surgery group had an increased stoma rate directly after initial intervention (0.23, 0.04 to 0.40, p=0.016) and a reduced frequency of stoma-related problems (between-group difference -12.0, -23.7 to -0.2, p=0.046). The most common serious adverse events were abscess (three in the colonic stenting group vs four in the emergency surgery group), perforations (six vs none), and anastomotic leakage (five vs one), and the most common adverse events were pneumonia (three vs one) and wound infection (one vs three).

INTERPRETATION

Colonic stenting has no decisive clinical advantages to emergency surgery. It could be used as an alternative treatment in as yet undefined subsets of patients, although with caution because of concerns about tumour spread caused by perforations.

FUNDING

None.

Ten-year retrospective study of treatment of malignant colonic obstructions with self-expandable stents

PURPOSE

To describe the use of self-expandable metallic stents to manage malignant colorectal obstructions and to compare the radiation dose between fluoroscopic guidance of stent placement and combined endoscopic and fluoroscopic guidance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From January 1998 to December 2007, 467 oncology patients undergoing colorectal stent placement in a single center were included in the study. Informed consent was obtained in all cases. All procedures were performed with fluoroscopic or combined fluoroscopic and endoscopic guidance. Inclusion criteria were total or partial colorectal obstruction of neoplastic origin. Exclusion criteria were life expectancy shorter than 1 month, suspicion of perforation, and/or severe colonic neoplastic bleeding. Procedure time and radiation dose were recorded, and technical and clinical success were evaluated. Follow-up was performed by clinical examination and simple abdominal radiographs at 1 day and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months.

RESULTS

Of 467 procedures, technical success was achieved in 432 (92.5%). Thirty-five treatments (7.5%) were technical failures, and the patients were advised to undergo surgery. Significant differences in radiation dose and clinical success were found between the fluoroscopy and combined-technique groups (P < .001). Total decompression was achieved in 372 cases, 29 patients showed remarkable improvement, 11 showed slight improvement, and 20 showed clinical failure. Complications were recorded in 89 patients (19%); the most significant were perforation (2.3%) and stent migration (6.9%). Mean interventional time and radiation dose were 67 minutes and 3,378 dGy·cm(2), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of colonic obstruction with stents requires a long time in the interventional room and considerable radiation dose. Nevertheless, the clinical benefits and improvement in quality of life justify the radiation risk.

Self-expanding metallic stents as bridge to surgery in obstructing colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

A self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) may relieve intestinal obstruction to permit elective resection of colorectal cancer presenting as an emergency. There have been concerns regarding the oncological consequences of this strategy. This study evaluated outcomes in patients with potentially curable colorectal cancer treated with a SEMS as a bridge to surgery.

METHODS

This retrospective study included patients with obstructing colorectal cancer in whom a SEMS procedure was attempted between January 2004 and August 2007. Palliative SEMS procedures were excluded. Outcomes for SEMS insertion and subsequent surgery were recorded with a focus on survival.

RESULTS

SEMS insertion was attempted and achieved in 34 patients, of whom 30 were discharged after successful relief of obstruction. However, five patients needed acute surgery within 18 days owing to insufficient relief of obstruction (1), or tumour (3) or caecal (1) perforation, with one postoperative death. The remainder underwent elective surgery with no postoperative mortality. In all, 28 of 34 patients were stoma free after operation. The 3-year survival rate of all 34 patients was 74 (95 per cent confidence interval 53 to 86) per cent after a median follow-up of 33·7 months. A curative outcome was achieved in 30 patients.

CONCLUSION

Although associated with significant short-term problems, a SEMS can be useful in converting an emergency into an elective situation. No adverse oncological consequences were identified.

Emergency preoperative stenting versus surgery for acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction: a multicenter randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Surgical management of left colonic cancer presenting as an acute obstruction remains controversial and still is associated with high mortality and morbidity rates. Recently, self-expandable metallic stents (SEMS) have been used as a bridge to surgery in an attempt to decompress the colon and then allow elective one-stage surgical resection without stoma placement. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of emergency surgery alone with emergency placement of colonic SEMS as a bridge to surgery in terms of efficiency and reduction of the stoma placement rate.

METHODS

A multicenter prospective, randomized, controlled trial was conducted according to the consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) Statement criteria. Patients eligible for the study were randomized to either emergency surgery or emergency SEMS as a bridge to surgery. The primary outcome was the need for a stoma (temporary or permanent) for any reason. The secondary end points were mortality, morbidity, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Nine centers participated in the trial. Among the 70 patients eligible for the study, 60 were randomized and included for the final analysis, 30 patients in each group. Seven patients were randomized but did not fulfill the entry requirements, whereas three further eligible patients were not randomized for various reasons. Concerning the primary outcome, 17 patients in the surgery group sustained a stoma placement versus 13 patients in the SEMS group (p=0.30). No statistically significant difference was noted concerning the secondary outcomes. A total of 16 attempts at SEMS placement (53.3%) were technical failures. Two colonic perforations directly related to the stent placement procedure occurred among the 30 randomized patients and 1 perforation occurred among the nonrandomized patients, leading to premature closure of inclusions in the study before the expected number of 80 patients was reached.

CONCLUSION

This randomized trial failed to demonstrate that emergency preoperative SEMS for patients presenting with acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction could significantly decrease the need for stoma placement.

Colorectal stenting in malignant large bowel obstruction: the learning curve

Aim. Self-expanding metal stents (SEMSs) are increasingly used for the palliation of metastatic colorectal cancer and as a bridge to surgery for obstructing tumours. This case series analyses the learning curve and changes in practice of colorectal stenting over a three year period. Methods. A study of 40 patients who underwent placement of SEMS for the management of colorectal cancer. Patients spanned the learning curve of a single surgeon endoscopist. Results. Technical success rates increased from 82% initially, using an average of 1.7 stents per procedure, to a 94% success rate where all patients were stented using a single stent. There has been a change in practice from elective palliative stenting toward emergency preoperative stenting. Conclusion. There is a steep learning curve for the use of SEMS in the management of malignant colorectal bowel obstruction. We suggest that at least 20 cases are required for an operator to be considered experienced.

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.

A situational overview of surgical quality and safety in 2010

BACKGROUND

Surgical safety and quality initiatives have now moved to the front of the agenda for contemporary surgery.

METHODS

Sixty-two surgical specialists began to study quality and cost control in 1998, and those efforts grew into a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services-funded pilot study of the Surgical Care Improvement Project in 2004. Subsequent symposia and studies evolved.

RESULTS

A greater awareness of the issues and methods for meaningful improvement of surgical safety in nearly 25,000 specialty surgeries have been described in numerous peer-reviewed publications.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgeon-initiated efforts have led to marked improvements in multiple specialties and in many small and large hospitals and academic training centers.

Current concepts in malignant bowel obstruction management

Malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) is a challenging complication of advanced cancer. Several pathophysiologic mechanisms are responsible for the syndrome, including mechanical compression, motility disorders, gastrointestinal secretion accumulation, decreased gastrointestinal absorption, and inflammation. The treatment of related symptoms requires a collaborative approach of surgical, interventional, and medical specialists. The surgical approach proves beneficial in selected patients with operable lesions, life expectancy greater than 2 months, and good performance status. Interventionalists place self-expanding metallic stents as a minimally invasive palliative method either as a definitive treatment or as a bridge to surgery. However, most patients with MBO are not candidates for surgery or stent placement. Medical management with opioids, antispasmodics, antiemetics, antisecretory agents, and corticosteroids is effective in controlling the symptoms associated with MBO. This article discusses the current understanding of MBO pathophysiology and emphasizes current MBO management concepts; it then reviews surgical, interventional, and medical approaches.

Treatment of left-sided colonic emergencies: a comparison of US, UK and Australian surgeons

BACKGROUND

This study sought to identify and compare the current practice of surgeons in Australia, the UK and the US when presented with a left-sided colonic emergency.

METHODS

Questionnaires were posted to 500 US, 500 UK and 500 Australian surgeons. Demographic data were collected regarding the surgeon's age and surgical interest, as well as their preferred method of managing left-sided colonic emergencies (namely obstruction and perforation in stable and unstable patients). The results were analysed using the chi-squared test.

RESULTS

Completed questionnaires were received from 224 UK surgeons (45%), 180 US surgeons (36%) and 259 Australian surgeons (52%). All the US surgeons had an interest in gastrointestinal surgery, while 31% of the UK surgeons and 22% of Australian surgeons had an interest in colorectal surgery. In a haemodynamically stable patient with a good anaesthetic risk presenting with a complete sigmoid obstruction, significantly more UK (84%) and Australian surgeons (70%) would perform a resection and anastomosis than US surgeons (54%, p<0.0001). Of those with a colorectal interest, 97% of UK surgeons and 80% of Australian surgeons would opt for resection and anastomosis. In a haemodynamically stable patient with a good anaesthetic risk with a perforation of the sigmoid colon and purulent peritonitis, 46% of UK surgeons, 32% of Australian surgeons and 33% of US surgeons would opt for resection and anastomosis, and among colorectal surgeons, 68% of UK surgeons and 50% of Australian surgeons would opt for resection and anastomosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The management of left-sided colonic emergencies varies depending on geographic location and degree of colorectal subspecialization. While the literature suggests that single-stage procedures are accepted and safe, the reasons for this variation are explored.

A dilemma in geriatric oncology: malignant bowel obstruction in an 81-year-old man

An 81-year-old male presenting with bowel obstruction was found upon examination to have bilobar liver metastases. In light of the patient's advanced age, bowel resection was foregone in favor of stent deployment, which led to rapid resolution of symptoms. The multidisciplinary team assembled to coordinate further care advised the use of chemotherapy with irinotecan, oxaliplatin, and 5-FU, which was well tolerated and led to an objective response. The special considerations relevant to the patient's advanced age, including the choice of stent deployment rather than resection and the decision to employ 5-FU-based chemotherapy in spite of limited trial data with this approach in patients of advanced age, are explained in detail.

Endoscopic stenting-Where are we now and where can we go?

Self expanding metal stents (SEMS) play an important role in the management of malignant obstructing lesions in the gastrointestinal tract. Traditionally, they have been used for palliation in malignant gastric outlet and colonic obstruction and esophageal malignancy. The development of the polyflex stent, which is a removable self expanding plastic stent, allows temporary stent insertion for benign esophageal disease and possibly for patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to esophagectomy. Potential complications of SEMS insertion include perforation, tumour overgrowth or ingrowth, and stent migration. Newer stents are being developed with the aim of increasing technical and clinical success rates, while reducing complication rates. Other areas of development include biodegradable stents for benign disease and radioactive or drug-eluting stents for malignant disease. It is hoped that, in the future, newer stents will improve our management of these difficult conditions and, possibly, provide prognostic as well as symptomatic benefit in the setting of malignant obstruction.