Hartmann's procedure vs loop colostomy in the treatment of obstructive rectosigmoid cancer

Which treatment strategy is optimal for acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction? A Bayesian meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to determine the best treatment for acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction (ALMCO) among emergency surgery (ES), self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS), transanal drainage tube (TD), and decompressive stoma (DS).

METHOD

Articles that compared two or more treatments of ALMCO were searched from PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase. Network meta-analyses were performed to calculate the outcomes of primary anastomosis, stoma creation, morbidity, mortality, and 5-year survival.

RESULTS

Fifty-one articles met inclusion criteria. TD was the optimal treatment in performing primary anastomosis [probability of ranking first (Pro-1) 0.96], while ES was the worst [probability of ranking fourth (Pro-4) 0.99]. More permanent stoma was formed in ES and TD groups than in SEMS and DS groups [OR (95%CI): TD vs SEMS: 4.12 (1.89, 9.45); TD vs DS: 3.39 (1.46, 8.75); ES vs DS: 2.55 (1.73, 4.17); SEMS vs ES: 0.33 (0.24, 0.42)]. More morbidity occurred in ES group than in SEMS group [OR (95%CI): ES vs SEMS: 1.44 (1.14, 1.82)]. Besides, SEMS was ranked first in avoiding infection (Pro-4 0.95). For in-hospital mortality, ES was ranked first (Pro-1 0.93). TD was ranked first in recurrence (Pro-1 0.97) and metastasis (Pro-1 0.98). There was no discrepancy in 5-year overall and disease-free survival among all strategies.

CONCLUSION

SEMS as a bridge to surgery reduces stoma formation, and morbidity especially the infection rate with relatively great oncological outcomes. Therefore, SEMS should be recommended first for ALMCO in the medical center with experience and conditions.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Laparoscopic Hartmann Procedure—A Surgery That Still Saves Lives

Background: A Hartmann operation, which is the intervention by which the lower part of the sigmoid and the upper part of the rectum are resected with the closing of the rectal stump and end colostomy, has as its indications: advanced or complicated rectosigmoid neoplasm, moderate biological condition of the patient, peritoneal sepsis, intestinal occlusion and fragile colonic wall, especially in the context of inflammatory changes. The Hartmann procedure can save lives even at the cost of a stoma reversal failure. Methods: The cases operated with the Hartmann procedure by an open approach or laparoscopic approach in our clinic, between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2020, were admitted in this study and their medical records were reviewed, also making a comparison between the two types of approach. Univariate statistical comparisons but also a multivariate analysis was performed. Results: We performed 985 operations for intestinal and colonic occlusion (7.15% of the total operations in the clinic), 531 (54%) were non-tumor occlusions and 454 (46%) were occlusive tumors (88 Hartmann operations). Of these, 7.3% were laparoscopically performed (7 laparoscopic Hartmann operations and 23 diagnostic laparoscopies). A total of 11 cases (18%) also had colonic perforation. We compared laparoscopic Hartmann with open Hartmann and observed the benefits of laparoscopy for postoperative morbidity and mortality. The presence of pulmonary and cardiac morbidities is associated with the occurrence of general postoperative morbidities, while peritonitis is statistically significantly associated with the occurrence of local complications that are absent after the laparoscopic approach. Conclusions: The Hartmann procedure is still nowadays an operation widely used in emergency situations. Laparoscopy may become standard for the Hartmann procedure and reversal of the Hartmann procedure, but the percentage of laparoscopy remains low due to advanced or complicated colorectal cancer, poor general condition both at the first and second intervention, and the difficulties of reversal of the Hartmann procedure.

Current practice for the treatment of obstructive left-sided colon cancer in China: a nationwide cross-sectional survey

PURPOSE

This study surveyed the current practice of surgical treatment of obstructive left-sided colon cancer (OLCC) in China.

METHODS

All colorectal surgery departments at tertiary or secondary hospitals in China were invited to complete a web-based questionnaire between August 27 and September 2, 2020.

RESULTS

Overall, completed questionnaire were received from 357 hospitals. Emergency surgery was the mainstay of treatment for OLCC, with the open approach accounting for up to 61.62%. The stoma rate of emergency surgery was up to 80%, mainly due to inadequate bowel preparation and severe edema of colon walls. Hartmann's procedure (61.62%) was the most preferred operation. A total of 243 hospitals (68.7%) reported that they would consider the use of a self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) as a bridge for elective surgery. More than 50% of the hospitals participating in this study reported the success rate of SEMS placement, as well as the resolution rate of obstruction more than 80%, and the stent-related perforation rate was < 5%. A total of 126 hospitals considered carrying out a strategy of SEMS followed by neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to elective surgery and believed that it might further improve treatment outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

SEMS is a feasible option for the treatment of OLCC in addition to traditional emergency surgery, and its clinical benefits have been preliminarily recognized.

Comparison of blowhole colostomy and loop ostomy for palliation of acute malignant colonic obstruction

Purpose

Surgery to create a stoma for decompression might be required for unresectable stage IV cancer patients with complete colonic obstruction. The aim of this study was to compare the results of blowhole colostomy with those of loop ostomy.

Methods

Palliative ileostomy or colostomy procedures performed at a single center between January 2011 and October 2020, were analyzed retrospectively. Fifty-nine patients were identified during this period. The demographic characteristics and outcomes between the blowhole colostomy group (n=24) and the loop ostomy group (n=35) were compared.

Results

The median operative time tended to be shorter in the blowhole colostomy group (52.5 minutes; interquartile range [IQR], 43-65) than in the loop ostomy group (60 minutes; IQR, 40-107), but the difference did not reach statistical significance (P=0.162). The median length of hospital stay was significantly shorter with blowhole colostomy (blowhole, 13 days [IQR, 9-23]; loop, 21 days [IQR, 14-37]; P=0.013). Mean cecum diameter was significantly larger in the blowhole group than in the loop group (8.83±1.91 cm vs. 6.78±2.36 cm, P=0.001), and the emergency operation rate was higher in the blowhole group than in the loop group (22 of 24 [91.7%] vs. 23 of 35 [65.7%], P=0.021).

Conclusion

In surgical emergencies, diverting a blowhole colostomy can be safe and effective for palliative management of colonic obstruction in patients with end-stage cancer and might reduce the operative time in emergent situations.

Surgical treatment of mechanical bowel obstruction: characteristics and outcomes of geriatric patients compared to a younger cohort

PURPOSE

Mechanical bowel obstruction (MBO) is one of the most common indications for emergency surgery. Recent research justifies the method of attempting 3-5 days of nonoperative treatment before surgery. However, little is known about specific characteristics of geriatric patients undergoing surgery compared to a younger cohort. We aimed to analyze patients with MBO that required surgery, depending on their age, to identify potential targets for use in the reduction in complications and mortality in the elderly.

METHODS

Thirty-day and in-hospital mortality were determined as primary outcome. We retrospectively identified all patients who underwent surgery for MBO at the University Hospital of Bonn between 2009 and 2019 and divided them into non-geriatric (40-74 years, n = 224) and geriatric (≥ 75 years, n = 88) patients, using the chi-squared-test and Mann-Whitney U test for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

We found that geriatric patients had higher 30-day and in-hospital mortality rates than non-geriatric patients. As secondary outcome, we found that they experienced a longer length of stay (LOS) and higher complication rates than non-geriatric patients. Geriatric patients who suffered from large bowel obstruction (LBO) had a higher rate of bowel resection, stoma creation, and a higher 30-day mortality rate. The time from admission to surgery was not shown to be crucial for the outcome of (geriatric) patients.

CONCLUSION

Geriatric patients suffering from mechanical bowel obstruction that had to undergo surgery had higher mortality and morbidity than non-geriatric patients. Especially in regard to geriatric patients, clinicians should treat patients in a risk-adapted rather than time-adapted manner, and conditions should be optimized before surgery.

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.

Diversion, resection, or stenting as a bridge to surgery for acute neoplastic left-sided colonic obstruction: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of studies with curative intent

INTRODUCTION

The debate on the best surgical management strategy for acute malignant left-sided colonic obstruction is ongoing. Decompressing colostomy (DC) and stenting as a bridge to surgery (SBTS) are the currently proposed alternative approaches to emergency colectomy (EC). However, the results of a traditional meta-analysis were inconclusive. Therefore, a network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to compare the three approaches for acute left-sided colonic obstruction.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of Embase, PubMed, Google Scholar and the Cochrane library was performed. A traditional meta-analysis and subsequent NMA were conducted.

FINDINGS

A significantly greater number of primary anastomoses were performed in the DC cohort than in the EC and SBTS cohorts. The 90-day mortality rate was significantly lower in the DC cohort than in the EC and SBTS cohorts. Higher costs were associated with the SBTS cohort (by US$2,000) than with the EC cohort. The locoregional recurrence rate was higher for the SBTS cohort than for the EC cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence from the first NMA suggests there may be some clinical advantages associated with DC as an alternative approach to the EC and SBTS approaches for adequately selected patients with malignant large bowel obstruction.

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.

Our 20-year experience with experimental colonic anastomotic healing

Aim: To present our experience with experimental colonic anastomoses and compare it with the results of other experienced researchers. Materials and Method: The published experimental studies of our research group up to 1996, as well as results of other researchers in this field, are demonstrated and discussed. Different actions of administered substances on the anastomotic healing were compared and represented. Various chemotherapeutic agents were evaluated in experimental models without colorectal cancer as independent risk factors for the anastomotic healing. Moreover, numerous pharmaceutical agents such as steroids, immunomodulators, vasodilators and the use of fibrin glue are also assessed in detail. Results: Cytostatics, as well as steroids, impair the colonic anastomotic healing, but the combined administration of other agents can reverse this negative effect. Fibrin glue seems to protect the colonic anastomosis, while iloprost could be a potential candidate for further exploration in patient trials. Tacrolimus, despite its immunosuppressive action, seems to promote the anastomotic healing. This observation could be useful for patients with inflammatory bowel disease under tacrolimus therapy, who undergo a non-elective colectomy. Obstructive conditions predispose to anastomotic insufficiency, and therefore, substances to avoid this threatening complication are also assessed. Tacrolimus and iloprost showed a remarkable action against anastomotic leakage under artificially obstructive conditions. Conclusion: Further studies, especially in forms of clinical protocols, are necessary in order for these results to find their place in safe daily practice.

Emergency Presentations of Colorectal Cancer

Many colorectal carcinomas will present emergently with issues such as obstruction, perforation, and bleeding. Emergency surgery is associated with poor short- and long-term outcomes. For abnormality localizing to the colon proximal to the splenic flexure, surgical management with hemicolectomy is often a safe and appropriate approach. Obstructions are more common in the distal colon, however, where there is an evolving spectrum of surgical and nonsurgical options, most notably by the development of endoluminal stents. Perforation and bleeding are managed similarly to benign causes, as malignancy may be only part of a differential diagnosis at the time of an operation.